Gita Hashemi on Tue, 13 Jun 2006 04:02:52 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> two forwards on canada's terror campaign |
i'm forwarding two items below (Statement on anti-terror arrests by the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War, and Wounded Sentiments: Multiculturalism, the "Toronto 17", and the National Imaginary by Sumayya Kassamali & Usamah Ahmad) as some people may be interested to know the local take on the recent canadian scare campaign. the arrests of these men (5 out of the 17 are under the age of 18) and the media spectacle staged by CSIS and RCMP and perpetuated by our embedded media - including so-called public CBC which effectively has become a mouthpiece for the security agenda - has successfully diverted the public discourse away from debating canada's recent upgrade of its military involvement in afghanistan from so-called peacekeeping to overt war (not new really, they've just dropped the cover). another triumph of propaganda. if you need a refresher on the infamous "project thread" arrests two years ago, note http://www.threadbare.tyo.ca/, the website of the "project threadbare", a local ad-hoc collective whose public interventions in that case were instrumental in rescuing the 20-some mostly pakestani students who were arrested then from the fate that has befallen "security certificate detainees" in canada. although, the subsequent deportation of these men and the heart-breaking personal tragedies many of them suffered and continue to suffer doesn't leave much room for celebration. a necessary addition to be made to the statement below (#1) is that many conservative and neoliberal camps within the diverse muslim communities here have in fact been playing alongside their white counterparts by calling on muslims to spy on one another and to "respect canadian values", thus perpetuating the "good vs. bad muslim" discourse. be well. gita === 1 === ---- forwarded message ---- Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 15:58:33 -0400 Subject: Statement on anti-terror arrests From: Coalition to Stop the War <stopthewar@sympatico.ca> Please forward widely. Statement on anti-terror arrests By the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War The recent wave of "anti-terror" arrests in Toronto has sparked a national debate about the threat of terrorism in Canada and the issue of security. In response to this debate, the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War would like to put forward the following points: 1) All those arrested must be treated as innocent until proven guilty. This precept is the cornerstone of our justice system and, in order to guarantee a fair and open trial, must be consistently applied to all those now facing charges; 2) What has been reported in the press are alleged acts and not proven facts. Only a trial by the public courts system - and not the media - can determine the difference. All media has a responsibility to report on the case fairly and accurately and without resorting to sensationalism; 3) Members of government and other public officials should not publicly comment on the case in any way that undermines the precept of "innocent until proven guilty" or that compromises the integrity of a fair and open trial. So far both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day have already suggested that those charged are guilty; 4) The Muslim community and the Islamic faith should not in any way be held responsible for the alleged acts of individual suspects. Every effort should be made to ensure the safety and security of Muslims and to prevent any kind of backlash against the Muslim community. All acts motivated by Islamophobia and hate should be opposed and condemned; 5) Canadians should bear in mind that this recent wave of arrests is not the first. Two years ago, as many as twenty-six Muslim men were arrested in Toronto in a sweep called "Project Thread" that received widespread international attention and that, according to at least one government official, had uncovered "an Al-Qaeda sleeper cell" in Canada. This statement was proved to be false, not one of the men were ever formally charged (or convicted) of committing a crime, and most were deported from Canada. No effort was made to clear their names or restore their reputations. Please circulate this statement in order to help defend civil liberties and to stand in solidarity with the Muslim community against any kind of backlash. It is critical that this recent wave of "anti-terror" arrests and the media coverage about it not be exploited to perpetuate divisions between Muslims and non-Muslims and that relationships of solidarity and support between communities be expanded and deepened. The arrests should also not be exploited in order to justify Canada's deeply unpopular participation in the occupation of Afghanistan or the use of repressive measures that curtail civil liberties in Canada such as secret trials and security certificates. The anti-war movement in Canada has an important role to play in defending civil liberties, opposing racism and Islamophobia and supporting the Muslim community. We hope that you will join us in this effort. Toronto Coalition to Stop the War TCSW is Toronto's city-wide anti-war coalition, comprised of more than fifty labour, faith and community organisations, and a member of the Canadian Peace Alliance. www.nowar.ca stopthewar@sympatico.ca 416-795-5863 --- end forwarded message --- === 2 === --- forwarded article --- Wounded Sentiments: Multiculturalism, the "Toronto 17", and the National Imaginary Sumayya Kassamali & Usamah Ahmad Over the past week, popular discourse on the "Toronto 17" has revolved around a shock at the possibility that Canadian citizens would want to harm the nation state. This shock has been personified by the depiction of a national body who has been wounded by a threat to its multicultural ideals. We hope to argue, however, that the wounds have not been inflicted on egalitarian ideals but rather on how Canada produces its self-image - its "national imaginary" - in the face of its racist, imperialist and exploitative underpinnings. Rebuking the Myth of Innocence At the heart of our