My October visit to Canada was overshadowed by the vicious demonisation and vilification of a friend. ZNet has already posted a copy of University of British Columbia academic and social justice activist Sunera Thobani’s speech and her paper ‘War Frenzy’ reflecting on the controversy that followed her talk.
The day I landed in Canada she was speaking at an Ottawa women’s conference on violence against women, in opposition to colonialism, imperialism, US foreign policy, and the war which the US was about to launch.
Si Sunera Thobani ay isang kahanga-hangang aktibista at iskolar. Sa loob ng ilang taon ay nagtutulungan tayong malinaw na salungatin ang corporate globalization agenda na isinusulong ng APEC (ang Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum) nang ang ilang NGO at unyon sa Canada at higit pa ay naghangad na repormahin lamang ito at patnubayan ang lumalaking oposisyon sa neoliberal na ideolohiya nito patungo sa lobbying para sa mga upuan sa mesa para sa civil society.
Para sa pagsasalita ng katotohanan tungkol sa patakarang panlabas ng US, siya ay inatake sa iba't ibang paraan bilang isang makulit na propesor, isang walang utang na loob na imigrante, isang kayumangging asong babae at isang teroristang sympathizer o isang kumbinasyon nito. Marami sa mga ravings laban sa kanya ay nagpapaalala sa akin ng higit na pang-aabuso sa rasista sa palaruan kaysa sa mga proseso ng pag-iisip ng nasa hustong gulang.
Ang backlash ay hindi pangkaraniwan sa kahulugan na marami pang iba ang gumawa ng katulad na mga punto sa mga ginawa ni Sunera ngunit hindi nakaakit ng anumang bagay tulad ng parehong opprobrium at personal na pag-atake. Ngunit mahuhulaan sa diwa na kapag kinagat mo ang liberal na harapan ng Canada, makikita mo ang maraming masugid na rasismo. At si Sunera ay isang babaeng may kulay na naninirahan sa isang lipunang itinatag sa tangkang pagpuksa sa mga Katutubo at pinananatili sa pamamagitan ng pagtanggi sa genocide na iyon.
Sunera’s observations about Canada in an article she wrote in the Canadian Journal of Women and the Law last year were borne out by her own recent treatment:
The racialisation of immigrants on the basis of their cultural, social, and linguistic characteristics would mean that all people of colour – regardless of their actual legal status, their birthplace, or the length of their residency in Canada – would come to be ideologically constructed as immigrants/outsiders.’ (from ‘Nationalizing Canadians: Bordering Immigrant Women in the Late Twentieth Century’)
After an ‘anonymous complaint’, Sunera’s speech was even investigated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for potential violation of section 319 of the Canada Criminal code – inciting hatred against an identifiable group – in this case the American people. The brave boys of the RCMP could not bring themselves to inform her directly about this- she found out after a police officer spoke about it to the media.
Sunera’s speech, bits of which had been selectively quoted and distorted by various news organizations across Canada, who helped to whip up the frenzy, was remarkably measured.
Others, while purporting to be concerned about freedom of speech and the backlash against Sunera, exhorted people to be ‘very careful in our speech’. Looking at what she actually said, I do not know how anyone could accuse her of using words carelessly. But that was never the point, really, was it?
There is much focus on the expansion of the powers of state security and intelligence agencies in the wake of September 11 – and rightly so. The cynical opportunism of governments, spy agencies and their apologists to cash in on September 11 knows no bounds.
But in the mobilizations against these law changes, the underlying ideology of national security and the way that ‘threats to national security’ are constructed should not be overlooked. Nor should we overlook the fact that the process of demonisation and vilification of critics is an equally important step in the legitimation of the criminalisation of dissent as is the passing of legislation itself.
Ang mga awtoridad ay mayroon nang panimula pagdating sa mga aktibistang may kulay. Hindi ito isang pangyayari pagkatapos ng Setyembre 11.
In the Canadian context, in ‘Whose National Security?: Canadian State Surveillance and the Creation of Enemies’, Laurentian University academics, Gary Kinsman, Dieter K Buse and Mercedes Steedman note that ‘national security’ rests on notions of the interests of the ‘nation’, ‘which is delimited by capitalist, racist, patriarchal, and heterosexist relations.
‘Democratic rights, if they are to be concrete rights, must be based on the expression of forms of social difference and the freedom of expression and association of oppressed groups. Unfortunately, national security in the Canadian and other contexts operates by precisely attacking the democratic rights of these groups’.