Poor judge-ment on display in scholarship discrimination

Last week, the Globe and Mail reported that retired judge Paul Staniszewski, who funds scholarships at the University of Windsor and Osgoode Hall Law School, "is asking that those scholarships not be awarded to any students 'of Islamic background.'"

Staniszewski asserts that his decision is a form of "retaliation" against the Taliban's beheading of a Polish engineer. Never mind that Islam is not merely a background, but is rather one of the world's greatest faith traditions; let's focus instead on Staniszewski's execution of judgement in this context.

His belief that the Taliban is representative of greater Islam is tragic enough, but made more so because the ignorant misconceptions are held by a former judge and also because they affect regular Muslim students interested in pursuing higher education. This is not to say that such bigoted beliefs, when held by non-judges, are acceptable. It should, though, be acknowledged that when discriminatory beliefs are held by individuals who are -- supposedly -- among the elite and educated in any established society, said society may wish to take a closer and more critical look at the situation before them, as it may arguably be a reflection of a deeper social malaise.

The philosophical debate

Some might argue that this is Staniszewski's personal money and so should be distributed according to his rules and his rules alone. Further, some might even argue that there should -- in this case and others -- be a distinction made between the private (his money/his scholarship) and the public (his position as a judge). That poor behaviour in one does not necessarily amount to poor behaviour in the other; or, possibly more obscure, that poor behaviour in one should not be equated as a poor reflection upon the other.

I will here respectfully disagree with both positions and argue instead that, for anyone interested in social justice, there needs to be a direct link between the personal and the public.

One would expect judges, retired or otherwise, to uphold impartiality and begin from a position of non-bias. A society must rest assured that when any one of its members enters into a court of law, that individual will be held to the exact same standard as any other, with unadulterated equality before the law. Apart from ensuring this be the case by way of entrenching impartiality within the laws themselves, so too must we expect that the interpreters and executors, the judges within the legal system, taint neither the proceeding nor the ruling with their anti-abortion, anti-homosexuality, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-anything beliefs, and where they would, they must immediately be held to account publicly.

Religion 101 (no scholarship fund required)

Ironically, Staniszewski's enmity toward Islam is the equivalent of any fundamentalist's ignorance wherein the lines of battle are imagined to be civilizational (and often times apocalyptic). He is guilty of 'Taliban-esque' ignorance because his request is rooted in the same world view as theirs: that we exist in a world of Good and Evil where, depending to which side you belong, the 'we' is Good, while the 'they' is always, and naturally, Evil. Explaining to the Globe and Mail that he was merely "sending a message," no one questioned either for whom he thought he spoke or to whom he was sending this message mired in unsophisticated and dangerous thinking.

Let us be unequivocally clear on the following two points: first, Muslims are not fundamentalists, but are rather men and women who follow the faith of Islam. Second, that the Taliban is in no way representative of Islam.

Islam, like Judaism and Christianity is a theology meant to guide its followers through their relationship to God, to peace within their hearts and peace with their surrounding environment. In each of these three religions, and at the discretion of the interpreting party, there exists a fundamentalist component that is a reflection of combined political demands, cultural and tribal underpinnings and misogyny. This is fundamentalism and it is not specific to Islam alone.

The Taliban, then, is an extremely small group of fundamentalists who just happen to be Muslim. Add to them the KKK, and the Reconstructionists, fundamentalists who just happen to be Christian and who have bombed abortion clinics and victimized African-Americans and immigrants in order to enforce their world-view. Finally, to ensure that each of the Abrahamic traditions receives its due spotlight, add the TNT underground, fundamentalists who just happen to be Jewish and who have employed violent terror tactics to realize a tribal and political world view fuelled by the belief that God is their real estate agent.

Today it is the Muslim fundamentalist that is newsworthy, and within that reality is propagated a cultural blind spot to Christian or Jewish fundamentalist-fuelled violent acts. Ultimately, it is to the process of dismantling all forms of fundamentalism that we must each engage.

Anti-Muslim perspectives such as the one held by Staniszewski serve only to proliferate the classical formula of prejudice: that diversity cannot exist within the demonized group. In leading news media, where this formula is most evident, we have seen manufactured an organic link between Muslims and terrorism, as though, somehow, Muslims are genetically inclined to violence. Such anti-Muslim spin must and can indeed be remedied, and Staniszewski is one fundamentalist who might well benefit from such a process.

Recommendation to Staniszewski

Speaking to the possibility that some students would lose funding, Staniszewski asserted that what is clearly discriminatory is nothing more than "tit for tat." To that, I would say that by holding to account Staniszewski's request on a public level, we should use this opportunity to shed light on the very real policies of discrimination being attempted on an individual level.

Interestingly, one of his scholarships awarded at Osgoode Hall is to a student enrolled in an ethics course; it is surprising that Staniszewski didn't feel it necessary that this one particular scholarship be awarded only to Muslim students, and then demand that he be the professor, as an enlightened and privileged white male who has much to teach the Other. He would be better served to withdraw his scholarships and instead enrol in Muslims 101: They're just like you, can you handle it?

Maha Zimmo is a political analyst whose areas of concentration are the Middle East, Islam and the international legal system. She received her Master of Arts from the Department of Law at Carleton University.

Comments