problematization of the shock that surrounds the "Toronto 17" case is that it constructs Canada as an innocent, non-threatening and benevolent state. Indeed, many have even suggested that opposition to the Canadian state stems from hatred towards the Canadian ideals of tolerance, democracy and justice. This conveniently ignores Canada's unjust activities both domestically and globally. For example, the inception of the Canadian state depended on the dispossession and colonization of First Nations. How can a state be built on the foundations of justice when it was created at the expense of the sovereignty of entire peoples, a large portion of whom were wiped out by White settlers? Furthermore, the state, yet to be decolonized, continues to oppose just settlements with First Nations through its ostentatious contestation of land claims, and continues to maintain First Nations peoples as the most marginalized members of society. Another aspect of the media's treatment of multiculturalism over the past week has revolved around disbelief that immigrants would be "ungrateful" to the country that has absorbed them into its pluralistic wings. This sentiment again fails to appreciate the racist institutions that have structured the immigrant experience in Canada historically. Indeed until 1945, Canadian immigration policy explicitly barred "undesirable racials" (essentially non-whites and Jews) from entering the country, or placed a head tax on those imported for labour. The Eurocentric and white supremacist bases of the state can also be seen in the internment of Japanese-Canadians, the Komagatamaru incident and the current illegal detentions of Muslim men under "anti-terror" laws, such as the infamous Secret Trial 5. Indeed racism is not only an experiential aspect of immigration but has also resulted in a particular racialized political economy. Multiculturalist dogma helps obscure these realities that paint a picture of Canadian nationhood based on racist intolerance and exploitation. Canada's hands are not clean in the global scene either. Its involvement in the invasion of Afghanistan, the meddling in Haiti and "peace-keeping" in Somalia (with infamously disastrous results) are all recent examples of Canadian interventionist agendas. Furthermore, its partnership with American imperialism guised under the language of a "war on terror" is another example of how this state is involved in, and depends on, various forms of violence. This is at the crux of our problem: given these realities, how can the state be constructed as innocent, and how can action against it inspire so much shock? It is clear that dominant ideology, and specifically multiculturalist thinking, helps produce a national mythology; a mythology that requires a national imaginary that the media has been trying to reaffirm over the past week. Given that crime and violence amongst citizens (particularly perpetrated upon feminine and racialized bodies) do not regularly produce hysteria, the true shock comes not from the possibility of violence - be it explosion, murder, or otherwise - but the threat to the nation state through its national imaginary, which is essential to constituting and maintaining its boundaries. This imaginary is dependant upon the image of a benevolent, non-violent state, constructed as a pristine body which bears no battle markings or blemishes. Neither has it perpetrated violence (thereby free of implication), nor has it been the victim of violence; for any acknowledgment of past victimization implies that there must have been cause for inflicting harm. Such a motive or reason would, of course, rupture the national imaginary. Thus, in order to keep the body of the state pure and continue to imagine the nation as one of multicultural tolerance, the "Toronto 17" must be constructed through an ahistorical lens, where only an irrational, ideologically-motivated group of individuals could (allegedly) desire to harm such innocence. Any attempt to problematize this presumed innocence would wound both how Canada defines and experiences itself. The media discourse surrounding the "Toronto 17", evidently racist, essentialist, and filled with dramatic hyperboles of "they hate our freedom", has not simply been a defensive reaction to the charges presented by RCMP and CSIS. Rather, it is an essential method of ensuring that the national imaginary remains firmly in its place. In turn, such discourses are critical to articulating and defining what is in the best interest of the nation - notably, stricter immigration policy, greater trampling of civil rights, and the need for increased security. Given the contemporary realities of war and destruction conflicted on primarily Muslim countries, the national imaginary further enables the production of a reductionist image of the "West and the Rest" to justify its global agendas. You're Right, Multiculturalism Doesn't Work In the barrage of public discussion that has followed Saturday's sensationalist events, we find ourselves once again faced with a debate on "multiculturalism." The continually regurgitated "is multiculturalism working?" most often begins from the same presumption of innocence as is believed to define the history of the Canadian state. Multiculturalism, it is claimed, was supposed to be our pride and joy: our claim to uniqueness; our happily brandished "Get Out of Jail Free" card in face of any accusations of practices that look suspiciously like racism or intolerance; what makes us the envy of the rest of the world. Ethnic conflict? Look at Canada, apart from Quebec every so often, we all get along just great. Forced assimilation? Look at Canada, where aboriginal arts appear as national symbols, where it is common to have students in a classroom from every region of the world, and where quaint ethnic neighbourhoods offer costume, craft and cuisine up for consumption as capitalist proof of multi-cultured integration. But all of a sudden some of them are dissatisfied - oh dear, has multiculturalism been too nice? Throughout the debate about Canada's self-congratulatory multiculturalism that has followed Saturday's events, there has been little substantial dialogue about how its highly lauded integration