Black Victimhood

"The likelihood of a Black person being shot by police in Toronto is just as high as for a Black person in the average city in the United States."                                 "The time for debate about whether systemic racism or anti-Black racism exists is over."                                                                                                                         "It is incumbent upon us all to re-envision the practices, the policies, the procedures, and importantly, the perceptions that shape policing in our city."            "The disproportionality, and the disparities in the commission report are more than just statistics. They are Black lives and Black Lives Matter."                                    Ena Chadha, interim chief commissioner, Ontario Human Rights Commission

"[Black people are more likely to be] arrested, charged, overcharged, struck, shot or killed by Toronto police."                                                                                "[Black people in Toronto are] disproportionately [arrested, charged and subjected to use of force by the city's police force]."                                                                 'A Disparate Impact' report

"This disparity cannot be explained away by racial differences in criminal history, civilian behaviour towards the police at the time of the incident, civilian weapons use, civilian mental illness, civilian intoxication, or local crime rates."                   Scot Wortley, criminology professor, University of Toronto

Black Lives Matter protests in Toronto. (Evan Tsuyoshi Mitsui/CBC)

"At the end of the day, when someone calls 911 they need to know that a police officer will show up at their door." "But is there an opportunity for other community agencies to do more? Absolutely."  "[Ontario has been] very active in doing things already [by increasing investment in community mental health and addiction resources, which account for 40 percent of calls to emergency services]."                                                                                   Ontario Solicitor General Sylvia Jones

Critics of Toronto police call for reform in the way mental health calls are treated, that mental health professionals, not police should be responding to mental health calls, pointing to the death of a 29-year-old Black woman, Regis Korchinski-Paquet who fell from a balcony while police were present in her apartment, called there by a relative who had alerted police to something going awry, wanting her taken to a mental health facility. For their part, police felt they were responding to a possible assault call. 

It's worth noting that Toronto has a (newly retiring) Black police chief, appointed back in 2015. His deputy chief was also Black, and is now Ottawa's chief of police. Many police chiefs in the United States are also Black. Some of them are Black women. Yet police in both countries are charged with prejudicial racism, that they deliberately target Blacks for suspicion of crime commission. Police are a professional public safety group. They become very familiar in the commission of their duties at every level where crime most commonly emanates from.

They also develop a fine-tuned sense of the relationship between elements of any population with the culture of crime. With gangs, drug dealing, weapons possession, and all the public/social malfeasance that follows from those propensities. Blacks do indeed become targeted for questioning, stopping, suspicion of anti-social acts, from drug dealing and weapons smuggling to competitive challenges between gangs leading to shootings, wounding and death.

That being so, they become a 'targeted' community in the sense that police, the guardians of public safety and security, are attuned to what occurs in those communities, dealing with the outcomes as best they can. Yet, in 'progressive' social cultures they come under fire by complaints and accusations that they're too hard on the criminal element among Black populations, as though being Black requires them to have special consideration. Black police and their Black police chiefs seem somehow to believe otherwise.

They respect their own cultural community to the extent that they see no reason why those within the community cannot be expected to respect society and their place within it by adhering to the public weal, eschewing criminality and living normal lives rather than choosing to be thugs, drug dealers and gang members. But the Ontario Human Rights Commission is convinced that the problem lies not with the culture of the Black underclass community but with police in general, whose reaction is too harsh.

The report published by the Ontario Human Rights commission lingered on the fact that Black people representing 8.8 percent of the population of Toronto, manage to represent close to a third of all charges. Refusing to credit the fact that smoke both precedes and follows a fire, the OHRC prefers to blame police reaction rather than a dire need for the Black social underclass to reform itself. The OHRC's first interim report after its inquiry was launched in 2017 found between 2013 and 2017 it was 20 times likelier for a Black person to be shot and killed by police than a white person.

