This page features the 14 articles that I have contributed to HuffPost Canada before it shut down & ceased operations!
*article: Canada’s Islamophobia Problem Won’t Be Solved By Denying Its Existence
It should be acknowledged matter-of-factly in order for us to begin tackling the complicated parts of it.
02/08/2019 11:55am EST
A wave of reactions poured in after Quebec Premier François Legault stated that Islamophobia does not exist in the province.
The timing of such a statement from the premier could not have been more insensitive. Legault chose to make it on the second anniversary of the Quebec mosque massacre which took place in 2017. The remark was like a punch to the gut for the broken-hearted remembering the loss of innocent lives at numerous commemoration events around the province and country. Six men were shot in cold blood on the night of Jan. 29, 2017 while they prayed, leaving behind 17 orphans, six wives, shattered lives and severe psychological wounds. Hearing someone deny the existence of Islamophobia was extremely hard to comprehend amid the dark memory of the mass killing.
The responses to the premier came from all sides of society: politicians, journalists and community figures. The hours that followed witnessed a half-hearted retraction from Mr. Legault’s office — a press aide later clarified that he meant there is no undercurrent of Islamophobia in Quebec — but the damage was done. Legault’s statement was like salt on a wound, souring the provincial government’s relationship with its many cultural communities.
There has certainly been no decrease in prejudice in Quebec, Ontario and the rest of the country. A 2018 Statistics Canada report shows that hate crimes reached an all-time high in 2017, based on incidents reported in both Quebec and Ontario. Quebec reported a 50-per-cent increase in the number of hate crimes in the month after the massacre in the mosque, mainly towards Muslim Quebecers. Ontario witnessed a 207-per-cent increase in hate crimes against Muslims, an 84-per-cent increase in crimes against Black people and 41-per-cent increase on incidents against Jewish people.
Taking into account that a good number of hate crimes are not reported for various reasons, these statistics are more than enough to be a wake-up call for Canadians to tackle a dangerous attitude contaminating our largely inclusive, peaceful and diverse country.
Bigotry has entered the public discourse, normalizing hatred and xenophobia.
Politicians and media outlets have fanned the flames of animosity, contributing to an atmosphere that promotes hate in extreme individuals. On some occasions, the authorities have arrested people who went public with hate speech against Muslim citizens. Bigotry has entered the public discourse, normalizing hatred and xenophobia. This will lead to the same violence that was demonstrated in the Quebec City mosque.
Political leaders are building platforms around division, developing an us-versus-them mentality targeting Muslims. The provincial government’s planned bill banning “religious symbols” from certain public jobs, including education, is one example. In a very strong statement published in Le Journal de Montreal, the head of “La Fédération autonome de l’enseignement (FAE),” a teachers’ union in Quebec, called the proposed bill what it is: a “hijab hunt.”
The list of actions that further alienate Muslim Quebecers and other cultural communities goes on. Quebec’s newly appointed minister responsible for the status of women added to the already heated climate in the province by stating that the Muslim hijab is “a symbol of oppression.” A Gatineau city councillor told a newspaper that “Islamophobia is a problem invented by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.”
More from HuffPost Canada:
- Quebec Premier Says There Is No Islamophobia In Province
- BLOG: Quebec’s Islamophobia Has Gone Down An Eerily Familiar Path
- BLOG: Islamophobia: The Very Real Monster In Canada’s Closet
At the federal level, Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer was called out for falsely claiming the UN Global Compact on Immigration that Canada expressed its readiness to sign onto would allow foreign governments to dictate our country’s immigration policies. In many of his appearances in the media, Mr. Scheer does not hide what is considered to be a harsh position on immigration and migrants coming into the country.
Instances like this challenge Premier Legault’s insistence that Islamophobia doesn’t exist. It’s alive and well within the province and Canada.
As populist and far-right movements take root across the country, it is more important than ever to renew calls to recognize January 29 as a day of action against Islamophobia. Both the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF) and Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) have launched a joint campaign to request the implementation of a National Day of Remembrance and Action on Islamophobia, which could be an important tool in the fight against all forms of discrimination through systematic efforts that are officially recognized and supported.
There is clearly a problem with Islamophobia in this country and it should be acknowledged matter-of-factly in order for us to begin tackling the complicated parts of it. Without a doubt such a deep social problem will not be solved by hiding or denying its existence. Open dialogue, strong political will, inclusive policies and human values can and should be used as strong tools used to fight any and all form of hate and bigotry.
Samer Majzoub
When Will Canadians Get The Anti-Islamophobia Measures They Want?
The federal government can be at ease knowing it will have broad support if it decides to implement the recommendations of the M-103 report.
By Miranda Gallo, Contributor and Samer Majzoub, Contributor
02/07/2018 01:17pm EST | Updated February 8, 2018
Since 2012, Canada has witnessed a surge in anti-Muslim attitudes and incidents, culminating in the Quebec City mosque attack on Jan. 29, 2017, that left six Muslims dead, and 19 injured. Following the attack, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised to support Muslims in Canada and asserted, “We will defend you … and we will stand up for you.”
M-103, a motion introduced last February by Liberal Member of Parliament Iqra Khalid, charged the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to conduct a study on how to reduce or eliminate systemic racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia, in Canada. On February 1, nearly two years after almost 70,000 Canadians called on the government to condemn Islamophobia in parliamentary ePetition e-411, the M-103 report and recommendations were finally released to the public.
Data from a recent survey conducted by EKOS Research Associates on behalf of the Canadian Muslim Forum (CMF-FMC) and Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) reveals that many are deeply disturbed by this increasing Islamophobia in Canada, and want the government to protect multicultural traditions.
The survey demonstrated that Canadians recognize Islamophobia is a problem, stand largely opposed to it and expect the government to take action. In fact, a whopping 81 per cent of Canadians acknowledge the existence of Islamophobia in Canada.
The joint CMF-FMC/CJPME survey reveals that the majority of Canadians support the timely recommendations of M-103. Recommendation 22 of the M-103 report asserts that “the Government of Canada take a strong leadership role to actively condemn systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia.” Indeed, survey results showed that 77 per cent of Liberal supporters, and 60 per cent of Canadians overall, agree that the government must take action to combat Islamophobia in Canada.
When asked, “What is the best way for the government to respond to the challenges that come with multiculturalism today,” Canadians in the survey expressed support for all the different courses of action recommended by the Committee. For example, Recommendation 29 of the M-103 report calls on the government to ensure that law enforcement agencies better “investigate hate speech on the Internet” and “enforce existing laws.”
