Connect with us

Features

Former Liberal candidate Lesley Hughes pens her version of what happened to her in 2008 when she was accused of being an antisemite

Lesley Hughes
cover of “The Dead Candidate’s Report”

By BERNIE BELLAN How many times are we going to revisit a story that has already received more than ample coverage within the pages of this newspaper – especially a story which one might have thought had been put to rest long ago?

The answer, in the case of Lesley Hughes, who achieved a level of notoriety in 2008 when she was unceremoniously turfed as the Liberal candidate in the federal riding of Kildonan-St. Paul during that year’s election, is: at least one more time.

The reason is that Hughes has just recently published a short book, titled “The Dead Candidate’s Report”, in which she offers her version of the events surrounding her forced exit as the federal Liberal candidate for the riding of Kildonan-St. Paul during the 2008 election, and the ensuing damage, both to her career as a journalist and her personal life as a result of that forced exit.
Looking back over our past coverage of the Hughes story, I see that we’ve run three previous articles about what happened: In July 1, 2009, we ran a story by Myron Love which I titled “Hughes Sues Jews”, in which Myron reported that “Last fall, Federal Liberal hopeful Lesley Hughes generated national headlines when it was revealed that she wrote an article in the Winnipeg Sun on May 5, 2002, alleging that the Israeli, American, German and Russian intelligence agencies all had advance warning of the Al Qaeda attack on the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001.”
(Ed. note: Hughes’ exact words, with reference to advance Israeli knowledge of the attacks, were: “Israeli businesses, which had offices in the Towers, vacated the premises a week before the attacks, breaking their lease to do it. About 3,000 Americans working there were not so lucky.”
In that article, Hughes indicated she was quoting internet journalist Mike Ruppert who, she notes in her recently published book, “The Dead Candidate’s Report”, “claimed to have two independent sources about the move” but whose “sources were sealed forever when he allegedly committed suicide in 2014.”
In her book, Hughes admits that “a later explanation for the move was that the existing firm had decided to leave months earlier, breaking their lease as a routine cost of business.”)

Myron’s 2009 article went on to note that Hughes “also posted the article on a United Church of Canada website.
“As a result of the revelation, the former CBC broadcaster (she co-hosted the CBC Winnipeg morning show for a number of years) was forced to step down as the Liberal candidate for Kildonan-St. Paul. (She ran as an independent in the October election and finished a distant third.)
“Now Hughes is back in the news with a lawsuit she has filed against federal cabinet minister Peter Kent, the Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith Canada, as well as Frank Dimant, BBC’s executive vice-president, CJC co-presidents Rabbi Reuven Bulka and Sylvain Abitbol, and Bernie Farber, the CJC’s former CEO.
“Hughes filed the suit in Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench on June 16. She alleges that the defendants ‘made untrue and defamatory accusations’ that she is anti-Semitic. She charges that senior members of B’nai Brith and the CJC went to see then Liberal leader Stephane Dion on September 25, with her 2002 article and persuaded Dion to drop her as a candidate on the grounds that she was anti-Semitic and ‘unfit to hold public office.
“In her lawsuit, she quotes a press release issued on September 27 by B’nai Brith’s Dimant in which he charges that Hughes has a ‘record of anti-Semitism’.”

