Be either consistent, or silent -- there can be no middle ground

How do high-profile, complicated entities, such as publicly-traded companies and educational institutions, demonstrate their core principles when presented with emotionally-charged issues?  It seemed so straightforward to most in the wake of George Floyd’s murder. Not so, apparently. 

The past few days have laid bare just how many high profile names are grappling with their values: Concordia, Harvard, Stanford, UPenn, Western, the University of Toronto, among others.  My alma mater’s motto is Veritas et Utilitas (Truth and Usefulness), which should have served as the perfect guidepost for both Western and any other school or firm that was at a loss for direction: Tell the truth, have it be in keeping with your prior approach on matters that you felt warranted public comment, and ensure that any statement you make is actually useful to your audience.

In May 2021, the Liberal government ordered that Canada’s flags be lowered to half-mast at all federal buildings “to honor the 215 children whose lives were taken at the former Kamloops residential school and all Indigenous children who never made it home, the survivors, and their families.”  A variety of taxpayer-funded schools and the headquarters of many federally-regulated businesses followed suit, including Canada’s publicly-traded banks.  As did the owner of Smart Centres, in a very visible fashion.

As I drove down Toronto’s Avenue Road last evening, I passed several versions of the Pride flag flying at various public and private schools.  While many Canadian schools and businesses have displayed supportive flags and banners during Pride Month each June, at least one area school decided to make this permanent in response to protests last month “against transgender ideology in schools,” according to Global News.  These heated events were well-covered by the mainstream media, “as rhetoric and debate over sex education curriculum grows louder.  In Toronto, hundreds gathered north of Queen’s Park as part of the Million March 4 Children, chanting ‘leave our children alone,’ while hundreds more gathered in opposition.”

Whatever your preference for “age-appropriate sex education curriculum” or “gender ideology” might be, it’s pretty clear that there will be other parents with kids at that same school who vehemently disagree with you.  That some school Administrations felt it essential to demonstrate their “inclusiveness” to a group representing 0.33% of Canada’s population (0.79% of Gen Z) in a permanent, visible way speaks to just how comfortable they are in “taking a stand” on issues that touch even a small minority of their population. No issue here —you’re in charge, and you have a duty to exercise that leadership role as you see fit. Unless that puts you out of step with your Code of Conduct, Charter, Board or shareholders.  

Many of these same schools are also flying orange-coloured “Every Child Matters” flags.  Over the past couple of weeks, some teachers and students affixed dozens, if not hundreds, of orange hearts on the fencing surrounding their various playgrounds to mark Canada’s new Truth and Reconciliation Day.  These public acknowledgements of historical injustices towards Aboriginals aren’t unique to Canada, as many U.S. Universities recently “honoured and recognized the history and culture of indigenous peoples” on October 9^th via an “Indigenous People’s Day,” rather than commemorate Columbus Day, as it has been formally known since 1934 (or even 1892).

Unlike Canada’s flag situation of 2021, these were clearly decisions of individual institutions, and not a result of federal pressure. U.S. President Joe Biden, Jr. himself proclaimed it as “Columbus Day,” citing the loss of “11 Italian Americans in one of the largest mass lynchings in our Nation’s history.”

In the wake of the horrific Hamas attack on innocent Israeli citizens two weekends ago (see prior post “My Canada does not include the Hamas flag” Oct. 15-23), most educational institutions, as well as many businesses, have been heartily encouraged to “say something.”  Compare the lynching of 11 Italian Americans in the late 1800s to the vile breadth of the Hamas attack. High schools, universities, even publicly-traded companies, have been called upon to acknowledge, denounce, show concern, condemn, advocate for peace, etc., depending on who was doing the encouraging.

Watching these institutions react in varying and confusing ways to the daily horrors has been a difficult exercise, both emotionally and intellectually, for many.  Myself included. Whether you be a student, parent, alumni, donor or taxpayer (in the case of publicly-funded entities), you rightly feel a sense of ownership over what happens on campus.  If you are a University President and found yourself issuing two or three statements over the course of last week as you tried to finally find the right tone, or attempting to respond to disgust within your school’s donor network, you’ve got to wonder what unconscious bias was at play; it’s not as though the scale of the depravity wasn’t widely-known as you crafted those initial words.

Many of us were troubled when traditionally-vocal educational institutions and companies of various stripes stayed silent for an extended period of time.  If your school or employer never comments publicly on matters relating to global issues, that silence is at least consistent with a formal internal policy.  But things look inconsistent (ed. note: galling?) if there were formal statements about, say, Climate Change (2015) and George Floyd (2020), but the largest slaughter of Jewish people since the Holocaust didn’t meet that same test of a matter of public interest.  Stanford University tried to claim that the institution doesn’t “take positions on geopolitical issues and news events,” before being reminded in the New York Times that it very much did so in 2015 and 2020, for example.

Have you asked yourself if you’re anti-semetic?  Are you simply trying to avoid accusations of unwittingly encouraging Islamophobia if you censure Hamas?  Do you think that being against Hamas will be seen as supporting Israel’s “Naval blockade” of Gaza?  Are you concerned about being seen to take sides in a multi-generational regional struggle over the implications of U.N. Resolution 181 for the various ethnic and religious groups that have lived on and near these lands for hundreds, if not thousands, of years?    

The issue is far less complicated than administrations and CEOs think.  Ask yourself a simple question: what have we done in the past, regarding “geopolitical issues and news events” that matter to our stakeholders?

If you look out your hard-earned window, and there’s more than the flag of your nation, province, school or company logo fluttering on your flagpole, there’s your answer.  If your website, speeches or Twitter feed contains statements about one or more of: Aboriginal issues, Anti-Black Racism, Black Lives Matter, Climate Change, Every Child Matters, Inclusiveness, Islamophobia, LGBTQ2+, Pink Shirt Day, Pluralism, Pride Month, September 11^th, but nothing about anti-Semitism, Jewish Heritage Month nor the Hamas slaughter of October 7th…why exactly is that? How did you pick and choose? Guilt? Virtue-signaling? Courage? Heat-of-the-moment? Moral outrage?

In the alternative, if your initial statement about the Hamas Attack wasn’t both the “truth” and “useful,” and came off as more mealy-mouthed, there’s still time to rectify things. Do yourself a favour, for your institution is surely at risk in the event the wheels of “Western Values” officially come off:

https://x.com/StopAntisemites/status/1712995455691304970?s=20

MRM

(this post, like all blogs, is an Opinion Piece reflecting a personal view)

(photo credit: Steel Mill Fire Fighter, New York, 1951 by Irving Penn)