The most highly recommended course of action by Canadians surveyed was to “better enforce existing laws to protect minorities from discrimination and hate crimes.” This approach was supported by 48 per cent of respondents, and indicates that Canadians continue to have faith in the existing mechanisms supporting multiculturalism.
If Canadians indicate that they are clear on what Islamophobia is, surely a Committee tasked with investigating Islamophobia could do the same.
Likewise, 42 per cent of Canadians believe the government needs to “provide cultural sensitivity training to government employees who deal with the public,” another position supported by several recommendations in the Committee’s report.
Sadly, after half a year of testimony and study, the Committee was unable to establish a working definition of Islamophobia. Considering that much of the opposition to the motion was due ostensibly to the “vague” definition of Islamophobia, the Committee fell short in addressing these concerns and developing consensus moving forward.
M-103 faced considerable backlash from right-leaning voices, who claimed Canadians find the term “Islamophobia” confusing. Contrarily, the survey results reveal that 70 per cent of Canadians are comfortable that they understand the meaning of Islamophobia. If Canadians indicate that they are clear on what Islamophobia is, surely a Committee tasked with investigating Islamophobia could do the same.
More from HuffPost Canada:
- M-103: Commons Committee To Study How To Tackle Islamophobia In Canada
- Anti-Islamophobia Motion Shows World What Canadians Stand For
- M-103: Anti-Islamophobia Motion Easily Passes House Of Commons
It has been said that actions speak louder than words, and rightly so. Indeed, in a context where there is a nation-wide wave of religious discrimination against Muslims, action becomes a federal imperative.
Many Canadians have waited years for Parliament to recognize the problem of Islamophobia in Canada. The federal government can be at ease knowing it will have broad support if it decides to implement the recommendations of the Committee’s M-103 report and take action to stand up for Muslims.
Samer Majzoub
*article: Justice Has Yet To Be Served For Indigenous Women
01/11/2018 11:27am EST
For years, calls have been made to society’s stakeholders, particularly various governments, to establish some sort of proper procedure to determine why Indigenous women have been the subjects of extreme violence and mostly unsolved disappearances for so long.
At one point, Patricia Hajdu, the ex-minister for the status of women, had said that research emerging from the Native Women’s Association of Canada has shown that the number of victims was much higher than the 1,200 noted in a 2014 report by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). She suggested that as many as 4,000 indigenous women have gone missing or been murdered over the past three decades.
Broken families of the missing and murdered women have come forward many times to publicly share the pain and misery they have felt over their losses, and sometimes the unimaginable anguish that comes with not knowing the actual fates of those who go missing nor what kind of circumstances the women and girls are going through.ADVERTISING
Violence against Indigenous women has been prominent for a long time now. The devastation such violence leaves behind as well as the long-term damages should have led to an earlier awareness and, as a result, firmer decisions by policymakers in order to tackle the issue. But for too long, there were delays to put into place concrete actions to shed the light on the situation. It was not until 2016 that the federal government decided to officially hear from the victims’ relatives and other relevant details throughout an exceptional commission it launched as a special National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.
The commission is supposed to be probing the systemic roots of the violence against aboriginal women. Moreover, other factors are to be examined by the commission such as wealth, health, sexism, racism, etc.
The commission serves as a platform to hear testimonies from families of lost loved ones and survivors of violence at community hearings across the country. Whether the commission will be a successful starting point towards real positive changes to the well-being of Indigenous women and girls remains to be seen.
Safeguarding a non-violent environment for aboriginal women to have adequate education, good health care and job opportunities, among other elements, is essential to alleviate an uncertainty that the community has been dealing with for so long.
Nations that wave the flag for women’s rights and protection should be spearheading any policies and safety measures which guarantee that vulnerable women are not subjected to hardship and suffering as a result of their circumstances. In this respect, the dilemma of Indigenous women in Canada should be approached at different angles with different methods in order to give hope to their various communities that attempt to resolve their issues will be taken seriously.
The championing of human and civil rights for all women, men and children will involve using any and all resources in order to achieve proper fairness and equality, making sure that no human being will ever be discriminated against, targeted, ignored and/or overlooked due to their race, origin, belief, etc.
*Samer Majzoub
*article: Canada Needs The Political Will Required To Tackle Hate
Day after day and incident after incident, it has become a necessity that all systematic, racial and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia, must be studied thoroughly to come up with policies that will cure these social diseases once and for all.
03/06/2017 12:17pm EST
As bullets harvested the souls of the victims, one after another, on the night of the Jan. 29, 2017 at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Centre, a new era of terror was inaugurated, signed by the bloodshed of those who lost their lives and the tears that have been shed by the 17 orphans and six widows left behind.
The shock waves of that bloody night hit very hard across the country, creating fears, worries and uncertainties. The first few hours after the massacre, the main question that was uttered by the media, citizens and politicians was who had committed this crime. The picture came to be clearer when it was revealed that the shooter was a young student, from the same university where most of the victims either graduated from or worked at. Moreover, based on Facebook posts, comments and information from those who knew the shooter, it was revealed that his right-wing ideology was his instigator, leading him to murder innocent worshipers.
The only “sin” those murdered in the mass shooting carried was that they were all Muslims, who happened to be praying in the Centre. And the only reason why the killer decided to end their lives was a hate doctrine, represented by the Islamophobia and bigotry that have plagued the environment in Quebec, and the rest of the country, for many years.
Following Quebec’s tragedy, columnists, civic organizations, NGOs, politicians and the general public all agreed that xenophobia, Islamophobia and prejudice were the drive behind the violent incidents that have been targeting Muslim citizens. For years and years, warnings and public advice have been given to society’s stakeholders and the political classes regarding Islamophobia as an extreme form of discrimination and radicalization, which has been leading to violence targeting Muslim community.
The Quebec City massacre is a clear demonstration of the tragic end-product of letting Islamophobia go unchecked.
For many years, besides some soft talk, the concrete political will to tackle Islamophobia and other sorts of hate speech was almost totally absent from the public scene. On the contrary, various political platforms embarked on divisive agendas that inflamed the extreme ideologies that implanted the concept of “us versus them.”
Furthermore, some mainstream and social media became unchecked podiums for all those who shared their animosity and hostility toward their fellow citizens of different skin colours or beliefs. This dangerous combination can, very expectedly, create a path of hatred that may lead to fatal incidents. The Quebec City massacre is a clear demonstration of the tragic end-product of letting Islamophobia go unchecked.
