| Apartheid or no apartheid, what is going on across Canadian university campuses this week is not a mature and helpful way to promote dialogue and raise awareness, wrote York students Joseph Juda, co-president of the Jewish Law Students' Association (JLSA) at Osgoode Hall Law School, and Ahsan Mirza, president of the Muslim Law Students' Association (MLSA) at York’s Osgoode Hall Law School, in the Toronto Star online edition March 6.
As Osgoode students, we find the events at York to be strange. There is no discussion taking place, but rather two sides screaming at each other. At Osgoode, the JSLA and MLSA may have different agendas and goals but we are all friends with each other. We do not all have to agree with each other's views to respect one another.
When friends discuss politics, even such hot topics as Israel and Palestine, you are more open to listen to the other side and hear the points they are making. No megaphones, no flags, just two groups listening to what the other has to say.
Often, members of our associations have admitted that they have had to rethink certain issues and change certain opinions they held due to some of these open and collegial discussions.
Israeli Apartheid Week only seeks to divide the campus more than it already is. Whereas the JLSA and MLSA are open to working together to try to host events that speak to the students' common goals, such as finding lawyers to come talk to our groups about difficulties maintaining our religious practices in the workforce, or issues of keeping kosher and Halal at law firms, the thought of something like this taking place at York is worrying.
Additionally, Osgoode Hall offers courses in both Jewish and sharia law. One need not be of any specific nationality or religion to attend and it would not be considered strange if anyone took up the offer.
By learning about the history and background of the other, we see that other as a human being rather than part of an ideology, and the debate suddenly becomes more humane. The way that Israel Apartheid Week is conducted only seeks to exploit the differences between us and does not focus on any of the good that we can do together or that can be achieved by having proper discourse in a responsible, academic setting.
Until the activists on both sides of the debate realize this, nothing will be achieved and emotionally charged students will continue to yell and scream at each other while not being heard and achieving nothing.
We are thankful that the law school is a place where we can be comfortable walking around in both kippas and kaffiyehs, and where the two groups can talk and consider each other as friends. |