In February 2013 Myron reported on a settlement reached between Hughes and the defendants to her lawsuit:
“This past week it was revealed that Hughes reached out-of-court settlements with the parties to her lawsuits.
“Following is an excerpt from a publication of joint statement issued by the parties concerned:
“ ‘Journalist Lesley Hughes, Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith Canada and Peter Kent MP (Thornhill) wish to clarify comments that each made during the 2008 Federal Election campaign regarding an article written by Lesley Hughes in 2002, in which she re-published statements that made presumptions of an anti-Semitic nature in connection with the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centre.
‘Ms. Hughes was dismissed as a Liberal candidate in the election after the 2002 article was raised in the media.
‘During the election Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith Canada and Peter Kent each raised concerns about statements in the 2002 article which repeated false allegations that Israel or Israeli tenants were forewarned of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and did not warn others. Comments made by Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith Canada and Peter Kent were published in the media and Ms. Hughes filed a defamation claim in respect of the comments.
‘Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith Canada, and Peter Kent accept that Ms. Hughes does not condone the use of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories by racist groups to support anti-Semitism of any nature. They therefore acknowledge and agree that Ms. Hughes is not an anti-Semite. In fact, Ms. Hughes has been an advocate of human rights through three decades as a journalist and teacher.
‘Ms. Hughes confirms that she has and will continue to be a strong supporter of the work of any individual or group who exposes false public statements that might do harm to the Jewish community, and more specifically that are anti-Semitic and racist.
‘Ms. Hughes joins with Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith Canada, and Peter Kent in strongly condemning anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. They find anti-Semitism and all forms of racism, to be deeply contemptible behavior.’ “

Then, in December 2015, in that year’s Chanukah issue we reprinted an excerpt from a forthcoming book by Hughes, in which she offered further background to the story. Hughes had contacted us, asking whether we would run the story verbatim, including this headline: “An Enemy of the Jews”. We agreed to that and ran the story in its entirety (It ran over five different pages. You can still read the entire story on our website. Simply enter the names “Lesley Hughes” in our search engine and you will find the entire December 9, 2015 issue in which Hughes’ piece appears.)

Now, all this may seem like quite a long preamble to a book review, but I thought it necessary to put what follows into a certain context. Given that Lesley Hughes has been adamant in protesting her innocence over the charge that she was anti-Semitic – and I have no doubt of the unfairness of that charge, given the fact that we have bent over backwards to treat her fairly within this newspaper, I wonder if there really is any further need to comment on a story that has gone on for so long.
But, when we ran a story in our last issue about another defamation lawsuit that had also been settled and in which B’nai Brith had been named as a defendant, I thought the juxtaposition of the two cases reflects poorly on B’nai Brith Canada – and its occasional willingness to engage in over the top criticism.

The most recent case had to do with an article B’nai Brith had published about former Green Party candidate (and more recently, a contestant for the party’s leadership), Dimitri Lascaris.
(I should also note that in September 2018 I did an interview with Dimitri Lascaris which can still be accessed on Youtube, although I admit it’s not easy to find. As much as Lascaris is decidedly critical of Israeli policies toward Palestinians, by no means would I describe him as “an advocate on behalf of terrorists”, which is what B’nai Brith did.)
The reason I thought it important to note that B’nai Brith has now settled lawsuits with two different individuals who had filed libel lawsuits against the organization is that it illustrates the danger involved in labeling someone either “anti-Semitic”, as was B’nai Brith’s allegation about Hughes, or “an advocate on behalf of terrorists”, as was the case with B’nai Brith’s allegation about Lascaris.
Regardless what one may have thought about what Lesley Hughes had written in the particular article which ended up causing her so much grief, or what Dimitri Lascaris’s record is with regard to criticizing Israel, one should be very careful when it comes to accusing individuals either of being “anti-Semitic” or “advocates on behalf of terrorists”, especially when those individuals are Canadian citizens and have recourse to the courts here.

With all that in mind, is there anything new in Lesley Hughes’ recently published book,
“The Dead Candidate’s Report”, which is a very short read at only 107 pages (including appendices)?

On the website for her book, Hughes describes it as “a memoir of my 2008 run for parliament, my defamation as an anti-semite and conspiracy monger, and the lawsuit that cleared me of all accusations”. Unfortunately, due to the terms of the settlement agreement reached between Hughes and the defendants to her lawsuit, she is not allowed to discuss the terms of settlement.
What she does discuss, at great length, is the devastating consequences that her being forced to withdraw as the Liberal candidate for Kildonan-St. Paul had, both on her personal life and career – when she was shunned by many of her former colleagues in the media, along with many other individuals with whom she had developed relationships over her many years as a commentator and radio host, including many Jewish friends.