Following the cruel killing of the six worshipers in Quebec City, there was an outpouring of sympathy and solidarity coming from every corner in the county in support of the families of the victims. Words of condemnation came from almost all politicians and public figures, bringing together all Canadians in their denunciation of the terrorist attack. The unfortunate reality came after this short term of solidarity which was presumed to be genuine enough to cause change in the toxic and bigoted environment that preceded the attack.
During the burials of the six victims, a spike of hate-related incidents were reported in various areas throughout the country, from Mosques being fire bombed to Muslim citizens being exposed to various physical attacks. Furthermore, there was a sudden increase of xenophobic incidences in many areas around the country as a result of political statements and positions held by those who have placed themselves at the forefront of the divisive rhetoric, creating friction within the Canadian social fabric.
Day after day and incident after incident, it has become a necessity that all systemic, racial and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia, must be studied thoroughly to come up with policies that will cure these social diseases once and for all.
Samer Majzoub
*article: Canada’s Anti-Islamophobia Motion A Shining Example To The World
Canada’s parliament adopted unanimously a motion to condemn all forms of Islamophobia in the country. The fact that the motion received no objection from any of the federal parties shows that the Liberal, NDP, Conservative and Bloc Quebecois members have a clear understanding that Islamophobia is a severe form of bigotry.
11/10/2016 02:36am EST | Updated November 11, 2016
On Oct. 26 2016, the House of Commons, Canada’s Parliament, adopted unanimously a motion to condemn all forms of Islamophobia in the country.
The fact that the motion received no objection from any of the federal parties shows that the Liberal, NDP, Conservative and Bloc Quebecois members have a clear understanding that Islamophobia is a severe form of bigotry and is not a simple subject that can be ignored anymore. It has become a critical illness that raises concerns and requires a forceful push back from the federal legislators that represent all Canadians to denounce Islamophobia.
Canada, united in standing up for human values, will be on record as the first country in the Western world to adopt a motion that contains clear wordings expressing denunciation of any sort of bigotry towards citizens based on their religious and cultural background. This move has sent a strong message to xenophobes that their acts of violence, whether verbal, moral or physical, have been rejected, and that their beliefs stand against everything that Canada prides itself on: inclusion, equality and peace. Moreover, Canada can now be provided as an actual example to the world that nations are stronger through the diversity of their population.
This move has sent a strong message to xenophobes that their acts of violence, whether verbal, moral or physical, have been rejected.
It’s rational to say that the notion of inclusion of all people that share a common land within an identified border is the most effective tool and approach to secure peace, harmony, equality and fairness.
Democratic states have carried titles of freedom, liberty and human rights slogans for a long period of time. We have been witnessing for the last two decades or so that some governments try or adapt official policies that lead to social friction amongst cultural, religious or ethnic lines. These strategies, despite appearing to be pay off through some political gains for a very limited period of time, certainly will end in devastating consequences that lead to social tensions that can be easily avoided.
By the same token, exclusion of groups of citizens because of their social, spiritual or intellectual convictions, skin colour or political views may lead to feelings of isolation and negligence, especially in the youth segment of society. This may lead some of youth to turn to inappropriate actions, creating a generation that is looked at and dealt with as second-class citizens and under siege at all times.
Canada has proudly taken a step in enhancing human values.
Anti-Semitism, racial profiling, islamophobia, bashing of any culture or race are all characteristics of bigots and portraits of racists. They are the individuals who rush to express their hatred and hostility toward any inclusive move and mind-opening exchange toward citizens of all faith, beliefs and views. Societies across the universe have suffered at the hands of these extremists elements that target all those who do not belong to their line of philosophy.
Canada has proudly taken a step in enhancing human values by condemning Islamophobia. The concepts of hate speech, bigotry and stereotyping have received a blow from the moral gesture taken by the House of Commons, the house that represents citizens from coast to coast, in unanimous consent without the opposition of any of the legislators on the floor.
The next step is for the federal government to set up policies and orientations to address and deal profoundly at all levels, social, economical and political, with Islamophobia symptoms that present themselves strongly in our society. Canada is exceptional in its values and human standards, and can remain the multicultural icon of the world with the continued condemning of bigotry.
Samer Majzoub
*article: The Rise And Fall Of The Megastore
In cases where big chain stores decide to move to a new market, one might think that the CEO would never sign off on the idea unless thorough “homework” has been done. However, this is not always the case. Some of the big names in the market may have their big move without proper groundwork and a detailed plan to address the requirements of the new venture.
05/09/2016 04:47am EDT | Updated May 10, 2017
Establishing or expanding retail department stores to new market requires in-depth knowledge and profound business study. The focus should be on crucial data such as: social dimensions, population taste, habits, life styles, financial capacity and historical spending trend of the targeted clientele.
Furthermore, a highly professional and precise business plan should be the root of the final decision whether to proceed with the new venture or not. Defaulting or missing any of the detailed investigation and analysis of the subject matter may end up in fatal failure and the loss of millions of dollars and hundreds of employees.
The main strategy for any firm is to create a concept that is so different and persuasive that it places competitors in very difficult situations and unable to copy or react to it, and then to apply that concept in such a way that core customers stay loyal. Another main method of the continuation of successful department stores is to maintain a distinctive offering that attracts an extremely loyal customer base.
Exploring more of the base elements for a successful business is to have a clear vision that connects products to core customers. Successful execution of the business concept is another factor that is needed for business to flourish and carry on. By developing culture and a set of values, the business will keep attracting the core customers to its customs and traditions. The strong bond between the services/products offered and the core clientele of any retail department store means profitability and continuity of the business project. Celebrating the work success with customers gives them their sense of belonging, strengthens the loyalty to the store chain and toughens its root presence in the market.
Other fundamentals that are significant to the success of retails departments can be summarized by crucial tips such as location — choosing your location is the most important step in making your dream of a successful department store come true, stocking shelves with merchandises — filling up the stores with products and commodities will positively give the clientele to more options of items choice, and keeping the theme of the chain stores. All these tips are crucial tools used in maintaining loyal customers committed to buying and promoting your business to higher levels.
An illustration of the securing elements of success for department stores is the Wal-Mart success story. The chain store had come into the Canadian market with a strong concept of “discount.” It created a culture that has been appealing to its core clientele since then.
