Update
– June28, 2004: My previous letter about “Anti-Semitism, purging and new
overreactions” from June 3, 2004 is printed in blue after 4 texts below. It is placed after the communication under
that has been published in The Reporter - May 27, 2004. The update is replying to Prof. Gil Troy’s
questionable claims inserted into Reporter on June 1, 2004. The administration still ignores it and
Prof. Troy does not mention this response in his “interviews” across Canada to
accuse me for anti-Semitism. Please
read my letter to some Editors across Canada explaining our McGill problems
with the overreacting Prof. Troy (it is green and at the end).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Montreal, May 18,
2004 This is a letter to the McGill’s community, and not only, on: http://spop.addr.com
To: Principal and Vice-Chancellor -
Professor Heather Munroe-Blum
McGill
University, 845 Sherbrooke Street
West, Montreal, QC H3A 2T5 Fax: 398-4768
Subject: “Orange alert”
at McGill
Dear
Professor Heather Munroe-Blum,
When it comes to media
access, we have some people who are equal and some who are more equal. Orwell’s
phrase perfectly describes the present situation in the North American
“information market”. There are many
proofs of this if we look more closely.
Mary Robison has been nominated by the McGill senate
for an honorary degree, to be awarded at the June 4 convocation. However, “The
Gazette”, Montreal’s monopolistic English paper, provided a platform to a
McGill history professor to present provocative comments on Mrs. Robinson (Insightful, May 2, “Degree of
dishonour”). Prof. Gil Troy’s
speculative insinuations caused scores of readers to write letters of protest,
which far outnumbered the few extremist opinions supporting Troy. The majority
of the authors were connected with McGill, but the local university press and
official website have totally ignored this issue. “The Gazette” published both
opposite opinions, but in a proportion indicating that both sides were equal in
number. On top of that, “The Gazette”
is inciting the public to disturb the convocation ceremony by importing the
opinion of an “intellectual” terrorist from Toronto.
We should declare an Orange Alert at McGill at the
beginning of June. This is the intention behind my opinion piece below, which
is still being ignored by the press:
“Dangerous overreactions”
About the heated Gazette discussion of May 2-17 after Prof. Gil Troy’s comments on Mary Robinson (Insightful, May 2, “Degree of dishonour”), here is what the Reporter does not see: Deep down, it is not about the speculative historian’s attack on this honourable woman for her allegedly anti-Semitic views, but about politically correct rhetoric from opportunists putting down others for personal reasons.
This situation upset a lot of people, and their emotions should not be suppressed by the artificially imposed silence of McGill’s media—and don’t forget, these media buried a well-balanced opinion (May 7th) from the Principal herself. If debates at McGill are constantly censored, there could be a scandal at the June convocation ceremony with people throwing eggs at Robinson. This embarrassing scenario seems more likely after the sensation-hungry Gazette’s recent publication (Letters, May 17) of a Toronto professor’s instructions on how to disrupt convocation! Furthermore, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel publicly scolded McGill (“Double shame on McGill faculty members…”) for supporting Robinson and criticizing Troy. Academics are clearly divided and need to let off steam at open internal press discussions or special seminars.
We cannot put our heads in the sand and ignore the presence of networked “intellectual terrorists” able to hijack our media, politics and economy. Their domination increases when people like you and me stop challenging the simplest manipulations and the rhetoric of current propaganda.
In mediaeval times, those in power orchestrated witch-hunts as an easy tool to maintain dominance and to mark out territories among the scared masses. Today, we are constantly bombarded with bloody images from cynically provoked conflicts. These polarize the masses, who then act more predictably and become easier to control. Those who are quietly globalizing the world love this. Yet the decent people consciously choosing neutrality toward those conflicts are the most hated by those with influence in the present system.
This is the light in which we must
analyze the “problems” that really small and mean personalities have created
around Mrs. Robinson. She is a role model for many people trying to recover a
taste of a true freedom in a world
full of traps. People like Mrs.
Robinson are not liked by the money and the greed that dominate our world: she
poses a danger to their single-minded cynicism. Mind you, they do not need
sophisticated plots to maintain their control; they can always count on
street-smart opportunists who recognize the key elements in the current power
structures and step in quickly for a share of power and security. The
motivations of such opportunists are malignant and they long ago ceased to
listen to their consciences. They are like the prisoners in the Nazi
concentration camps who agreed to become “kapos”. They worked well without
needing documented orders from above, and they allowed the top Nazi officials
quite successfully to play the role of “innocents” who knew nothing about the
atrocities committed.
I remember from former communist Poland the manipulators (not only among the party members) who accused others of being anti-socialist. This was used to settle private accounts or to boost their own importance as powerful individuals able to break recognized social authorities, for reasons really unrelated to the “sacred” communist ideology.