Leaving aside the mistake Hughes may have made in repeating a since debunked claim that Israelis had prior knowledge of the attack on the World Trade Centre, what followed was certainly devastating for Hughes.
Even when she was vindicated in a court of law and the defendants to her lawsuit apologized for having labeled her an antisemite, as she was about to discover, news of the defendants’ apologies and retractions of the charge was generally ignored within the mainstream media.
As Hughes writes, “When confronted by personal and professional devastation in 2008, at least I was able to turn to an overpriced, self-serving legal system. I have won back my reputation, by way of a lawsuit, but there is no remedy for the unyielding non-coverage of my vindication. No consequences. No accountability. No more action to be taken.”

For Lesley Hughes, at least, while the lessons she may have learned about the dangers inherent in taking any sort of a controversial position in public may have been salutary indeed, what does her experience have to say about anyone else who may be contemplating entering into politics – or who may already be involved in politics?
I certainly wouldn’t be the first to point out the dangers that exist for just about anyone who may have ever tweeted or posted to Facebook anything the least bit controversial. In 2016 this paper itself played an instrumental role in raising awareness of overtly anti-Semitic tweets that had been posted by a doctor by the name of Hussam Azzam, and which had been scrubbed from his Twitter feed – but not before someone who had been monitoring Azzam’s tweets had taken screenshots of them – and ended up giving me those screenshots.
Subsequently Assam was fired as the Chief Medical Officer at St. Boniface Hospital.

So, I’m well aware of the power even a small newspaper such as this can have in affecting the careers – and ultimately the lives, of individuals. In Lesley Hughes’ case, the likelihood is that her controversial columns about 9/11 conspiracies might well have gone ignored for the most part (although she does acknowledge that a column which she wrote for two Winnipeg weekly newspapers in 2002 about 9/11 in which she suggested that the United States brought about the attacks upon itself by its past behaviour did elicit some very angry responses from a great many readers of those papers), had she not inserted a suggestion that Israelis had foreknowledge of the attacks on the World Trade Centre, she would probably have been allowed to remain a Liberal candidate in 2008.
It was only because a blogger (whom she doesn’t identify in her book, but whom we identified as “The Black Rod”, a very well known blogger here who has a record of important scoops over the years) decided, in 2008, to publicize an article Hughes had written in 2002, that Hughes’ was cast into political and personal purgatory.

And, as we have just seen in the most recent federal election, it doesn’t take all that much to have candidates forced to remove themselves as candidates for political office. I think in particular of an NDP candidate by the name of Dan Osborne who, as a teenager tweeted at Oprah Winfrey (of all people), “was Auschwitz a real place?”
Who knows what the context was for that seemingly silly question, but let’s be honest: Is asking that question, especially by a young person who may simply be ignorant, in and of itself anti-Semitic or is it perhaps simply an indication of ignorance on the questioner’s part? But, as I’m sure Lesley Hughes can explain to Mr. Osborne: You can’t be too careful these days in posting anything that might potentially be used some day to cause great embarrassment to you. And, once you’ve been shamed in public, there’s no getting back your reputation, no matter all the apologies and retractions you might end up receiving.

Continue Reading

Features

CAD Performance in 2025: Key Factors Behind Its Recovery

The CAD is clawing back lost ground. Discover what pushed the loonie down in 2024, what’s lifting it in 2025, and why its future still hangs in the balance.

2024 was a strange year for the loonie. If you are an active currency trader, a quick look at a CAD/USD price chart would have you nodding in agreement. Yes, the year started off strong, but as the months rolled by, it was obvious that something was wrong, especially as we neared the end of Q3. The reason for the downtrend was clear. Most people agreed that it was the tariff threats from Washington, rate cuts at home, and a volatile global economy that were being reflected in the currency markets. And for a while, the CAD was stuck in that losing streak, with some experts even suggesting that there was still more to come.