Whether the study undertook to assess and analyze the number of Blacks shot, wounded or killed by other Blacks is as yet unknown, but that this is a problem of immense proportions certainly is not. The enquiry also highlighted that officers sometimes lack a legal basis for stopping or detaining Black people, searching them without justification, making unnecessary arrests and laying unnecessary charges. In the opinion of the Human Rights Commission obviously, which knows nothing about finely honed police intuition and experience.

The protests sparked by the police-involved death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May which led to protests and demonstrations by Black Lives Matter worldwide, that were often offensive and violent and ultimately led to the impression that among Blacks white lives don't matter, did nothing to achieve sympathy other than among 'woke' progressives whose 'guilt-by-whiteness-colonialism' sought to expunge itself through unquestioning support.

Repeat, With Emphasis: Politically Incorrect

"The opinions expressed in this essay do not reflect our values of fairness, trustworthiness and social awareness."

"It is not only our responsibility to spread trusted knowledge, but to also stand against discrimination, injustices and inequity."

Neville Compton, editor-in-chief, Angewandte Chemie, German scientific journal

"In a social equilibrium, preferential treatment of one group leads to disadvantages for another."

"The rise and emphasis on hiring practices that suggest or even mandate equality in terms of absolute numbers of people in specific subgroups is counterproductive if it results in discrimination against the most meritorious candidates."

Essay, Tomas Hudlicky, Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in chemistry, Brock University

A German Science journal has retracted an essay written 30-years-ago, but just published, by Brock University professor Tomáš Hudlický which criticizes diversity hiring. (Brock University)

"We are sliding back to Calvinism and burning at stakes. This is absurd. I expressed my opinions and my words were totally taken out of context", responded Professor Hudlicky, of the censorious reaction he is now facing n response to his essay titled 'Organic synthesis -- Where now?' A Reflection on the Current State of Affairs. The piece was written in homage to a scientific article originally published 30 years earlier by Professor Dieter Seebach, now 83.

Out of the mental store of Professor Hudlicky's experience and informed wisdom, he has also -- perhaps somewhat recklessly given the spirit of the times -- written about "preferential" treatment handed out to women and minorities in academic and business staffing. His point being that hiring practices now reflect a time when a candidate's position in a "preferred" social group could override his/her qualifications. A forbidden truth.

The article, published on June 4th, in the journal considered to be one of the world's prime chemistry organs, was withdrawn. As an opinion essay questioning the value of 'affirmative action' hiring, the publisher and the writer's university both hastened to issue public apologies in reflection of the temper of the times. The Angewandte Chemie would be conducting an internal investigation, according to its editor-in-chief who cannot perform enough obeisance to the powers of political correctness.

That the piece had been accepted for publication represented a "clear mistake", for which two of the journal's editors have been punished by suspension. Professor Hudlicky's punishment is that of total rejection -- by his university and by a first-tier scientific journal, when publishing is critical to the career advancement of academics. The provost of Brock University, (located in St.Catharines, Ontario), stated that the paper had included "highly objectionable statements" countering the promotion of equity and diversity with the promotion of academic merit.

Social media for its part, exploded with an immediate backlash, as a chemistry professor at Queen's University sanctimoniously informed the journal she was removing herself from its editorial board: "I am resigning effectively immediately", tweeted Cathleen Crudden, a Queen's University chemistry professor. Excoriation of the professor who had the unmitigated gall to speak the inconvenient truth continued, as 16 members of the journal's international advisory board, inclusive of Nobel Laureates, resigned as they denounced the essay.

Oh, dear! Sincere condolences, Professor Hudlicky, for the ignominy your incaution has engendered.

Saturday Night Hockey Massacre

"During the broadcast, he [Don Cherry] made divisive remarks that do not represent our [Rogers, Sportsnet] values or what we stand for."
"Don is synonymous with hockey and has played an integral role in growing the game over the past 40 years."
"We would like to thank Don for his contributions to hockey and sports broadcasting in Canada."
"[After] further discussions with Don Cherry after Saturday night's broadcast, it has been decided it is the right time for him to immediately step down." 
Sportsnet

Don Cherry, pictured with Evander Kane, left, and Nazem Kadri, right, before their NHL careers, lost his job with Sportsnet on Monday for his remarks about immigrants not wearing poppies. (Claus Andersen/Getty Images/File)

Certain segments of any population seem to find it endearing when a popular, increasingly cranky man of advanced years has a platform to publicly address issues that rankle him personally, speaking with the authority of age, experience and more than a tad of irritable irrationality, leavened with his own brand of rude and rough expression. A man of such public popularity that despite his lack of concern for how others might perceive his statements of questionable civil value, feels he has the authority through that popularity to speak as he does while believing he is employably 'untouchable'.