In 1994, the year Wal-Mart first came onto the scene in Canada, it presented lines of products that competed, with great achievement, against their “rivals”. The chain has filled up the shelves with a great variety that is affordable for most social classes. Wal-Mart waited 12 years, until 2006, to open its first supercenter store. It took more than a decade for the establishment to expand in size, having studied the market thoroughly and experienced all its dimensions rigorously.
In cases where big chain stores decide to move to a new market, one might think that the CEO would never sign off on the idea unless thorough “homework” has been done. However, this is not always the case. Some of the big names in the market may have their big move without proper groundwork and a detailed plan to address the requirements of the new venture.
One of the risky steps that may be taken by big department stores is to expand fast, wide and large. Establishing numerous new stores in a wide geographical area in a short time period puts tremendous pressure on the operational system of the new outlets. Such a huge move requires high management skills, effective marketing approach, competitive pricing, efficient distribution centers, and strong human resources that execute the work timely and fashionably.
A clear example of a big fiasco that reflects the ill business decision making of random expansion on lose ground was the failure of Target in the Canadian market. In 2013, Target took a bold decision to expand internationally from the States to Canadian soil. The chain store had in mind that Canadians have been cross-border shopping from its department stores for years, so why not moving to Canada and offering direct services to its loyal clientele. Under the shadow of $4.4 billion expansion plan, Target bought more than 120 Zellers stores from the Hudson Bay Co. in 2011. In less than two years, the huge Target chain stores announced that they are pulling out of the market by the year’s end, incurring a loss of two billion dollars.
Many experts had begun analyzing and explaining why Target had witnessed such a disastrous failure in Canada while the chain store continued to witness success in the American market. There is consensus among the experts that one of the apparent reasons that Target failed in the Canadian market was their failure to keep their shelves filled with the expected products. It had been an extreme challenge to establish a solid, working distribution mechanism that was able to properly allocate the products to over 100 stores. The distribution default had led to waves of client complaints over the lack of merchandise in the stores\ shelves.
Another factor of the Target expansion failure had been the location of its newly bought stores. Having bought Zellers locations, many have criticized these spots as non-suitable settings for Target’s bigger space requirements. To add more complexity to the expansion process, Target had to renovate all of Zellers stores in a one year period. This task by itself needed tremendous work, time management and cost in order to meet the deadline for the chain to open its stores. The process ended up as an unfinished task, and yet still the stores had to be opened on time.
A third element that had added pressure to the malfunctioning of Target stores in Canada was the high pricing competition from its competitors. Overestimation of the potential market, and the fact the stores’ products were not appealing to the customers, had been an additional pressuring factor on the chain’s already great running difficulties.
No one can deny the fact that establishing and operating successful big chain stores is a great challenge that requires a full set of decision making expertise, management skills, operational experience, effective marketing plans and human resources in order to have the work run on the right track. Flying blind and having no background information on the market to decide which expansion should be planned is a devastating recipe for any work affair. Any new venture should have its conditions and details met and respected completely in order to make it a success story.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/rise-and-fall-of-megastores_b_9860996.html
Samer Majzoub
*article: Multiculturalism Is A Canadian Success Story
Multiculturalism, as a comprehensive communal doctrine, came to be the right answer for the nation of Canada to create its unique, coherent and inclusive society which guarantees equality, freedom, fairness and reverence to all its citizens. The various cultures, religious doctrines, social values and ethnicities merit equal respect.
03/07/2016 10:39am EST | Updated March 8, 2017
It was May 10, 1534, early in the 16th century, when a little squadron of “first immigrants” set foot on “Canadian” soil in an expedition mission. The new arrivals consisted of two small vessels, with crews amounting to about one hundred and twenty men, led by the Frenchman Jacques Cartier (or Quartier), a mariner originating from the small French seaport St. Malo, who arrived off Cape Bonavista, Newfoundland.
Kanata, or Canada, meaning “village” or “settlement,” became the newly discovered land for the Europeans, mainly the French and the English. As the years passed, French migrants started flooding into Canada, settling in colonies and enhancing the power of what was then considered “the new France.” The second wave of “immigrants” came after the British conquest in the 18th century. Thousands of English speaking settlers arrived to reside in “Canada.”
A couple of years after the Confederation, under the reign of Prime Minister John A. Macdonald, Canada issued its first Immigration Act of 1869. The main objectives of the act were to ensure the safety of immigrants and protecting them from being exploited. Throughout the years, the nation of Canada, as we are aware, became a land of immigration, a home to millions of people from different lands, ethnicities, cultures and religious beliefs. Every new comer that has settled in Canada in the last few hundred years and those who will settle in the future share one common name: “immigrants.”
Canada, proudly, was the first country in the world to adopt multiculturalism as an official policy.
A land that houses millions of citizens on its soil, all from various backgrounds, definitely searches for some sort of inclusive concept that brings all their varieties under one accepted human model. The people who have settled since the French arrival in the 16th century strived to have the uniqueness of their identities protected, their dignities respected and their civic rights valued and not violated.
Multiculturalism, as a comprehensive communal doctrine, came to be the right answer for the nation of Canada to create its unique, coherent and inclusive society which guarantees equality, freedom, fairness and reverence to all its citizens. The various cultures, religious doctrines, social values and ethnicities merit equal respect. For the most part, Canadian origins are from every corner of the world, reflecting a wide range of cultural environments that carry a collection of values and doctrines. Having the rights of aboriginals, the natives of Canada and all other citizens in mind, multiculturalism becomes the precise recipe of a healthy country.
In 1971, Canada officially adopted multiculturalism as “an inclusive citizenship” policy. This policy was enhanced in 1988 by the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. The Act was designed to create equality, before all authorities and at all levels, for all citizens with respect to their differences and origins. It emphasized that discrimination was prohibited by Canadian laws and regulations. All citizens are entitled to the protection of their identities and beliefs. Canada, proudly, was the first country in the world to adopt multiculturalism as an official policy.
There are voices, now and then, which object to multiculturalism as a social formula. These anti-equality calls are considered by many to be coming from either people who may be racist by nature, for electoral political reasons, or from those who believe that they are supreme over certain other citizens. Needless to say that the wide majority of Canadians believe in, support and enjoy the bounties and rewards of multiculturalism. All “immigrants” that landed in Canada starting from Jacque Cartier until now, enjoy the livelihood of peace, harmony, freedom and fairness amongst all citizens.
/https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/multiculturalism-in-canada_b_9388576.html
Samer Majzoub
*article: The Difference Between Community And Religious Schools
There is general belief that Islamic schools are religious educational bodies, and the kind of courses taught is based on Islamic theology. This is a false understanding. It is important to note that the majority of these schools are either don’t or only partially receive subventions from provincial authorities.