As the new year rolled around, it didn’t seem like anything had changed. But by mid-2025, quiet shifts had turned into a noticeable recovery, with the loonie gaining back significant ground against the greenback. So, in this piece, we’ll break down what really dragged the Canadian dollar lower in 2024, what’s fueling its recovery this year, and whether this rebound is going to hold steady.

Understanding What Happened in 2024

At the start of the year (2024), one U.S. dollar traded for about 1.35 CAD, which translates to one Canadian dollar being valued at roughly 74 cents U.S. It wasn’t anything special at the time, especially after the levels of inflation and volatility of 2023. Still, economists noted that these were the few key factors that kept the loonie afloat early in the year:

  • The price of oil made a comeback. Crude prices firmed up early in the year, supporting Canada’s export earnings and adding a tailwind to the currency.
  • Employment figures were solid. Job growth held up, and steady wage gains helped offset the pressure of higher borrowing costs.
  • The BoC held a steady interest rate. After an aggressive round of rate hikes in 2023, policymakers looked ready to pause and let the economy cool gradually.

All of these factors were thought to have helped build confidence in the Canadian economy and by mid-2024, the loonie had edged up toward 76-77 cents U.S.

Late-Year Turbulence

Not a lot of people saw it, but as Q2 2024 unfolded, the CAD started to look unattractive to currency market investors. How? Well, it started when the Bank of Canada (BoC) started to signal its intention to cut interest rates. It gave its clearest sign to this on April 10, 2024 when the bank highlighted that inflation was slowing down and it was leaving the door open for rate cuts. This announcement changed market expectations almost overnight.

Eventually, the first cut came on June 5, 2024. The BoC lowered its benchmark rate by 25 basis points from 5% to 4.75%, becoming the first major G7 central bank to start easing.

From there, the pace picked up with rates being reduced four more times. The market’s reactions to these cuts were immediate. And any currency trader with a reliable forex trading app saw each one unfold live. The CAD began to lose altitude as the yield gap with the U.S. widened. With lower returns on Canadian assets, investors favored the greenback. Adding to the pressure, the Trump campaign’s 25% tariff threat in September ignited the fears of a trade war. Which led to traders quickly pricing in potential hits to exports and investment, sending sentiment lower.

The 2025 Comeback

The CAD started 2025 trading at around 67 cents U.S., with some days even seeing it flirt with the 66-cent mark. So, it was a common assumption in the currency traders’ community that 2024 might repeat itself. But something was different this time. Every day, the loonie was quietly clawing back much of the ground it lost during the previous year’s slump.

So, what was different this time? Well, experts believe the panic that gripped both retail and institutional traders through late 2024 began to fade. As positive economic data started to filter in, confidence slowly returned alongside a few key drivers. By midyear, analysts were already talking about a turnaround rather than just a recovery attempt. The CAD was trading in the 72-73-cent U.S. range, up solidly from its January lows, and here’s its current rate.

Major Factors Behind the CAD’s Recovery

So, what helped the CAD? Well, there were a few clear factors that came together to turn sentiment around and put the loonie back on steadier footing.

  1. U.S. Dollar Weakness

A softer U.S. dollar was one of the clearest tailwinds for the CAD in 2025. The weakening of the USD started occurring when investors started to pull back from U.S. assets as political tension, fiscal worries, and softer economic data piled up.

What drove it?

  • Trade and political uncertainty: Tariff moves and Washington infighting rattled investor confidence.
  • Fiscal strain: Deficit concerns eroded trust in U.S. financial stability.
  • Fed policy shifts: With the Federal Reserve showing interest in cutting rates (and actually doing so on September 16), the yield advantage that once favored the dollar began to fade.

As investors reduced exposure to U.S. assets, capital rotated into other major currencies. The CAD, being liquid and commodity-linked, was one of the key beneficiaries, strengthening almost by default as the greenback lost ground.