His huge and loyal following, accustomed to his rants, finding humour and a candid expression of their own blighted biases in a venue that is respected, overnight found reason for fury at the sudden dismissal of someone they like and whose statements they support. Citing, after all, freedom of expression. And although Canada likes to think of itself as a bastion of support for that freedom under its laws of social civility, employing a battering ram of criticism against the firewall of political correctness ensures an eruption of sanctimonious condemnation.

Don Cherry, the sports expert and raconteur, long a fixture on Coach's Corner, a televised Hockey Night in Canada show, whose featured appearance in Victorian-era-constructed dress suits, a quirky manner and authoritarian pronouncements enraptured viewers who would often tune in more to catch any potentially outrageous comments than to watch the game even in this National Hockey League-obsessed country. Over the years, his outbursts verging on insults and badgering commentary have all been overlooked in view of his iconic status as a hockey great -- commentator if not player.

But he committed the cardinal sin of embarrassing the Sportsnet network in a display of vexed anti-immigrant spouting off. Actually, it is his inimitable manner more than what he actually said that must have enraged enough viewers to respond in condemnation of his unchecked commentary on this occasion. His personal opinion, that of a crotchety old man, arrogant in the belief that nothing he would ever say would threaten his appearances as a regular on Coach's Corner, incited him to spout when he should have thought carefully first. That is definitely not his style, however.

Not about his wording necessarily, but the vehemence of his emotions in castigating immigrants for failing to sufficiently respect the Canadian military, Canadian veterans and the solemnity of November 11st as Remembrance Day, honouring Canada's fallen soldiers during both World Wars and the Canadian military's interventions in other Allied conflicts through the years from Korea to Somalia, Afghanistan to Syria. And the wearing of the poppy, reminiscent of the Flanders Field poem by John McCrae is the symbol of Canadian respect and remembrance.

"You people love -- that come here, whatever it is -- you love our way of life, you love our milk and honey. At least you could pay a couple of bucks for a poppy. These guys paid for your way of life the life you enjoy in Canada. These guys paid the biggest price", he stated somewhat incoherently as is his off-the-cuff style on Saturday evening. And then the backlash on social media demanding his job, if not his head. "Offensive" stated the NHL and the Royal Canadian Legion slammed the statements as contrary to the Legion's Articles of Faith.

"You know, I was talking to a veteran. I said 'I'm not going to run the poppy thing anymore because what's the sense? I live in Mississauga, nobody wears -- very few people wear a poppy. Downtown Toronto, forget it! Downtown Toronto, nobody wears a poppy'" he explained before launching into his disgust with immigrants' lack of respect for Canadian veterans who gave their all so that we could live in freedom. "It's deserved (his firing). It's deserved because of what he did. When you act inappropriately, there should be consequences and that was the consequence", stated Bhupinder Singh Hundal, senior CBC producer where over 30 years Don Cherry had spouted his opinions.

Well, that's a peculiar comment, considering that on a number of occasions the prime minister of this country of Canada saw nothing amiss in spoofing people of colour, painting his face and appendages thinking it downright cool to prank about, amusing himself and presumably others present at the various events when he donned blackface and had a rip roaring time of it. The condemnation his disrespect of Blacks and East Indians indicated, lasted all of two days and he wasn't fired. His lame explanation that he was merely a product of his environment and upbringing was held to be acceptable.

