The Jewish Community:
Faculty members who identify as Jewish are anything but unified in their reaction to the report by Carleton’s Commission on Inter-Cultural, Inter-Religious and Inter-Racial Relations on Campus.
Aviva Freedman, director of the Max and Tessie Zelikovitz Centre for Jewish Studies at Carleton, said she supported the commission’s findings and criticized a perceived double standard present at Carleton.
“[I]t is clear that both Jewish students and faculty have been experiencing what used to be called ‘a chilly climate’ on campus,” Freedman said via email.
“People are very comfortable condemning Israel but there is very little tolerance for those who support Israel.”
Brenda Carr-Vellino, a self-identified Jewish English professor, acknowledged that student debates on the Israel-Palestine conflict can get “overheated” and may make some students feel unsafe. She took issue, however, with the way the report “lumps Jewish people together.”
“I would like to see in the commission a recognition that there is a diversity of Jewish opinion,” she said. She said the report’s current wording has a “chilling” effect on legitimate debate on the Palestinian issue.
Human rights professor Rebecca Schein echoed these sentiments.
“I don’t feel represented by the views that were put forward in the report on behalf of Jewish faculty,” she said. “I also feel as a Jewish faculty member . . . the way that the report discussed issues around criticism of the Israeli state, to me actually exposes me more to the risk of anti-Semitism than anything I’ve experienced from critics of the Israeli state.”
“To attribute, by virtue of your ethnicity, certain kinds of political perspectives [like Zionism to those who identify as Jewish], that’s exactly the kind of thing that this report should be trying to undo, not to bolster.”
She also questioned the lack of representation of other groups who may experience racism.
“I think [the report] actually does harm to having a real honest discussion . . . there was no discussion about Muslim students . . . no discussion about black students on this campus. Where are the other groups?” she asked.
Though opinions on the report were varied, many of the professors discussed issues related to academic freedom.
“What I would like to see emerge from this report is a campus-wide conversation focusing on the issue of professorial ‘power,’” Freedman said.
“The report leaves unanswered questions regarding the legitimacy of making political, moral or ethical judgments regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by a professor in the classroom,” political science professor Mira Sucharov said.
Pitseolak Pfeifer, programming co-ordinator for the Aboriginal Service Centre, said he is pleased that the university addressed Indigenous issues in their report on Inter-Cultural, Inter-Religious and Inter-Racial Relations on Campus, but remains skeptical about the real impact the recommendations will have on the community.
“The recommendations are consistent with what [Indigenous representatives said in] the consultations,” Pfeifer said.
“However, [the report] continues to fall short in being concrete in suggesting . . . that actual resources be allocated for these efforts.”
Pfeifer said he appreciates the nature of the recommendations in the report, noting personal experiences that support the need for greater training of teaching assistants in indigenous issues and “aboriginal-specific needs for counselling,” both of which were covered in the report.
He added, however, that “without money to implement any of this, it’s not going to happen.”
“I respect that…it’s a commission report and it doesn’t tie the administration or the board of directors of this institution to anything, but because it’s not tied, there could have been stronger language.”