On May 5, Mr. Troy and his friend Mr. Smith used “new arguments” in the letters section about an old-fashioned anti-Semitism that supposedly needs their attention. The next day, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel, Mr. Spector, joined them with the same “accusation”. They say Mrs. Robinson failed “to do enough to condemn anti-Semitism”. This sort of easy accusation is as old as the hills: People were once forced to confess to being possessed by spirits that were rebelling against local political systems, and even prosecuted for not killing anti-socialist or unpatriotic relatives.
Hissing like cats and fluffing the fur to seem bigger works well only for a short time. People are quick to see that behind it all are weak and insecure personalities. The consequences of overreaction are to awaken the dangerous atavistic herd instinct, which is to eliminate “socially unbalanced” individuals. We don’t need this. I believe that Mr. Troy can understand his mistake enough to say sorry to the readers and to the unfairly attacked Mrs. Robinson. More importantly, though, he should apologize for his lack of respect for the real victims of racial friction, who should not be used as a handy instrument for political and personal gains.
Let’s hope that the June 4th
convocation will see some calm among the more destructive elements around us.
Regards,
Slawomir Poplawski
c.c. Vice-Principals and “The Reporter”and “The Gazette”(an opinion or letter)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This letter is edited by Reporter and published on May
27, 2004 but has been removed from the McGill Website two days after and no
answer is given until today (see the request below in
blue)
To the Editor:
Mary Robinson has been nominated by the McGill Senate for an honorary degree, to be awarded at the June 4 convocation. However, The Gazette provided a platform to a McGill history professor to present provocative comments on Mrs. Robinson (Insight, May 2, "Degree of dishonour"). Prof. Gil Troy's speculative insinuations caused scores of readers to write letters of protest, which far outnumbered the few opinions supporting Troy. The majority of the authors were connected with McGill, but the local university press and official website have totally ignored this issue.
On May 5, Mr. Troy used "new arguments" in the letters section about an old-fashioned anti-Semitism that supposedly needs attention. The next day, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel, Mr. Spector, joined them with the same accusation. They say Mrs. Robinson failed "to do enough to condemn anti-Semitism." This sort of easy accusation is as old as the hills.
Deep down, it is not about the historian's attack on this honourable woman for her allegedly anti-Semitic views, but about politically correct rhetoric from opportunists putting down others for personal reasons.
This is the light in which we must analyze the "problems" that really small and mean personalities have created around Mrs. Robinson. She is a role model for many people trying to recover a taste of a true freedom in a world full of traps. People like Mrs. Robinson are not liked by the forces of money and greed that dominate our world: she poses a danger to their single-minded cynicism.
I remember from former communist Poland the manipulators (not only among the party members) who accused others of being anti-socialist. This was used to settle private accounts or to boost their own importance as powerful individuals able to break recognized social authorities, for reasons really unrelated to the "sacred" communist ideology.
Let's hope that the June 4 convocation will see some calm among the more destructive elements around us.
Slawomir Poplawski
- - - - -
---- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - --- - - --- - - - -- - -- - -- - - -- - - -
--- - - -- - -- ----- - --- - - - -- - - - --- -- -- --- -- -- -- --- -- - - -
- - - -- -
After removing my already printed letter from the website
and big cry of Mr. Troy for being criticized by me a special insert four days after the Reporter’s release is put into
the remaining papers.
This very unusual and expensive
distribution is however not enough for his wounded ego to heal and he names the
young woman publicly: “The editor of the Reporter was
ignorant and others were just bigots.”
The Reporter - Special Insert – May 31, 2004
To our Readers :
In the pursuit of fairness and balance, and as The Reporter does not publish again until September, we have decided to insert this letter from Professor Gil Troy in response to one signed by Slawomir Poplawski that appears on page 2 of the May 27, 2004, edition of The Reporter.
The Reporter welcomes Letters to the Editor and publishes a selection of letters on issues of interest and relevance to the McGill community. Letters must be concise and free of inappropriate language and expressions of intolerance or hatred. Our goal is to provide a forum for open and constructive debate, ideas and opinion. Letters to the Editor reflect the views of the writer and do not represent the views of the University.
Have a great summer.
Maeve Haldane
Editor, The Reporter
- - - - - - - - - -
For a reasoned and respectful debate
I thank the McGill Reporter for giving me this opportunity to respond to some of the inaccuracies contained in Slawomir Poplawksi’s letter (Reporter, May 27). My arguments – with which reasonable people can disagree -- were not “speculative insinuations,” as Mr. Poplawski charges, but considered assessments, backed by eyewitness accounts from the Durban conference and its preliminaries. I raised legitimate issues questioning the decision to award Mary Robinson an honorary doctorate. My arguments have been distorted by this letter writer and others.