So Don Cherry, on the other hand was fired. "No problem", he said. Refuting the wording of the official statement to the effect that he had seen fit after consideration to retire, he affirmed the firing. "I know what I said and I meant it. Everybody in Canada should wear a poppy to honour our fallen soldiers." At age 85, he can hardly be expected to shuffle his feet, adjust his bowtie and beg forgiveness, saying he is a product of the age he was brought up in. He said what he felt, and there are no regrets, and good for him.

A veritable tempest in a teapot. During the Saturday Coach's Corner exchange his conversational partner Ron MacLean smiled throughout Mr. Cherry's narrative. In one photograph of the event, Mr. MacLean can be seen thumbs-up as in agreement. Ostensibly, it was only after the public response rocked the equanimity of yet another commentary by Don Cherry that the explosive Sportsnet consternation was evidenced. And when Mr. MacLean apologized the following night classifying Mr. Cherry's statements as hurtful and discriminatory, "flat-out wrong", the die was cast. Unnecessarily, given the circumstances.

The Prestige and Privilege of Higher Education : Diversity, Equity, Inclusiveness

"Why is diversity so important?"
"Diversity is a powerful agent of change. Indeed, diversity is an imperative that must be embraced if colleges and universities are to be successful in a pluralistic and interconnected world."
Dalhousie University, 200 years of intellectual rigour

"The academy has been so focused on attaining diversity by race and gender [which are valuable] that it has created a hostile climate for people who think differently."
"The American Academy has -- arguably become a politically orthodox and quasi-religious institution."
Jonathan Haidt, The Coddling of the American Mind

"Loud noises, including whooping and traditional applause, could pose an issue for students with disabilities, such as those with anxiety or sensory issues."
"[Jazz hands are required at debates, panels and talks, along with at meetings of the student senate.]"
"Jazz hands [was designed to support those with disabilities and/or sensory conditions to participate in events."
"Students' unions strive to make their events welcoming to all of their students by acknowledging their experiences and responding to their needs."
Manchester University student union

Oh dear, the poor darlings, all of them. Due regard for their comfort and feelings must always be uppermost in mind at today's institutes of higher learning. And so, we must, all of us be aware, those within the sacred halls of universities where the young are nurtured, instilled with obligatory compassion for others, while science, history, politics, economics are all filtered through the delicate lens of leftist perception and compassion for the social-economic-political-non-gendered underdogs of society in the new(ish) social compact to produce sterling citizens of tomorrow today.

Dalhousie University, to celebrate its 200 centuries of existence as a hallowed hall of cerebral functioning has recognized a problem in its ceremonial mace; it is now viewed as an oppressive symbol of an oppressive past. So its function is being redesigned to enable it to "better reflect the University's evolving values and commitment to diversity and inclusiveness". Oh, thank heavens, really!

As for Lord Dalhousie who founded that eponymous institution, the old colonialist pale-male no longer appears to reflect the humanitarian values Dalhousie is now embracing. Did you know that Lord Dalhousie spoke of blacks fleeing the perdition of the United States post War of 1812 as "slaves by habit and education"? Well, he damn well did, the old rogue. What to do? Strike a scholarly panel to debate and probe: honour or expunge?

This past fall, Michelle Williams – the director of the Indigenous Blacks & Mi’kmaq Initiative, Schulich School of Law – was selected as co-leader of the Diversity and Inclusiveness Strategy. She replaced Dr. Wanda Thomas Bernard who completed her term summer 2017 after being appointed to the Canadian Senate. Michelle has been working alongside Jasmine Walsh, co-leader and assistant vice president, Human Resources.  Dal News

What is indisputable, however, is that Dalhousie has signed on to a Strategic Priority to "foster a collegial culture grounded in diversity and inclusiveness". To that end, an advert for a new dean of students specified that candidates be "racially visible". Courses? How about one on pulp fiction, another on popular culture, mystery and detective fiction, science fiction, fan culture, afrofuturism?
No kidding, chum...

Front and centre, top of mind, eclipsing all other matters of concern however notable is the new face of the Academy: anti-racism, anti-oppression, and so then it becomes de rigueur that Pride Week, Respect Week, African Heritage Month, Mi'kmaq History Month and Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence be regarded as the fulcrum spokes around which Dalhousie and others of its accreditation ilk revolve. Of course Dalhousie has lots and lots of company.