  1. Diverging Monetary Policy

Monetary policy divergence became another major driver. The Bank of Canada held its policy rate steady near 2.75% through Q2 2025 before cutting in September, signaling confidence that inflation was cooling without stalling growth. Meanwhile, the U.S. Federal Reserve began easing monetary policy with its first rate cut in September 2025, responding to slowing growth and softer inflation. This divergence in pace and tone helped support the Canadian dollar’s rebound.

This narrowing interest rate gap mattered. And with Canada offering relatively higher yields, foreign investors found the loonie more attractive, especially compared to the softening U.S. dollar. For traders, the CAD started to look like a better carry trade than it had in over a year.

  1. Easing Tariff Fears

Another major psychological lift came from the fading of tariff risks. In the first half of 2025, Trump’s proposed 25% tariffs on Canadian goods lost traction as political attention shifted elsewhere. While some concerns still lingered, the immediate threat of a trade shock began to ease. Cross-border trade flows regained a bit of momentum, and markets started to price in a smoother path for Canadian exports. That renewed confidence played a key role in supporting the loonie’s recovery.

Can the Loonie Hold Its Ground?

As 2025 moves forward, the consensus among analysts is cautious but constructive. Most expect the Canadian dollar to trade in the 1.33-1.36 range against the U.S. dollar, a level that points to stability. The worst of 2024’s volatility seems to be behind it, but the loonie’s next moves will still depend on how the global story unfolds.

A Currency That Refused to Stay Down

The past two years have been anything but smooth for the CAD, but this move has proven one thing: resilience runs deep. After weathering policy shifts, tariff scares, and market pessimism, the loonie has managed to rebuild its footing in 2025. Its recovery hasn’t been dramatic. It was grounded in solid fundamentals and steady confidence. For traders, that’s a reminder that sentiment can turn just as fast as it fades.

Continue Reading

Features

Statistical Volatility Models in Slot Mechanics: Extended Expert Analysis Informed by Pistolo Casino

Analytical reviews of slot volatility often reference ecosystems similar to those found at Pistolo casino. Within the gambling research community, volatility is understood not as a marketing attribute, but as a technical framework that shapes how digital slot systems distribute outcomes over time. Expanding on earlier overviews, this extended analysis examines the deeper mathematical logic behind volatility classes, as well as their implications for long-term behavioural modelling.

Volatility as a Mathematical Architecture

Slot volatility is commonly divided into high-, medium-, and low-risk models, yet this simplified categorisation hides the structural complexity underneath. Developers configure several layers of probability weighting, which include:

  1. Event Density Layers – Each slot contains multiple weighted segments representing minor, medium, and rare outcomes.
  2. Return Frequency Curves – These curves dictate how the distribution of payouts drifts around the long-term equilibrium.
  3. Reel Weighting Matrices – Symbol appearance probability is shaped not only by frequency but also by conditional dependencies within each reel strip.

Research drawing on examples parallel to Pistolo casino shows that modern slots increasingly use modular probability blocks, making outcome variance more flexible and more precisely adjustable during development.

Behavioural Interpretation of Volatility Signals

From a player analytics perspective, volatility modelling helps identify how different user groups respond to varying risk structures. High-volatility mechanics frequently attract users who seek extended tension cycles and the possibility of occasional strong outcomes, while low-volatility systems are associated with steady-state gameplay and longer average session times.

Analysts also examine “volatility fatigue,” a concept describing the moment when prolonged dry cycles reduce engagement. By tracking these patterns, researchers can map how changes in event spacing affect decision-making, bet sizing, and persistence.

Simulation Methodology for Evaluating Volatility Accuracy

Technical audits rely heavily on large-scale simulations—sometimes exceeding fifty million iterations — to verify that the modelled volatility aligns with theoretical expectations. Key indicators include:

  • Hit rate stability across long sequences
  • Distribution symmetry, ensuring outcomes do not drift into accidental bias
  • Deviation corridors, which define acceptable ranges for short-term anomalies
  • Return-to-player convergence, showing whether the model equilibrates over time

When discrepancies appear, developers may adjust symbol weighting, probability intervals, or feature-trigger frequency until the system reaches internal balance consistent with regulatory and mathematical demands.

