In the opening line of their letter refuting the legitimacy of the Carleton University Commission on Inter-Cultural, Inter-Religious and Inter-Racial Relations, a number of Carleton professors and students state the following:
“The Report rightly acknowledges Aboriginal peoples’ marginalization on campus, but it ignores the problems other racialized groups face, and focuses primarily on a small fraction of Jewish students and employees.”
To my mind, the very discrimination that the commission seeks to address is present in the words of this opening line of this letter. I for one am appalled.
To the signatories of this open-letter, please allow me to contest your attempt to undermine the commission’s report.
Firstly, welcome to Carleton University for some of you. It seems that many of you come from other universities located in Toronto, and as far away as Dublin. It strikes me as odd that you would consider yourselves knowledgeable enough on the Carleton University climate, and processes related to the commission itself, to comment at all. Nonetheless, welcome.
As a member of the commission, I can attest to the dedication of its diverse membership of undergraduate and graduate students, professors, university staff and community members. The diversity of this group fostered important conversations that carefully considered the many requirements of the Commission’s mandate. This deliberate process was applied to all surveys distributed and collective decisions made.
The commission heard from experts in the field, and heard presentations from members of the Carleton community, giving equal voice to all those who wished to be heard. Landon Pearson, the head of the commission, led the group with an inclusive outlook, taking the time to listen to all perspectives shared.
In order to do this process justice, the mandate of the commission was extended to two years from the one year mandate it had initially intended.
Let us analyze your reaction further.
Firstly, your open letter claims that the commission’s report unjustly singles out Jewish and aboriginal peoples as groups that are less satisfied with “Carleton’s general climate of respect and with relations between religions on campus.” Before identifying the commission’s decision to single out Jewish and aboriginal peoples on campus, perhaps you should look to the report in order to substantiate your evidence without cherry picking statistical figures that are convenient in substantiating your bias.
While you accept the further investigation of issues faced by aboriginal peoples on campus, you dismiss further investigation into the issues faced by Jewish students on campus. Let me ask you, is the commission’s decision, to address the marginalization of aboriginal peoples on campus statistically sound? If so, why do you object to the conclusions made for Jewish students, professors and staff? After all, the method of data collection used for aboriginal and Jewish respondents was the same.
To the signatories of this open-letter, I am calling you out on your bias, and your attempt to delegitimize Carleton’s effort toward inclusion.
In order to provide a comprehensive and objective report, the Commission put politics aside and dealt with the issue at hand — the betterment of the Carleton community, in the name of an inclusive campus. To my mind, the signatories of this letter have demonstrated that they place the advancement of political interests above the creation of an inclusive campus, and for this, they should be ashamed.
Chelsea Sauve,