02/05/2016 03:42am EST | Updated February 5, 2017
Upon the arrival of the British and the French in the late 15th century along the shores of the Canadian Atlantic as new immigrants, the concept of the educational institutions came into light. During the French ruling of Canada, the establishment of schools was given to religious bodies.
The first schools in New France were operated by the Catholics. In the early 19th century, the colonial governments moved to set up publicly funded education systems. Protestants and Catholics were deeply divided over how religious and moral education should be taught.
In Upper Canada, the Catholic minority rejected the Protestant practice of biblical study in schools. In Lower Canada, on the other hand, the Protestant minority objected to the education system instilling Roman Catholic dogma.
Thus, in both these areas, two school systems were established: one Catholic and one Protestant. When Confederation took place, these school systems were enshrined in the British North America Act, 1867. British Columbia established a non-sectarian school system in 1872.
Based on the aforementioned piece of Canadian history, it becomes clear that religious schools per se are mainly run by religious bodies, their curricula circulate, and focus on theological studies. Although some contemporary courses may be given in such educational institutions, teaching is motivated and revolves around religious concepts and doctrines.
On the other side of the token comes what could be called community schools. This type of school arose upon the influx of waves of immigrants that considered Canada their country after the establishment of the Confederation in 1867. The nation started to witness the constitution of community schools across the country.
Community schools are used as hubs to bring educators, families and community partners together to offer a range of supports and services to children besides the main objective of learning. Normally, every community school responds to unique local needs.
In the minds of the founders and administrators of the community schools, such educational bodies have a climate, a culture and minimal universal religious teachings that enable students to develop cognitive, social, emotional, civic and ethical competences, and help them develop the capacity to thrive and continue their learning cycle and life journey within the society at large.
Both the community and the public schools that are funded by the provincial governments in Canada follow defined curricula set by the local ministries of education, work under similar general guidelines and rules, and share the same learning guiding principles at all teaching cycle levels.
A legitimate question may be raised: Why is there confusion between what a religious school is and what a community school is, since their definitions are clearly understood?
It should be noted that perceptions and understanding of words may diversify depending on the linguistic and cultural background of the speakers on one side and of the listeners on the other side. Such a difference in comprehension may generate some confusion and misunderstanding of terms and expressions used by various ethnic and cultural communities that constitute one society in nations such as in Canada.
The word “religion” in the context of the Western contemporary societies that originated in Europe is more of a theological doctrine, while in some societies originating in other part of the world, it reflects cultural identity, rituals, conviction and social habits.
Another clear example of such misconceptions can be demonstrated by the confusion about the nature of Muslims or Islamic schools across Canada. There is general belief that these institutions are religious educational bodies, and the kind of courses taught is based on Islamic theology.
This is a false understanding. It is important to note that the majority of these schools are either don’t or only partially receive subventions from provincial authorities.
The fact is that the provincial governments grant permits to run the ordinary operations of these schools similar to any other public and private ones. Furthermore, Muslim schools follow official curricula.
For example, in Quebec the class’ programs contain 35 to 37 periods, including two to three sessions per week that may be considered of Islamic nature, such as reading the Quran, which is used to teach how to read Arabic and universal Islamic values and ethics.
On such a ratio, certainly schools can’t be considered religious organizations. Muslim community schools are run by civic volunteers and not religious personnel.
Muslim Canadians share other communities to establish the social fabric of the nation to the bounty of multiculturalism adopted in the 70s of the last century.
“Multiculturalism ensures that all citizens can keep their identities, can take pride in their ancestry and have a sense of belonging” is a golden statement that supports the notion of community pride, equality of all citizens and love for Canada.
Public/private and community schools, whether ones for the Muslim community or ones for others in our society, both share most of what the conventional education is all about.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/religious-schools_b_9164896.html
Samer Majzoub
*article; Islamophobia Is Now A Canadian Concern
As the years have passed, the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF), community organizations, activists, human rights groups, some public figures, intellectuals, elected officials and others have kept their worries very well exposed over the intensification of Islamophobia in the country.
0/18/2016 10:22am EDT | Updated October 18, 2016
The notion of discrimination has been the plague of humanity since forever. People have been targeted and persecuted for their skin colour, religious affiliation, race, nationality and others attributes. History is full of bloody periods where men, women and children have been exposed to violent hostility and deadly means for no reason besides their unique identities which their aggressors have used as pretext for crimes and atrocities inflicted upon them.
In the present days, at the time where the human civilization declares its superiority, new forms of hatred and bigotry have come to light. Modern stereotyping and what is considered to be the old fanatic stereotyping share many parallels, one of which is that both are discriminatory towards groups of people due to attributes of their identity, race, convictions and cultural background. The “new concept” of discrimination has been demonstrated under various titles, such as racial profiling, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.
In 2010, the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF) had led a community delegation to the House of Commons in Ottawa Hill. The objective of that parliamentary day was to create awareness and shed more light to the legislators over the notion of Islamophobia and the very troubling sharp increase in reported incidents that were related to this issue. Statistics and points of discussions were presented. Concerns over the moral and physical violent incidents against Canadians because of their visible religious identity had been some of the focus points brought up during the trip to Parliament that day.
As the years have passed, the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF), community organizations, activists, human rights groups, some public figures, intellectuals, elected officials and others have kept their worries very well exposed over the intensification of Islamophobia in the country.
Media statements, seminars and lectures, raising the subject matter to elected officials and creating awareness amongst the communities and the general public have all been means used to demonstrate the danger of letting hatred and intolerance prevail, which would lead to a toxic environment by bringing up friction within the society and creating fear in the hearts and minds of young Canadians who have been victims of verbal and physical aggressions by bigots and hatemongers.
In early 2015, the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF), in a press conference held in Montreal, voiced citizens’ frustrations and denunciations over using the Muslim community as a political football by certain politicians in hopes of gaining more votes during election periods. Furthermore, there were notes over the role of a few media outlets in inflaming Islamophobia during these times.
As hate speech moves from being a phenomenon to a social disease, some politicians, public figures and other media outlets joined in on the warnings expressed previously that Islamophobia has to be stopped, rejected and deplored. On Oct 1, 2015, Quebec’s National Assembly came together to condemn Islamophobia. Furthermore, more declarations started to be heard from various sides, whether from the governmental ruling side or the opposition side, all joining together to warn against the looming upsurge of hate speech.
