September 2003
Summary
of Keynote Address to the AGM by Dr Fred Lowy, Rector, Concordia University
Prepared by Chris Furedy
[Clive Seligman introduced
Dr Lowy as one who always sees the good in people.]
Dr. Lowyrecalled
Clark Kerr’s remark as he left UC Berkeley (as president) in 1967: “I leave
this university as I entered it – fired with enthusiasm.”
His themes: Concordia
University has always been politicized, and this politicization was exploited
deliberately by a small group of Ontario graduate students who entered
Concordia with this objective. Student activism has a long history
and is not necessarily bad; it can be constructive, but this was not the
case at Concordia.
The background for the
academic culture that has developed at Concordia: It comes from
the traditions of the two institutions that were amalgamated in 1974 (Loyola
and Sir George Williams). Sir George Williams University had a ‘political
tradition’ and riots in the 1960s. The downtown campus is part of
the ‘downtown scene’ and attracts many non-Concordia students.
An important feature is the
‘diversity’ of Concordia – this is true of both students and faculty.
He explained the beliefs
of the radical graduate students that promoted politicization:Their
inspiration comes from anarchist thinking, and philosophers and educationists
such as Herbert Marcuse and Paolo Freire. They reject the very purpose
of a traditional university, holding that universities support the status
quo and thus broader social change must begin with destabilizing universities.
An important factor in the
strength of the student movement is that student unions in Quebec can have
labour union status and independence, so that the administration at Concordia
lost control of the $1.3 million in fees students pay to the union.
The radical graduate students
formed an alliance with a
group of Muslim pro-Palestinian
students, although as anarchists the former were not really interested
in Middle East politics and the latter do not want to destabilize Canada.
It was a pragmatic alliance. (There are estimated to be about 4000
Muslim students).
Explaining how the conflict
between the student union and the Administration escalated, Lowy said
that in the beginning the Administration took the usual stand of allowing
freedom of speech. He then described the evolution of his own thinking,
acknowledging the help of SAFS’ board member Harvey Shulman in drawing
his attention to an article in Front Page Magazine that spelt out
two polar views of universities: the university as a social-change
agent vs the university as upholding a non-politicized curriculum. A thorny
issue in Lowy’s mind was whether the concept of academic freedom can be
used to justify the indoctrination of students. Lowy stated his emphatic
view that universities and professors should not be propagandists, that
they have a obligation to respect truth, and that truth is facilitated
by allowing the clash of opposing points of view.
World events and Concordia:
While important world events have always provoked debate on campus, the
Middle East issues since the new intifada were of a different order.
There was a steady escalation of rhetoric and propaganda, often an ugly
mood. The Administration only tried to limit this rhetoric a little
– when it seemed that other students’ rights were being interfered with.
Incidents on campus and
Administrative action: Lowy outlined various events, such as
the setting up of a “Palestinian check point” leading up to the violence
when Netanyahu attempted to speak in September 2002 at the invitation of
the Jewish students’ organization Hillel.
The Administration imposed
a three-month cooling-off period and there has been no violence since.
There has been some progress. Students voted in a new student government,
on a platform of ‘evolution not revolution.’ The Administration could
not do much about the radical students, such as pursuing conviction for
promoting hate, because the Criminal Code’s language makes it almost impossible
to convict anyone of a hate crime. However, those who could be identified
as participating in the riot have been charged.
Conclusion:
Lowy concluded by saying that he believes the subversion of the core values
of a university must be contained and that Concordia’s Administration must
try to create a different and tolerant climate on campus. But you
can’t legislate civility. He quoted George Bernard Shaw on ‘unreasonable
people:’ “Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable
people attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore,
depends on unreasonable people.”
Discussion
John Furedy: Comment
on the need to be clear about the distinction between acts and opinions.
Bill Fisher:
Vital not to concede campuses to ‘brown shirts.’ The title of the
talk should have been the limits to violence.
Lowy:Agrees authorities
have to be able to anticipate violence. Now accusations are made
against the Administration of repression because of the security measures.
John Palmer:Under
what conditions would Ernst Zundel be allowed to speak at the university?
Lowy:There are speakers
that the university invites and that are invited by student organizations.
The Administration does not censor student-sponsored invitations.
The university could not stop an invitation to Zundel as it would be regarded
as censorship.
Ken Hillborn:The
pro-Palestinian students declared beforehand that they aimed to shut down
Netanyahu’s talk, so the university should have been prepared for this.
Ken Westhuis:
Congratulated Lowy on his politically sophisticated talk and said no university
president outside of Quebec can be imagined having come and spoken like
this to such a group. Has political correctness been stronger in English
Canada than in Quebec?
Lowy: The political
climate in Quebec has changed since the 1970s. Now Quebec universities
are more politicized than those in the rest of Canada. But it is
not a qualitative difference; perhaps there is more outspokenness in Montreal.
Jeff Ascher: Asked
Lowy to elaborate on what specific measures the Admin has taken to create
a different climate.
Lowy: Specifically:
1) Patricia Gabel was appointed as Special Advisor to the Rector, Conflict
Analysis and Management, to have discussions on conflict resolution with
the different student groups; 2) A committee of faculty, administrators
and students was formed to consider ways to increase inter-ethnic tolerance;
3) An academic centre was created to study inter-ethnic conflict; 4) Sanctions
were imposed, mostly on the pro-Palestinian students (much criticism from
them of Lowy as a result), and non-students committing violence have been
banned from campus; 5) New dean of students appointed.
Rory Leishman: Are
numbers of Muslim students a threat to academic freedom?
Lowy:He
does not think so. But many Muslim students have come from cultures where
there is no tradition of civil discourse. About 100,000 Muslims have
immigrated to Quebec in the past few years. But militancy breeds
militancy, and the Jewish students are more militant now too.
Rory Leishman:
Isn’t there
an intrinsic threat to academic freedom from such values?
Lowy:Recalled
the case of a Muslim student on the board of governors who objected to
wine being served at receptions. Some members of the board found
it hard to understand her point of view – was it ‘political’ or a distinct
religious value?
Keith Cassidy:
The procedure of requiring pro-lifers at UBC to post bond with the university
seems the wrong way to go.
Bill Fisher:
Recalled that an argument used against Philippe Rushton at UWO was that
‘fascists have no right to speak.’ But this argument is not used
against students who may be real fascists.
Clive Seligman:
Does Lowy think that Netanyahu could be invited again next September?
Lowy: Not yet.
Well, it is still possible that the conflict could start up again.
However, there has been a fair amount of progress at Concordia in this
matter.
Chris is a SAFS member.
Help us maintain freedom in teaching, research and scholarship by joining SAFS or making a donation.
