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