Leaving Canada for London: students there now are no longer to use loud clapping, whoops and any noisy applause in appreciation of concerts or lectures. Sara Khan, Manchester University's liberation and access officer nixed traditional applause as being insufficiently "accessible", so clapping is banned and "jazz hands" is in, where people wave their hands about, instead, urging "student groups and societies to do the same".

The National Union of Students adopted "jazz hands" in 2015 on the grounds that clapping "triggers anxiety". Students who whoop, cheer and clap should, feels the National Union of Students, face "consequences". Audiences must be aware that to whoop in expressing support for a speaker has a "serious impact" on disabled students who under those circumstances, will find attendance at conferences "inaccessible".

Oxford University's equality and diversity unit last year issued guidance to its students advising that those who avoid making eye contact with their fellows could be guilty of racism. Can't get too much more august than Oxford; can't get too much more threatening than to be accused of (shudder) racism. "Trigger warnings" have been issued at University of Glasgow for theology students studying Jesus Christ's crucifixion; informed in advance they may view distressing images, and thus have permission to leave, should they wish to.

Jazz Hands...British Sign Language action for applause  The Independent

Saint Justin Slaying the Anti-Equality Dragon

"[Crown Prince] Mohammad bin Salman was trying to send a message that he is not to be disrespected by anyone. Unfortunately, many Saudi students who were in Canada are paying a heavy price."
"Investors are looking more askance at Saudi Arabia, and none of this helps Saudi relations with the rest of the world."
Paul Sullivan, Saudi specialist, Georgetown University, Washington

"Canada is back," Trudeau mugged for the world's cameras at the signing of the Paris Accord in 2015. "We're Canadian," Trudeau told the U.N. General Assembly the following year, "and we're here to help." (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

When the smiley-face ebullience of Justin Trudeau, Margaret's "Golden Boy", was loosed on the world stage as Canada's spanking new prime minister he presented as an antidote to the taciturn, capable, resolute and intelligent Stephen Harper with whom the voting public had tired. How the public spirit soared at the prospect of this handsome young man with the temerity to offer himself as a public service to Canada with his great experience in drama and snowboarding excited expectations!

"Sunny ways" did it, Justin winked, as he boasted on the world stage introducing himself to other world leaders, that "Canada is back". Since then, we have learned that the Canada that never went away has shifted backward. Canada has become the world's silly clown, alternating between espousing progressive values and changing the social contract and its language, alerting 90 percent of the population that due diligence must be paid forward in soothing the emotional baggage of the dissatisfied ten percent as their due.

As for Canada's reputation abroad, it has become somewhat of a laughing stock, an administration that busies itself morally strong-arming its counterparts to give obeisance where it is due; Canada's version of social, cultural, international, economic imperatives to hoist the status of women and the traditionally socially-impoverished in a mission of achieving total equality.

Stephen Harper's cabinet gained close to parity between the genders, but Justin Trudeau appointed women to cabinet posts based on gender alone, it seemed not necessarily suitable qualifications which he deemed to be expendable; he had none, why would they require any?

Now it is attempting to placate the rage it inspired in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia when Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland demanded that the Saudis release a rights activist instanter. Liberal Party supporters like SNC-Lavalin, the Canadian unit of General Dynamics Corp., McCain Foods Ltd., and others stand to suffer as a result of a breach in relations whereby Canada's ambassador to the Kingdom was expelled, investments curbed, Saudi medical students recalled; a giant rebuff to Canada for interfering in Saudi Arabia's internal affairs.

Globally, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is increasingly being regarded as a pain in the arse, his virtue-signalling fails to impress internationally just as it is beginning finally to pall at home. When Trudeau jabbed China and India in trade discussions with his expectations on women's and minority rights he failed to endear himself and Canada to potential free trade partners. This, in addition to the sad state of Canada's third-class status in NAFTA negotiations, where once again Chrystia Freeland has assaulted the sensibilities of the U.S. top trade negotiator; a trading partnership made in hell.