Volatility’s Role in Market Diversity

Volatility modelling helps explain the substantial variety between slot titles. Instead of relying solely on themes or graphics, modern game design differentiates titles by emotional rhythm and progression speed. This technical approach has led to more deliberate pacing structures where reward cycles, anticipation building, and event clustering are calibrated through mathematical systems rather than subjective intuition.

Conclusion

Volatility remains one of the most precise and data-driven components of slot design. Its study provides insight into outcome diversity, behavioural responses, and long-term predictability. Research frameworks referencing platforms comparable to Pistolo Casino highlight how volatility models shape modern gambling environments through measurable probability engineering and large-scale simulation.

Continue Reading

Features

Bias in America’s Colleges Produced Modern Anti-Zionism

By HENRY SREBRNIK Jon A. Shields, Yuval Avnur, and Stephanie Muravchik, professors at the Claremont Colleges in California, have just completed a study, “Closed Classrooms? An Analysis of College Syllabi on Contentious Issues,” published July 10, 2025, that draws on a database of millions of college syllabi to explore how professors teach three of the most contentious topics: racial bias in the criminal justice system, the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the ethics of abortion. 

They used a unique database of college syllabi collected by the “Open Syllabus Project” (OSP). The OSP has amassed millions of syllabi from around the world primarily by scraping them from university websites. They date as far back as 2008, though a majority are from the last ten years. Most of the data comes from universities in the United States, Britain, Canada, and Australia.

“Since all these issues sharply divide scholars, we wanted to know whether students were expected to read a wide or narrow range of perspectives on them. We wondered how well professors are introducing students to the moral and political controversies that divide intellectuals and roil our democracy. Not well, as it turns out.” 

In the summary of their findings, “Professors Need to Diversify What They Teach,” they report that they found a total lack of ideological diversity. “Across each issue we found that the academic norm is to shield students from some of our most important disagreements.”

Teaching of Israel and Palestine is, perhaps no surprise, totally lopsided, and we’ve seen the consequences since October 7, 2023. Staunchly anti-Zionist texts — those that question the moral legitimacy of the Israeli state — are commonly assigned. Rashid Khalidi, the retired professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia, is the most popular author on this topic in the database. A Palestinian American and adviser to the Palestine Liberation Organization delegation in the 1990s, Khalidi places the blame on Israel for failing to resolve the conflict and sees the country’s existence as a consequence of  settler-colonialism.

The problem is not the teaching of Khalidi itself, as some on the American right might insist. To the contrary, it is important for students to encounter voices like Khalidi’s. The problem is who he is usually taught with. Generally, Khalidi is taught with other critics of Israel, such as Charles D. Smith, Ilan Pappé, and James Gelvin.

Not only is Khalidi’s work rarely assigned alongside prominent critics, those critics seem to hardly get taught at all. They include Israel: A Concise History of a Nation Reborn by Daniel Gordis, a professor at Shalem College in Israel. Gordis’s book appears only 22 times in the syllabus database. Another example is the work of Efraim Karsh, a prominent historian. His widely cited classic, Fabricating Israeli History, appears just 24 times.

For most students, though, any exposure to the conflict begins and ends with Edward Said’s Orientalism, first published in 1978. Said is the intellectual godfather of so many of today’s scholars of the Middle East, thanks in no small part to this classic book. Said was a Palestinian-American academic, literary critic, and political activist from a prominent Christian family. Educated at Princeton and Harvard Universities, two of America’s most distinguished centres of higher learning, he taught at Columbia University, another Ivy League institution, until his death in 2003.