To state categorically that “scores of readers” protested my views is absurd, for The Gazette does not reveal these totals –the fact that more letters published by The Gazette were critical of McGill’s decision suggests that many share my views. I also want to emphasize that I never accused Dr. Robinson of holding anti-Semitic views. Instead, I questioned what I and many others believe was her lack of moral leadership in combating the anti-Semitism that festered at a conference convened to fight racism.
Even worse than these inaccuracies, this letter spends more time attacking me than presenting reasoned arguments. The language used in this letter is offensive to many. Statements like “the forces of money and greed that dominate our world” have a long and ugly pedigree. Not-so-subtle code words, along with the prejudice and hate that inspire them, should be buried in the dustbins of Europe’s disgraceful history of anti-Semitism.
I urge everyone, as we celebrate our graduates, to adhere to the published words of our Principal and the Dean of the Faculty of Law, who welcome provocative ideas and reasoned debate. We can disagree intelligently, respectfully and substantively, focusing on the issues rather than casting aspersions and making inaccurate and personal accusations.
Professor Gil Troy, Department of History
- - - -- - - -
-- ------ ----- -
---------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 3, 2004
To: Ms. Maeve
Haldane – The Editor This is a letter to the
McGill’s community, and not only, on: http://spop.addr.com
Cc: The
Principal and Prof. Gil Troy
Subject: Letter purging
Dear Ms. Haldane,
I am sure that it was not on your initiative that my
letter of May 28, 2004 was purged from the web version of the latest Reporter
after only one day's posting.
So whose initiative was it? Certainly somebody's who has been corrupted by power and who is
well aware of the clout of the Internet. Afraid of the longevity of items
posted in cyberspace, someone has stifled my attempt to reduce the use of
accusations of anti-Semitism, accusations which are so common as to devalue
this serious issue.
You provided an explanation in the “Special Insert”
added to each Reporter on June 1, but this does not justify the May 28
removal of my letter from the website edition. Please look at: http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/17/ and
compare it with the May 27 edition. Also, to date you have not restored this
link - even with Mr. Troy’s letter. I demand that you restore it!
The action of censoring my letter paints a picture of
a powerful/networked Professor who can march into your editorial office and
dictate your policies; to erase the views of “less important people” who should
know their place and do not contradict the learned experts. The very unusual and expensive distribution
of special insert four days after the Reporter’s release would also
appear to be your penance for allowing this contradiction to occur in your
bi-weekly magazine.
I think you would never have risked your reputation in
such a circus with all its inconsistencies. I feel sorry for you for being
pushed into this, but I think you will feel better after sharing the truth.
Regards,
Slawomir Poplawski
P.S. Ms. Haldane, please publish now my answer to Mr.
Troy’s letter: “For a reasoned and respectful debate” for the web
version and in September as the printed version presented below:
Mr. Gil Troy states: “More letters published by The
Gazette critical of McGill’s decision suggest that many share my views”. In fact, on May 4-19 there were seven
letters supporting him (excluding his own letter) and eight letters
against. He is right to contest my
argument that “scores of readers protested (his) views”, since officially
“The Gazette does not reveal these totals”. However, he does not take into account that
on top of the easily-verified statistics, as presented above, I also spoke to
the editor and his assistant. They
confirmed that many more letters were received, and that most of them
criticized Mr. Troy's opinions of Mrs. Robinson.
It is curious to insist that a person, by mentioning “the
forces of money and greed that dominate our world”, must automatically be
anti-Semitic. All I was talking about was the fact that the media and political
systems are elevating money to the highest level in our value system. The
professor of history is shooting himself in the foot when he connects
legitimate criticism of these trends with anti-Semitism.
I would like to add that I have seen a lot of
depressing behavior recently, with the secret removal of my letter from McGill
cyberspace, and the untrue accusations (presented above) inserted in the latest
Reporter on a piece of Xeroxed office paper. This unusual “total solution” reminds me the communist art of
photo-forging, whereby unpopular people were removed from official pictures to
make it easier to claim later that they never existed. A classical example was Trotsky who was erased
from all pictures with Lenin and Stalin.
Today, cyberspace replaces photos and you can be deleted as easily from
it as from pictures.
I would like some openness in our University. I notice
double speak, arrogance in Deans or Chairs, discrimination in HR and
bureaucratic highhandedness. Anyone who has been a victim of these, or has been
'deleted' or brutally edited while trying to express themselves, must come
forward and tell our community so that the abuse of power is stopped.