So, sigh, what went wrong? Well, just about everything. The shining new prime minister who promised that his administration would tend to bolstering Canada's reputation abroad, take back its revolving seat in the United Nations, bolster the military and respond to peacekeeping requests has just been slapped down by the Organization for Economic Cooperation for its failure to restore foreign aid commitments to the level it enjoyed under the Harper government.

Trudeau seemed to think his considerable charm and celebrity could mollify Trump in the early days of his presidency. (Christinne Muschi/Reuters)

Another Tempest in Academia

"These concerns relate to the manner in which you are expressing views that you are alleged to be advancing or supporting and, in some instances, time that you are spending on these issues in the classroom."
"The university has a legal responsibility to provide an environment free from discrimination, sexual harassment and personal harassment."
"The nature and frequency of these complaints and the significance of the allegations is concerning for the university, and we have determined the necessity of proceeding to a formal investigation."
Heather Hemming, vice-president academic, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova Scotia

Acadia University Hall in Wolfville, Nova Scotia. Peter Bleakney

"I would have no problem if people refuted me and told me I was being unreasonable, that is perfectly fine. I would love it if students just told me I'm wrong."
"I made sure I told students they wouldn't be tested on the specific materials, I just want them to think about these concepts."
"[A study showed men prefer more competitive careers] whereas the women on average tended to prefer spending time in the community."
"I'm open to criticism but the problem with the letter [from Dr. Raeside] is it's basically telling me what to do in the sense of micromanaging how I run my courses without taking into consideration it's my area of expertise."
"[Have I made racist or transphobic remarks?] Perception is very subjective. I take those issues very seriously, given my own background as a first-generation Canadian and having grown up with racism, I'm not going to do that in the classroom."
"Even if I didn't have that life experience, I just know it's morally wrong to do that in my position as a professor. For those of you following my story, let me be clear: I loathe both racism and violence in all its forms. What I DO stand with is the right of ANYONE to free speech, regardless of how reprehensible I may find it."
Rick Mehta, Associate professor of psychology

Rick Mehta.Rick Mehta/Facebook

His intention as a university professor -- lecturing and introducing students to thought concepts -- was to guide them toward becoming critical thinkers and informed citizens. Dr. Mehta has distinguished himself by being an outspoken academic on campus and on social media in a range of issues seen to be contentious; decolonization, immigration, and gender politics. He has his supporters and oppositionally, there is a contingent of 'progressives' who happen to be in the academic majority who deplore his public utterances.

Stating that multiculturalism is a scam has gained him few friends in the academic community where political correctness has become de rigueur. Stating that no wage gap exists between men and women in the work force yet another issue that irks against the grain, as is his comment that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has succeeded in helping to create a victim narrative prompting "endless apologies and compensation". His mission, he says, is that of a free-speech advocate attempting to build bridges.

"He's just sort of parroting the much more popular Jordan Peterson. He's very clearly just trying to piggyback on that to gain a certain notoriety", claims Matthew Sears, associate professor of classics and ancient history, University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, scornfully referring to the University of Toronto professor who has emerged as a celebrity after weathering a storm of criticism over his refusal to respect and use gender-neutral terms. What they both do have in common is that both are psychology professors.

Dr. Mehta's defenders value his voice as an antidote to political correctness; his critics insist he attacks the marginalized, perpetuating harmful stereotypes. The storm that has erupted yet again circling around free speech and political correctness represents another expose of the challenges universities face to balance the exchange of ideas with their perceived responsibility to keep students safe and supported; as though young adults in an academic setting require protection from challenges to the socially acceptable from iconoclasts like Drs. Mehta and Peterson.

Dr. Mehta's department head set out the details of some of the complaints students have levelled against him, emphasizing the high level of anxiety in the class that has led some students to cease attending classes, distressed by hearing provocative comments in class. The very fact that many students hear clearly politically provocative comments issued by 'progressive' professors in their classes, comments that have become the accepted norm from the perspective of the politically correct environment, and feel forced to gulp them down, represents the other side of the ledger.