The tackling of Islamophobia as a Canadian issue took another step ahead on the ladder of interest in the country. On June 8, 2016, a petition had been initiated by myself and sponsored by Frank Baylis, federal Liberal MP of Pierrefonds-DDO, calling on the House of Commons to condemn all forms of Islamophobia in Canada. The petition known by e-411 collected close to 70,000 signatures, making it the most signed online petition in the history of the House of Commons. Canadians from coast to coast showed their support for the request that the petition carried to denounce discrimination against Muslim citizens.
Based on the solid support that the petition e-411 got from Canadians, a motion to condemn all forms of Islamophobia was submitted, on Oct 5, 2016, to the House of Commons for unanimous approval by all MPs. Although the unanimous motion didn’t pass through due to the refusal of a small group of Conservative representatives out of the 338 members in the House of Commons, the fact that it earned the consent of the vast majority of other legislators proves that the Islamophobia is becoming a true Canadian concern.
Surely, the trip to recognize and to condemn discrimination, as it is a total contradiction to Canadian values, has not come to an end yet. Canadians from all stripes of social, political, racial and religious backgrounds are coming together at a much faster pace to stand united up to hate and smear campaigns against their fellow citizens.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/islamophobia-canadian-concern_b_12533736.html
Samer Majzoub, E-411 petition initiator
*article: Condemning Islamophobia Promotes Human Values
All human beings deserve to live in peace and safety. Attacking women because of their visible faith as they stroll around a shopping mall or take the metro to school or work, denying jobs because of a candidate’s name and background, and vandalizing community and religious properties should stop once and for all.
07/25/2016 11:03am EDT
The initiation of the online petition e-411, sponsored by Frank Baylis, the Federal Liberal MP of Peirrefonds-Dollard, comes at a time when extremists from every side are attempting to hijack civic peaceful societies and cause friction amongst groups of people through destructions and devastation.
The world has witnessed many dangerous events: violent “lone wolf” individuals, who are ready to commit bloody criminal attacks on civilians in the name of a religion, extremist groups, politicians; and persons who engage in hate and discriminatory smear campaigns, and people who attack citizens on the streets based on their faith and visible dress codes.
As if this miserable view is not enough, North America is observing a surge in racial tensions, with law enforcement forces being accused of discriminatory use of deadly force against men based on their skin colour. On the other hand, police officers are being ambushed and shot dead by angry individuals.
Canada is witnessing a sharp increase in Islamophobia, which has even been described as an “epidemic” in certain large areas of the country. Citizens are aggressively and physically attacked on the streets, shopping malls, and community centres. Moreover, places of worship are being firebombed and vandalized. Islamophobic political campaigns have become very troubling, mainly during the election periods. Furthermore, some media outlets add salt to the wound by becoming venues for anti-Muslim rhetoric under the justification of “freedom of speech,” which seems to be without boundaries and irresponsible when it comes to bashing Islam and Muslim citizens.
All human beings deserve to live in peace and safety.
Under this gloomy climate, citizens from all aspects of society, responsible media, and honest, elected decision makers have the civil duty and moral obligation to stand up united to denounce all sorts of discrimination and prejudice. To come together with initiatives that clearly condemn and refuse any act, talk and policies that lead to hatred, hostility and lack of harmony within society.
On June 2nd 2010, The Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF) led delegations consisting of representatives, young professionals, activists, women advocates and others on Parliamentary Day at the Hill. The main objective of meeting the Federal parties’ caucuses on that day was to introduce and express concerns about Islamophobia, and its impact on Arab and Muslim citizens. From that day, the most noticeable remark was that most of the policy makers were not fully aware of the dangers of Islamophobia, and its implications on Canadian society.
After a long and, at times, very hard journey, Islamophobia is currently recognized as a harsh reality that needs a strong political will and social awareness to undertake, engage in, deal with and find concrete solutions and remedies to cure such an “epidemic” phenomenon and terminate its harmful symptoms from the society at large.
All human beings deserve to live in peace and safety. Attacking women because of their visible faith as they stroll around a shopping mall or take the metro to school or work, denying jobs because of a candidate’s name and background, and vandalizing community and religious properties should stop once and for all. Such aggressions are against woman’s rights, human dignity and the integrity of Canadian society.
Mr. Frank Baylis, federal MP, Pierrefonds-Dollard, recently said on Le Huffingtonpost, “I am against all forms of discrimination. That’s why I am supporting this petition (e-411). It’s not a petition for Muslims; it’s a petition against discrimination.”
Violent extremism represents itself. The perpetrators of acts of devastation have not been voted for to speak on behalf of any religion, cultural or human groups.
Civilized people stand up against all kinds of prejudice, hate-speech, unfairness and intolerance that are expressed in various forms of bigotry, such as anti-Semitism, racial profiling, bias based on personal orientation and Islamophobia. Such a noble stance promotes human values, civil rights and enhances equality amongst all.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/condemning-islamophobia-canada_b_11150012.html
Samer Majzoub, initiater of petition e-411
*article: We Need To Make A Collective Effort To End Violent Radicalism
The responsibility of tackling, addressing and finding drastic solutions for violent radicalism is a duty that should be spread over the shoulder of the society’s stakeholders as well as decision-makers, community, media, “religious” groups, social experts, families and others.
2/09/2015 11:58am EST | Updated December 9, 2016
Radicalism that leads to violence by individuals needs to be addressed profoundly,instead of politicizing the subject or making use of it for biased “gains.” Furthermore, it should not be used, as we have been witnessing for so long, to launch hatred, discriminatory, bigotry and smear campaigns against any community, religion or culture. Actually, such racist approaches against citizens certainly inflames radicalism from all sides.
The concept of radicalism that leads to violence through history has always, similar to all other philosophical doctrines, sought to justify its movement based on mainly social, economical and political reasoning.
“Religions” have been, in recent times, added to the catalogue that violent radicals use to legitimize their acts, and as mean of delivering their objections to what they consider “injustice.” This addition of “religious” reasoning to violent operations has made the subject much more sensitive, confusing and complicated.
On the other hand, the self-proclaimed civilized “governments and administrations” that consider themselves fighting against “extremism” are themselves relying on means of extreme radicalism to achieve their goals, such as wars, bombardments of cities and military assaults whose victims are mainly innocent civilians. These forces go as far as supporting of dictatorship, enraging conflicts, creating more unrest and making matters much more complex than ever.
The world ends by extremism adopted by individuals, groups, rulers and states that are fighting each other. End-result, innocent blood is spilled all over the land, countries destroyed and thousands of refugees on the run!