Said was no crude antisemite. His writings were aimed at academics and intellectuals and he has, in my opinion, done more damage to the Jewish people than anyone else after 1945. Said claimed to be the first scholar to “culturally and politically” identify “wholeheartedly with the Arabs.” But he was also a political activist for the Palestinian movement opposing the existence of Israel.

Said warned PLO leader Yasir Arafat that if the conflict remained local, they’d lose. Join “the universal political struggle against colonialism and imperialism,” with the Palestinians as freedom fighters paralleling “Vietnam, Algeria, Cuba, and black Africa,” he advised.

(In this he was not the first, though. Fayez Sayegh, a Syrian intellectual who departed for the United States and completed his Ph.D. at Georgetown University in 1949, preceded him. Also an academic, his 1965 monograph Zionist Colonialism in Palestine stands as the first intellectual articulation of Zionism as a settler colonial enterprise, arguing that the analytical frameworks applied to Vietnam and Algeria apply equally to Palestine. The treatise situated Zionism within European colonialism while presenting it as uniquely pernicious.)

Israel’s post–Six-Day War territorial expansion helped Said frame Israel as “an occupying power” in a 1979 manifesto titled The Question of Palestine. Alleging racial discrimination as the key motive was a means of transforming the “Zionist settler in Palestine” into an analogue of “white settlers in Africa.” That charge gained traction in a post-Sixties universe of civil rights, anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism, and Western self-abnegation. The work sought to turn the tables on the prevailing American understanding of Israel: It is not, in fact, an outpost of liberal democracy or refuge from antisemitism, but an instrument of white supremacy.

Orientalism popularized a framework through which today’s advocates on behalf of Palestinians understand their struggle against the state of Israel and the West generally. Said casts the Western world as the villains of history and peoples of the East as its noble victims.

The essence of the book, Said concluded, is the “ineradicable distinction between Western superiority and Oriental inferiority.” It falsely affirms “an absolute and systematic difference between the West, which is rational, developed, humane, superior, and the Orient, which is aberrant, undeveloped, inferior.”

So it was impossible to take Zionism seriously as one among the myriad nationalist movements that emerged in the nineteenth century, much less to see Israel itself as a land of refugees or the ancestral homeland of Jews. And, indeed, Said’s Orientalism singles out Israel for special rebuke, suggesting that the state could be justified only if one accepted the xenophobic ideology at the core of Western civilization. Israel’s defenders, particularly those who lament the lack of democracy in the Middle East and fault Arabs for their militancy, represent the “culmination of Orientalism.” 

Said is widely acknowledged as the godfather of the emerging field of postcolonial studies, and his views have profoundly shaped the study of the Middle East. Said also inspired – and in some cases directly mentored – a generation of anti-Zionist U.S. scholars whose dominance in the academic study of the area is unquestionable today.

The political left that emerged trained itself to read every conflict as the aftershock of colonialism. The ideological narrative of oppression and resistance allowed even the jihadist to become a post-colonial rebel.

It’s hard to overstate the academic influence of Orientalism.  The authors note that “As of this writing, it has been cited nearly 90 thousand times. It is also the 16th most assigned text in the OSP database, appearing in nearly 16 thousand courses. Orientalism is among the most popular books assigned in the United States, showing up in nearly 4,000 courses in the syllabus database. Said’s work appears in 6,732 courses in U.S. colleges and universities.

But although it was a major source of controversy, both then and now, it is rarely assigned with any of the critics Said sparred with, like Bernard Lewis, Ian Buruma, or Samuel Huntington. Instead, it’s most often taught with books by fellow luminaries of the postmodern left, such as Frantz Fanon and Judith Butler.

All these ideas are now embedded into diversity, equity, and inclusion identity politics, and “humanitarian” outrage over supposed Israeli “settler-colonialism,” “genocide,” and “apartheid.” 

The ground for the massive pro-Hamas college and university encampments, and attacks on Jewish students, was prepared decades ago. The long march of progressives through American institutions over the past decades has taken its toll on society.

Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News