"The students have not expressed in writing the precise details of the racist and transphobic comments", wrote department head Rob Raeside, "but it is clear from their interactions with me that they are extremely disturbed by your comments, some to the point of not going to class". Students, according to Dr. Raeside, have accused Dr. Mehta of spending excessive class time on non-class-related matters; using non-academic sources for lecture content; testing on content not dealt with in class or in assigned readings; and making provocative comments in class. Horrors!

"I fully understand that university teaching should expose students to a range of viewpoints and especially in a discipline like psychology some of these perspectives may be challenging to students. However, in a first-year class it is imperative that the approach be well-balanced and must be in line with published resources", emphasized Dr. Raeside rather patronizingly, urging Dr. Mehta to "stay on topic"; digressions on non-psychology topics must be relevant, never exceeding ten percent of class time.

Fortunately for healthy academic life still surviving in some Canadian universities, Dr. Mehta has his defenders:

"I hope that any student that goes to any university is made to feel uncomfortable many times. Universities are not places to go to be comfortable."
"They're places to go to be uncomfortable, to have your views challenged."
Canada Research Chair in Regional Innovation, Professor Ken Coates, University of Saskatchewan

"I have read many of Dr. Mehta's postings and it is difficult to see how anything in them could be construed as discriminatory or harassing. If Dr. Mehta's ideas are false or pernicious, they could be shown to be so through discussion and better ideas."
"[Acadia University's investigation represents a] frontal assault on academic freedom."
Mark Mercer, president, Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship, professor and chair, philosophy department, Saint Mary's University, Halifax

Serve and Protect?  Or Swerve and Neglect!

"It's definitely happening, there's no doubt about it."
"[In 70 percent of all responses police display] limited to moderate to intensive de-policing. ['De-policing is defined as] an officer choosing not to engage in discretionary or proactive aspects of police duties."
"There's a massive downside to [proactive policing], and I think they can clearly realize that."
"That [responding to 911 calls for service] is the core function of their job. When the computer [inside the cruiser] beeps, you respond to the call, go and address the call. You do what has to be done."
"If an officer responds to the calls they're responsible to respond to, they're doing their job. The rest is gravy."
"There's really no way to police de-policing."
Greg Brown, Carleton University doctoral researcher

"What you were trained to do is no longer acceptable. What is the immediate reaction? Cease any activities that would be conducive to exposing yourself."
"The results that [Brown] is experiencing throughout the entire country is what we've experienced here in Ottawa."
"The dialogue starts to have a racial component to it. It impacts the officers when they see agencies taking political positions against police officers that compounds the jeopardy a police officer already faces when they're dealing with the public. The officers feel very second-guessed."
"There seems to be an expectation that a police officer is going to driving around for ten hours of their shift, without realizing that there's a significant amount of paperwork involved for every call for service."
Matt Skof, president, Ottawa Police Association

"I would agree that officers are likely more mindful about the implications of their interactions with the public. As the saying goes, 'Once bitten twice shy'."
"However, I don't think this is creating a culture of police that are neglecting their fundamental duties of protecting the safety and security of the community. It has added another level to their decision making process, an increased awareness."
Eli El-Chantiry, chair, Ottawa Police Services Board

Officers are weighing the costs of engaging with the public and for many, the cons outweigh the pros. Photo by Ashley Fraser Ashley Fraser / Postmedia

Bollocks! Police everywhere now encounter the outrage of the public, the censure of social agencies, the backtreading of politicians and the pointed questions posed by news coverage of events where police have been tasked with dealing not only with the criminal element in society, but with its social problems, handling out-of-control people with mental illness whose instability has created public threats, requiring police to apprehend potential crimes by recognizing the presence of threats posed by visible minorities.