One of most dangerous forms of radicalism that may lead to direct, indirect or encourage violence is hate speech that is targeting individuals, groups or segments of society because of their religious, cultural, racial or ethnic back ground.
The dangerous element of such a phenomenon is the fact it seems soft in its nature and as if it’s only freedom of expression. The matter of the fact that tolerating such bigotry form of hate speech radicalism has proven that it leads to violence against innocent people in the streets and public places creates friction within societies and legitimizes discrimination and racism.
The responsibility of tackling, addressing and finding drastic solutions for violent radicalism is a duty that should be spread over the shoulder of the society’s stakeholders as well as decision-makers, community, media, “religious” groups, social experts, families and others.
Spreading accusations, ignoring collective responsibility, indictment of cultures and ethnicities, isolating societies and believing in the theory of conspiracy, are all elements that will get the subject matter into more difficulty and will create tricky situations that will lead us all to a vicious circle.
Society should unite and work together to prevent and assist the individuals that may be inclined to choose vicious radicalism as a means of expressing their political dissatisfaction. The message to those people would be to quit such a devastating path that is, undoubtedly, causing so much damage and sorrow for the public at large, including the cause they allege they are fighting for. The clear idea is there are other peaceful ways to expose political points of views and there is absolutely no need for aggressiveness.
Preventing radicalism that may lead to violence requires collective efforts at educational, social, economical amongst other levels to deal and solve the subject matter effectively and successfully.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/end-violent-radicalism_b_8746608.html
Samer Majzoub
*article; These two Quebec Bills Are Apparently Targeting Muslims
The Liberal provincial government has aimed to address very controversial subjects that have been dominating Quebec politics for some time, including reasonable accommodation, youth “radicalization,” and increasing incidents of hate speech.
06/23/2015 07:52am EDT | Updated June 23, 2016
Recently, the Quebec provincial government tabled two long-awaited bills to the National Assembly.
Bill 62, on religious neutrality, proposes a number of measures that must be taken into account when considering whether to grant an accommodation on religious grounds and, provides that public services must be both delivered and received by persons with their faces uncovered.
Bill 59, proposes the prohibition of hate speech and speech inciting violence that are engaged in or disseminated publicly that targets people sharing a common characteristic identified as prohibited grounds for discrimination in the Quebec Charter of human rights and freedoms.
The Liberal provincial government has aimed to address very controversial subjects that have been dominating Quebec politics for some time, including reasonable accommodation, youth “radicalization,” and increasing incidents of hate speech. Both bills, 62 and 59, include vast measures and action plans. Topics covered in the two bills are so numerous that it appears as if PLQ , the governing Liberals, are aiming to tackle all divisive issues within Quebec society.
In the last few months, about two dozen Quebec youth have been reported to have left or attempted to leave to war zones in the Middle East. Those reports have raised concerns of what has been called radicalization of youth Quebecers. Calls to deal with the subject have dominated official statements and airwaves. While the general reaction to the anti-radicalization measures proposed by the government have been positive to a large extent, serious concerns have been raised on how the plan will be implemented.
Taking into consideration not to mix between religiously practising individuals and signs of radicalization is one of the main challenges that will face the civil servants who will be at the forefront of implementing the anti-radicalization action plan. This will require extensive training and knowledge for all the employees involved in the action plan. The employees should not be treating such sensitive cases based on their personal judgment which may lead to failure of the entire intervention action plan.
Another point of concern in the proposed bills is the mandate given to the police to detect signs of radicalization. Question that will arise include, what defines the physical signs of an individual’s radicalization, is it his or her appearance or dress? How do you detect on the street that an individual carries signs of extremism? A major fear is falling into religious profiling. Our societies already suffer from racial profiling; certainly, no one would like to add another hardship to our Quebec communities by poor implementation of such a security mandate.
Hate speech has plagued many aspects of Quebec society for long periods of time. This toxic phenomenon has witnessed a surge recently. One of its worst times came within the period of the previous Parti Quebecois government with the proposed Quebec secular charter. Quebec society witnessed a very dangerous trend of continues smear campaigns against cultural, ethnic and religious groups. Moreover, concerns of extreme speech that may incite violence came as an additional reason for the need to have clear anti-hate speech laws. Such a measure would fight all sorts of discriminatory discourse, such as Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and racial talk. It’s hoped that such an act, if it’s fairly implemented, will heal division, reunite and create harmony within Quebec’s social fabric.
The Quebec Liberal party has been blamed by some for not addressing what has been known as neutrality of the state or the secular charter. Whatever name is given, the concept came down to the prohibition of women from receiving or offering public services while their faces are covered. Depriving Quebec women from public services such as health and education because of their face cover is considered very discriminatory against women’s basic right of being treated as human beings and not discriminated against because of their choice of dress code. Such a provision is a blow to Quebec’s claim to be pioneer on women’s rights.
Although there are no official statistics, the number of face covered Quebec women, many of whom are French Quebecer converts, does not exceed a handful. Does this very small number of women, none of whom work in public service, deserve to be put in the spotlight? Is it worth to have the government tabling special laws against their choice of dress code?
Furthermore, the fact that the Provincial government tabled both Bills 59 and 62 at the same time, although, with totally different subjects and topics, has given the impression that the move is targeting one Quebec community — Muslims in particular. Although, officials try to deny that they are targeting any group or religion, the way both bills are presented, debated and covered in the media leaves no doubt in the minds and hearts of many Muslim Quebecers that here they are, again, being used as a political football within the province’s political arena.
No one argues for the great need to have bills, laws and social action plans to address important issues of Quebec society such as hate speech, discrimination, extremism and neutrality of the state. However, it’s not fair to target one group or the other. Although, the Muslim community at large doesn’t believe that the provincial government meant to target their population in the province, the government should be working very hard to avoid giving the perception that those bills are targeting Quebec Muslims.
The opportunity and the possibility are still there for officials to remove the impression that such proposed bills are targeting one community by carefully working and avoiding religious profiling in the process of implementing the relevant action plans.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/quebec-muslims-hate-crimes_b_7621612.html
Samer Majzoub
*article; Is Canada Destined to Be Ruled by the Same Two Political Parties?
Canadians throughout the years have been convinced that they have only one choice to choose between either of the Liberals or Conservatives. This particular “doctrine” has ruled out any opportunity for other political parties to rule the nation in any way.