model operates. Exactly what form of integration does our "multiculturalism" command? Or, specifically, integration into who's model? The white, middle-class, secular ideal to which we are told to aspire is not only undesirable to many (and rightly so), it is inaccessible and impossible. There is no acknowledgment of structural barriers to such integration, and how in fact multicultural policies shut down room for critical debate. Multiculturalism can breed terrorists by allowing them not to assimilate and allowing Muslims to keep to their own neighbourhoods, CBC informs us. That forced ghettoization has anything to do with labour and socioeconomic barriers is unmentioned; that the racialization of space both stems from and is a result of racism, which confines populations to "their own neighbourhoods" and causes communities to come together in face of outside rejection simply cannot be spoken: for we are a multicultural state, remember? We accept everyone. In listening to discussions over the past week, we have also been disgusted by the continual reoccurrence of the question, "if they don't like our values, why do they come here?" Well, "our values", as we know, are built upon stolen land and the bodies and labour of aboriginal and immigrant populations. Furthermore, there is no mention of global economic and political factors which are causing forced migration in mass numbers at an unprecedented scale in human history. Canada's willing participation in neoliberal institutions such as NAFTA and the FTAA furthers the economic integration of countries under a globalized capitalist economy, flooding foreign markets with goods which devalue domestic products and cause the export and exploitation of cheap labour to fuel consumerist desires at home. Migration, increasingly feminized as evident in Canada's Live in Caregiver Program which sees Filipina women coming to Canada to work as domestic workers under unjust conditions, is often not a choice. Yet regardless of the multiplicity of reasons for which Muslims are a growing population in Canada today, given our multicultural tolerance, one would expect to find it a space of respectful diversity, at least. It is at times like these that we are reminded, through public discourse and the reassertion of the national imaginary, what the true definition of "Canadianness" is. Defining the Nation; Defining the Other The hegemonic white, consumerist ideals which form the premise of dominant Canadian culture alienate all peoples who deviate from this historically positioned identity. There is thus no room for discussing how dominant consumer-based cultural mores may indeed be alienating for many, including many Muslim, persons. But for Muslims, we are further faced with the existence of an imperialism which clearly defines us as an Other, globally. The very ability to define oneself as Muslim, and not Secular and White, is under attack. Over the past week, there have been continual attempts in the media to solicit the testimonies of Muslims to prove that the National Other is not the Muslim (necessarily), but the "Bad Muslim." The opinions these Muslims can voice are limited within certain terms of engagement; terms under which we cannot interrogate the realities of racism and imperialism, but have to take an apologetic tone in claiming "we are not all bad!" Instead, we must prove that we are "Good Muslims" whose faith is confined purely to our personal-spiritual identity (and cannot be politicized or the basis of a morally guided political praxis), who attempt to live the middle-class Canadian dream and do not deviate from status quo sentiments and desires; who love the Canadian state for its pluralistic benevolence and ignore its imperialist, racist and exploitative tendencies. This typography requires certain Muslim spokespersons, or "native informants", to legitimize the polarizing of who is a part of the social body and who is not. The media vehemently recruits these individuals to reassure Canadians that racism and social alienation do not produce rage because these spokespeople are Muslim too, and even they find these Muslim Others abhorrent. Through these relations, the self is thus reaffirmed by not only defining the Other (the Bad, "freedom-hating", Muslim), but also defining the self's (the Canadian State's) jurisdiction to control and produce the terms on which the Other can interact with the social body. This occurs through discussions on how to "integrate" Muslims into "Canadian society" and justifies the imposition of such racialized and legally dubious devices as security certificates. Another aspect of the "Toronto 17" in media discourse has been the nationalism Muslims are being forced to adopt. In proving the status of a "Good Muslim", we are asked to legitimize our presence on this territory by espousing an uncritical zeal for the state. Nationalism always works to shroud status quo relations and exploitation by constructing an imagined commune to which one must be emotionally and viscerally committed. There have thus been charges that if certain groups do not accept dominant mores, they have no reason to be here. We are forced into celebratory nationalism or are labelled "Enemies Within" who need to be exorcised (or deported). As outlined earlier, immigration is not a favour the state endows, nor necessarily a "choice", but a historical product of exploitation Canada continues to benefit from. Ultimately, then, it is important not to fall into apologetic nationalisms, or "gratefulness," but to maintain a critical lens on, and oppositional praxis to, Canada's role in the unjust Order of Things. Current debates around multiculturalism and shock can be conceptualized as "wounded sentiments": it is not the integrity of the national body that is being challenged but rather, the national imaginary. This imaginary has produced the "Toronto 17" as having violated core Canadian ideals without problematizing these ideals. As we have discussed, these ideals are in fact not "freedom-loving" and "tolerant" but a particular configuration of racist imperialist thinking guised in ahistorical multiculturalist ideology. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net