In their introduction to scenes of emergency responses to public threats if police respond to physical violence by matched, often controlled physical force in the execution of their duties to protect the public while also protecting themselves, the expected unexpected can occur, and the police are called to the carpet. Police experience and intuition in dealing with criminal gangs, with drug pushing and prostitution committed by an overwhelming number of Blacks, Aboriginals, Muslims, is characterized as 'targeted' against the vulnerable.

Greg Brown, the doctoral researcher was in his prior career an Ottawa police homicide and drug investigator. He knows the profession from the inside out. And it is the 'outside' of the profession that is compelling the 'inside' of policing that has created a situation where police officers have a double mission; to protect the public and to protect their own reputations and professional life in the bargain. Political correctness and self-serving victimhood on the part of civil groups disproportionately represented in crime sprees and incarceration rates have found a new voice in public support.


Their over-representation in criminal gangs, in drugs and violence, the use of firearms, and targeted killings is the sole issue that alerts police to investigate them in suspicious circumstances in hopes of preventing the commission of yet another crime. But this proactive and generally successful approach to policing has been identified as 'profiling' and has been condemned, irrespective of the fact that it represents an integrally required and useful part of the profession of serving and protecting the public.  A public which, within the target group clamours for protection but fails to cooperate with police investigations.

A useful initiative undertaken in Toronto had a mitigating presence of a police officer assigned to a specific high school to familiarize students with lawfulness, the project having a high degree of interactive success. It has been suspended by the Toronto Public School Board, however, because Black Lives Matter denounced it as primarily targeting black students. Who just happen to be responsible for most of the gang crimes. That suspension occurred despite that most students found the presence of a police officer who connected with them reassuring, including most black students.

The issue of 'carding' by police officers encountering visible minorities in potentially incriminating circumstances received wide condemnation by special-interest groups exerting enough political pressure to have the practise censured; yet another useful tool set aside in the generalized trend toward neutering policing. Greg Brown's study, the first of its kind in Canada, measuring the F.I.D.O.
phenomenon among police ("F**k it, drive on"), was undertaken with a wide survey of front-line officers encompassing 18 police services.

Police from Halifax to Vancouver, including five departments in New York State were all included in the survey of 3,600 police services personnel. In Ottawa alone, 382 police participated from 18 patrol platoons, representing close to the entire front-line. It became clear that officers weigh the costs of public engagement, finding the negatives to outweigh the positives. Interactions carrying the potential of racial profiling allegations that could end up before a disciplinary tribunal or human rights body, media scrutiny, a YouTube video or judge deliberating breach of Charter rights has become anathema.

The more mature officers happen to be in their career path, the more careful they are not to ruin their careers, let alone their lives by bringing down censure upon their law-and-order professionalism.  No longer is it automatic to pull a driver over for a Highway Traffic Act infraction, to approach a suspicious-appearing individual lurking about in an area known for high residential break-and-enters, let alone attempting to seek out wanted offenders on warrants; all considered to be proactive in nature which officers cannot to be coerced to perform.

This is the danger zone to be avoided. Self-preservation is a powerful survival tool. A wait-and-see attitude toward deployment has become the norm; initiatives in the fulfillment of policing duties are no more and where many years ago this type of attitude would have been viewed as disinterested lassitude, it is now a calculated decision related to colleague experience and the wish to avoid the misfortune visited on colleagues seeking to perform their duties in full measure.

If a racialized individual with mental health issues is behaving violently, as a threat to public security, officers approach with especial caution in the knowledge that from somewhere someone will be videotaping any confrontation so that if officers respond with force to restrain violence they will be liable for criticism should harm come to the offender. Sexuality and gender represent yet other interactions that have the potential to result in problem explanations for outcomes.

New legislation now regulates practices such as those that saw racialized young men stopped by police wanting their personal information. That new legislation altered protocol such that officers are now reluctant to act after a personally thoughtful introspective cost-benefit analysis has persuaded them through analyzing others of their colleagues playing the price for extending themselves in reflection of their mandate, paying the consequences of matters turning awry. Police now look to play it safe in public order and security and still deliver their mandate.

Toronto Police Service: Woman pulled from freezing water.