Reducing racism in Canada

“M-103” has become a flashpoint for public debate about racism in Canada. In itself, Motion 103, introduced in the House of Commons by MP Iqra Khalid, seems reasonable. It recommends that parliament condemn Islamophobia and all other forms of racism and discrimination and asks a committee to study the issues in more detail. A similar motion in the Ontario legislature passed without controversy on February 23. To understand why the federal debate became acrimonious, including hate-filled messages to MP Khalid, we need to dig deeper. That is also important to chart a way forward. 

At one level the introduction of an alternative, generic motion against “all forms of racism, religious intolerance and discrimination” by some Conservatives is political game-playing in the context of a leadership race. Ironically, the Conservatives supported a New Democrat motion condemning Islamophobia on October 26, 2016. The refusal to specifically name Islamophobia now denies symbolic support to a group who are currently experiencing racism. If “anti-Muslim bigotry” is a more precise term, that could be refined by the committee. The intent of M-103 is clear. 

The argument that more Christians suffer persecution than believers in Islam plays into divisive and dangerous wedge politics. The prediction that M-103 will reduce freedom of speech, which is the other objection, shows a weak understanding of human rights. The same laws that protect religious freedom also protect other rights. One problem in religious communities is a tendency to zero in on religious freedom and ignore other rights, or give religious freedom a status above all other rights. That ignores how human rights laws work and the foundation of all rights in the dignity of every person.

Moving forward

The heated debate around M-103 is a wake-up call for Canada. Recent polls confirm increasing fears about new immigrants and a significant loss of trust in governments and institutions to manage society well. The number of physical and verbal attacks based in hatred of the “other” is increasing across Canada. In addition, we have political actors who see advantage in playing to emotional fears and polarizing people into camps focused on defending their own interests. Loss of civility is a serious risk, even in the stereotypically “nice” country of Canada. 

Understanding human rights

Preserving civility requires more serious attention to how we develop rights-respecting relationships in a pluralistic society. There are useful guidelines and tools available in the human rights conventions that Canada has ratified, but they are not well-known or practiced. First, it is important to remember that rights are not a zero-sum basket of goodies, so that Christians will have less if believers in Islam have more. Human rights are about relationships; they help to navigate the intersections between individuals and groups in a modern society. Secondly, all rights are inter-related; resolving conflicts requires attention to all aspects of a situation, limits that respect other people, and accommodation on all sides. Finally, religions, cultures and contexts are not fixed in stone. All are evolving. Sound principles combine with a lot of listening, learning and loving the other to find ways to live together. 

More dialogue 

I wish parliamentarians were debating a practical plan of action to strengthen how we implement all rights related to discrimination across Canada. There are tools to distinguish between civil discussion of difference and incitement to hostility and violence. More dialogue between people of different beliefs and cultures and more practical mechanisms for resolving conflicts in early stages will be needed as diversity increases. Faith communities and community groups, who rallied in response to the dramatic attack on a mosque in Quebec City, can also play a positive role in everyday incidents and community-based strategies to foster understanding and respect. 

Role of bystanders

Research shows that the actions of bystanders are a critical factor in determining whether lack of civility spreads or is checked. Martin Luther King highlighted this when he wrote that beatings hurt less than the silence of white Christian bystanders. Learning to use the bystander role wisely is a useful discipline to add to prayer, worship and the rest. All indications are that Canada will experience increased social tensions in the next few years. To navigate through them well we need a lot more than M-103.