05/10/2015 07:44am EDT | Updated May 10, 2016
Since the establishment of the confederation in 1867, both the Conservatives and the Liberals have exchanged posts continuously until present day as the federal ruling parties in Ottawa. The two political parties have dominated politics in Canada: the Liberal Party and the historic Conservative Party (previously the Progressive Conservative Party, which merged with the Canadian Alliance Party in 2003). If the modern Conservative Party is considered as the successor to the historic one, then these are the only two parties to have formed a government in Canada. Canadians throughout the years have been convinced that they have only one choice to choose between either of these two “traditional” political parties. This particular “doctrine” has ruled out any opportunity for other political parties to rule the nation in any way.
The mere fact that federal policy has been mainly subject to the sway of either the Liberals or the Conservatives has not stopped the formation of parties promoting themselves as the alternative choice for Canadian voters. One can say that throughout most of history’s elections, these hopeful political parties have played very minimal role at the ballots when it comes to the decision-making day. Election campaign after the other, these parties assumed maximum efforts to convince the electorates that they can select an alternative political group to rule the nation with different social and economical platforms and directions. However, time after time, Canadians stuck to the tradition of choosing one of the two dominant political orientations, Liberals or Conservatives.
The rule of the game stayed for decades without any change, switching roles, from the Liberals forming a government and the Conservatives acting as the official opposition, and vice versa.
Until the federal election of 2011, the year the New Democratic Party made history by gaining 102 seats at Parliament Hill and occupied the post of the official opposition for the first time since it was born in 1961 and Tommy Douglas, Premier of Saskatchewan at that time, was elected its first leader. The real change in the political scene was not only limited to the NDP’s major win, but, in addition to that, the reality that one of the “traditional” parties, the Liberal Party of Canada was relegated to the second opposition role on the floor for the first time in its history. It should be noted that the party’s establishment was on July 1st 1867, the date of the Canadian Confederation.
The NDP success waves in 2011 led to another deep upheaval in Quebec’s political map. With the NDP winning 56 seats in Quebec, they nearly wiped out the Bloc Québécois from the political scene. The Bloc is a federal political party that considers itself as the protector of Quebec’s interests in the House of Commons of Canada, and the promoter of the province’s sovereignty. Despite the total contradiction in the main political concepts between the two parties, the NDP as federalists, and the Bloc Québécois as sovereignists, the Orange Party was able to break the odds in Quebec in addition to its achievement at the federal level.
Another strong sign that Canadians could be ready to do the change in their choices of who may represent them as their elected officials came from Alberta on May 5 2015. Albertans had cast their ballots with a complete mind shift, from the conservative-based political power to a social democratic one.
The fact that Albertans kept choosing conservative economical platforms for 44 years, and in one night rebelled over their tradition came as big surprise to all Canadians. Alberta’s NDP win is a major upset, considering the PC Party had won 12 consecutive majorities and the NDP held only four seats when the election was called on April 7. In this election, the PC were not even able to hold on to the official opposition status that was taken by the Wildrose Party — a party that was formed when the Alberta Alliance Party in early 2008 merged with the unregistered Wildrose Party of Alberta.
Canadian voters may have shown, in recent years, at both the federal and the provincial levels, eagerness for a change in their options and choices to choose alternatives political platforms to administer their governments. Competition amongst a wide range of contenders for office from different political backgrounds to satisfy and to respond to their constituencies’ best interest is certainly a healthy element for all societies. At no time should any political party take for granted that it will be elected to public office irrespective of its performance and its efficiency. Canadians share of democracy, values and freedom of choice deserves first-class trustworthy politicians who are characterised with dignity, dedication, and commitment.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/federal-political-parties_b_7238576.html
Samer Majzoub
*article; Quebec Must Address its Growing Climate of Islamophobia
Recently, Quebec has witnessed very alarming anti-Muslim and anti-Islam rhetoric that has led to moral onslaught against citizens of Muslim faith. The discriminatory campaigns against any group of citizens due to their religious or ethnic background will lead to unhealthy social harmony within any society.
04/17/2015 06:00am EDT | Updated June 17, 2015
Muslim Quebecers have become victims of an increasingly dangerous Islamophobic environment. Recently, Quebec has witnessed very alarming anti-Muslim and anti-Islam rhetoric that has led to moral onslaught against citizens of Muslim faith. Such toxic atmosphere has been reflected in incidents of violence against Muslim Quebecers youth, women, men, community centers and mosques.
Since the establishment of the Commission on Reasonable Accommodation in 2007 followed by Bill 94 tabled by the PLQ in 2010, then Bill 60 (Quebec Charter of Values) presented by the Parti Quebecois in 2013, the planned PLQ programs and measures to fight what is called “religious radicalism” in 2015, and finally the promised new Charter of Quebec Values to be presented by the provincial government during its current mandate ending in 2018.
Some running contenders from different political parties in addition to existing elected officials do not hide their intentions to join their peers in either introducing or supporting regulations that target Muslim culture under diffident labels and excuses.
The motto that secular Quebec is in opposition to all religious beliefs due to its history of social clash with the church is not quite correct in this context. While it’s an open highway for media outlets, politicians and others to offend, insult and attack the Muslim Quebec community by degrading its public figures, religious rituals, and tainting its institutions with shrouds of rumours, these smear and hatred campaigns are rarely targeting other citizens’ groups and cultures within the society. This fact brings the bitter reality that Muslim Quebecers have been under tremendous pressure with the evident lack of political will to stop the moral onslaught against noticeable segments of Quebec society.
The continuing violation of the basic human right to security and dignity has witnessed a surge in chauvinistic media campaigns against Quebec Muslims lately. Some media reports allege that the community’s schools and places of worship are related to “terrorist” organizations. By doing so, the level of prejudice against Muslim Quebecers has reached its peak in recent history in the province. Such rumours have crossed ethics and principles of honest media reporting putting children, pupils, employees and ordinary citizens at danger by associating them with institutions that are connected to alleged “fanatics.”
The exaggeration of incidents, twisting of facts and the discriminatory campaigns against any group of citizens due to their religious or ethnic background will lead to unhealthy social harmony within any society. In Quebec, Islamophobia, has become a strong trend that needs our attention as Quebecers from all stripes of the province’s elite, politicians, media, public figures and the general public to unite to defeat unfairness and racism. Quebec human rights values are great tools to fight all sorts of bigotry and intolerance. Islamophobia should have no place in Quebec.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/samer-majzoub/islamophobia-quebec-politics_b_7087830.html
Samer Majzoub
samermajzoub 