- - ------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------
printed in the Jewish Tribune:
By Lynne Cohen
McGill University has sparked indignation by deciding to award an honourary doctorate degree to Mary Robinson, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and chairperson for the infamous Durban Conference. This 2001 gathering is seen as one of the worst demonstrations of antisemitism in more than 50 years. In a letter to McGill Principal Heather Munroe—Blum dated May 19th, B’nai Brith Canada President Harold Davis and Executive Vice—President Frank Dimant, expressed their concern. “Despite the sham of the conference, Ms. Robinson continues… to insist that ‘much good’ came from it, and accepts no responsibility for its failure, or for its having been taken over by perpetrators of antisemitism and hate…” the letter read.
Dimant and Davis urged Munroe—Blum to have the university’s decision regarding the honourary degree immediately reviewed. In the meantime, in response to the controversy, the May 27 edition of the university newspaper McGill Reporter — the edition that was to be distributed at convocation — published a letter that one professor characterized as “an ugly antisemitic screed, filled with code words.” The letter, written by university staff member Slawomir Poplawski, was in response to a May 2nd Op Ed in the Montreal Gazette by McGill History Professor Gill Troy entitled “Degree of Dishonour.”
Poplawski complained Troy’s assertion that Robinson didn’t do enough to condemn antisemitism “is as old as the hills.” He accused the professor of being an “opportunist [who is] putting down others for personal reasons” referring to him as one of a group of “small and mean personalities” who have created problems around Mrs. Robinson, whom he described as “a role model for many people trying to recover a taste of a true freedom…”
“People like Mrs. Robinson are not liked by the forces of money and greed that dominate our world,” Poplawski concluded. Not surprisingly, Troy took issue with much of what Poplawski wrote. In a highly-edited response, distributed as an insert in the Reporter due to the lateness of its submission, Troy maintained that his arguments were not “speculative insinuations… but considered assessments, backed by eyewitness accounts from the Durban conference and its preliminaries.”
He noted that Poplawski spent more time attacking him than presenting reasoned arguments. “It’s been an unfortunate and unhappy meeting of ignorance and bigotry,” observed Troy in an interview with the Tribune. “The editor of the Reporter was ignorant and others were just bigots. If I had been defending feminists, I would have been embraced instead of demonized.” But, says Troy, many people have quietly whispered their support. “I should have never been the issue,” he said. “The real issue is the historical legacy of Durban and the lack of moral leadership there. I discovered there is a lot of Durban denial.”
Meanwhile, B’nai Brith Canada’s Institute for International Affairs demonstrated outside McGill where Robinson was set to receive her degree at Convocation, in order to protest the award. Protesters carried placards quoting Robinson saying Durban was a success, and showing the increased number of antisemitic incidents since the world conference.
- - - - ------------------- --------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
And my latest answer is:
June 28, 2004
Subjects: Answering problems created at McGill and not
only by the overreacting
Prof. G. Troy
Dear Editors,
The story of
Mary Robinson being awarded an honorary degree has been blown out of proportion across Canada. The
McGill Senate, which represents over 20 000 students and 7 000 staff members,
made a balanced decision and voted democratically to award the degree. Further, Dr. Robinson was invited over six
months ago to a widely-advertised public meeting at McGill, where listeners
were impressed by her directness in presenting the modern world’s neglect of
the poor by affluent nations. This was probably the first instance of somebody,
after being selected for the nomination, discussing such controversial topics
openly with an audience.
However, Prof. Gill Troy did not accept
the wisdom of the Senate, and tried to portray himself in the Gazette as the only upright Jew who
could see what is good or bad at McGill. One gets the impression it was
more important for him and the sensation-hungry Gazette to create public scandal than to accept the Senate’s
decision, which was taken after consulting with the community and objectively
assessing Robinson’s accomplishments.
Fortunately, after initially helping Prof.
Troy question the reliability of the Senate, the Gazette had to admit its mistake. It published a letter (June 14, 2004) from
the Jewish Co-President of the McGill Law Students Association, praising
Robinson’s openness after a discussion between law faculty students and her on
June 4, 2004. Her sincerity received accolades
once more in a Gazette letter of June
21 signed by six Jewish people from McGill.
What I have been talking about all along is that awarding the degree to Dr.
Robinson was a way of recognizing publicly her intelligence and humanity. I
often talk about a greedy world promoting violence, and I defend the Senate’s
decision and denounce Troy’s carping, because Dr. Robinson shares my views on
this divided world of rich and poor. Money and greed are driving ever-deeper divisions between people,
and I applaud any attempt to honour those who draw attention to these rifts and
defend human rights. I think it is more constructive to reward the good that a person has done than to
dwell on any imperfections.
Regards,
Slawomir Poplawski