More racism isn’t the solution for racism

From the Macdonald Laurier Institute

By David L. Thomas for Inside Policy

If Canada decided long ago that it is morally wrong to discriminate based on race, why is it suddenly okay now in BC?

Sometimes our solutions to problems have the feature of exacerbating them and making conditions worse for the very people we intended to help.

The latest candidate is the British Columbia government’s proposed Bill 23, the Anti-Racism Act. The Bill arises from the 2022 Anti-Racism Data Act and the follow-up 2023 Anti-Racism Legislation Questionnaire Summary Report (the Report).

The Bill raises two questions: Does systemic racism really exist? If it does, is the Anti-Racism Act the right solution – or will it make matters worse?

On the first question, let’s draw a clear distinction between allegations of “racism” and “systemic racism.” Racism is about an incident that amounts to discrimination based on someone’s race. Systemic racism suggests not merely the presence of particular incidents of racism, but rather, something baked into the “system” that results in the discrimination of a person or group based on their race.

There are, without question, examples of systemic racism in our history, such as laws that were overtly racist in their nature. For example, we once allowed restrictive covenants in BC on land titles that prohibited property ownership by certain races. We look back on those examples today with disgust. Since those days we have implemented long-standing, honourable anti-discrimination laws that state that no one should be judged by their physical or mental characteristics. We all come into the world with certain attributes that will be with us for life. We concluded a long time ago that it is morally wrong to discriminate against a person based on such attributes.

Interestingly, the Report does not provide any examples of systemic racism. In fact, the Report admits that in its public questionnaire, the highest response was denial that systemic racism exists. The Report acknowledges that there was “a consistent theme” of denial of systemic racism and racial trauma across all demographic groups. The fact that all demographic groups question the existence is raised in another section of the Report: “In the analysis of comments, the ways in which respondents expressed denialism were not noticeably different across ethnic groups.”

Not to be dissuaded by responses that systemic racism doesn’t exist, the Report explains away “denialism” as being the result of the respondents’ anti-diversity, overt racism, implied racism, victimhood, and naïveté. The Report even suggests that denialism is a problem to be dealt with: “Denial of systemic racism was found across ethnicities, suggesting the need for a closer look at foundational drivers of culture, how those persist, and what can dismantle it.”

Notwithstanding the uncertain answer to our first question, the first principle in the Anti-Racism Act broadly asserts: “systemic racism, systemic racism specific to Indigenous peoples and racial inequity are harming individuals and communities in British Columbia and require urgent action.” And yet, nowhere in the Anti-Racism Act is there evidence or examples of systemic racism or an indication of where it can be found.

Nevertheless, let’s give the BC government the benefit of the doubt and conclude that systemic racism does exist. Why do they need to create a whole new bureaucracy with endless reports and action plans? Why don’t they go straight to those laws and policies that result in adverse differential treatment of others based on nothing more than their race and repeal them? The NDP has a majority government. What is it waiting for? The solution should be simple.

Unfortunately, the NDP solution is the Anti-Racism Act, which sets out to do something different. Rather ironically, the law in fact establishes adverse differential treatment of people based on their race. It contains several racially discriminatory clauses and mandates. An obvious example is Section 5, which establishes a Provincial Committee on Anti-Racism. However, to be a member of said Committee, one must “racialized” which, we are left to presume, means you cannot be white. Apparently, the BC government has decided to exclude the insights and opinions of an entire group of people based solely on the colour of their skin.

The Anti-Racism Act will require all public bodies to set race-based recruitment and advancement targets to ensure “racialized individuals” are hired and promoted to senior levels. Under this law, such racial discrimination is not only permissible, but also mandated. It will be lawful to racially discriminate against certain people pursuing their career ambitions, even though, like their “racialized” friends, they did not have any choice to be born with certain immutable characteristics.

All of this is permissible under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms even though Section 15(1) guarantees that everyone has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. However, Section 15(2) goes on to say it’s okay to ignore the previous section if you make an unequal law for the “amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race….” etc.

Lawmakers should always ask themselves the question: this may seem like a good idea today, but will it seem like a good idea 50 years from now? I am sure those lawmakers who permitted racist covenants on land titles thought it was a good idea at the time. Is mandating a new form of reverse-racism today really a good idea in the long run? The racial demographics in Canada are rapidly changing. Some academics foresee white people becoming the minority in Canada as early as 2050. Will the Anti-Racism Act endure as a socially just and morally defensible law when the racial structure of Canadian society is fundamentally different than it is today?

The latest data from Statistics Canada shows that people of South Korean, Japanese, and South Asian descent tend to be the top earners in Canada, broadly speaking. While Latin-American and Black people are often among the lowest earners, white people are mostly in the middle of the pack. If the goal of the Anti-Racism Act is to advance racial equity, why does it contravene its second principle – “actions to … advance racial equity … should be informed by data” – by ignoring the data?

If Canada decided long ago that it is morally wrong to discriminate based on race, why is it suddenly okay now in BC? How is this morally justified? And, who decides which groups are advantaged or disadvantaged under the Charter? Will those determinations change over time, or will legal privileges based on race be owned indefinitely?

In my years as a human rights adjudicator and mediator, I often heard the allegation of “systemic racism,” but no one was able to clearly point to it when asked. I was not expected to ask such questions, but to just accept its existence as a given fact. It would be impolite to ask if there could be other reasons for disparate outcomes. Best to leave it to something invisible, that we all just agree is there, without having to point a finger to a person or an identifiable policy that might counter back. And yet, the Statistics Canada data, showing striking income differences within the visible minority cohort, tells us there is something more going on here.

I doubt the Anti-Racism Act will ever resolve the disparate outcomes that it targets. I fear it will make outcomes worse. The Anti-Racism Act contemplates anti-racism training in public bodies and the Report suggests education in our schools, presumably to educate everyone about Canada’s racist nature and unequal outcomes being based on systemic racism. It’s easy to blame something you cannot see for the outcomes you don’t like. The problem with blaming disparate outcomes solely on this invisible “systemic racism” is that it detracts from and negates other obvious causes of disparity. This is not how racial equity will be advanced. It is not how to teach our children to advance themselves or to create a more just society. It is more likely to have the opposite effect because problems never get solved when the cause is wrongly identified.

Anti-racism activists want to fight discrimination with racism. Ironically, it will only beget more racism in the long run. The more we see acceptable and overt racism in the law the more we will see the normalization of racism. It will make life for certain visible minorities and Indigenous peoples worse by further dividing society. People will naturally segregate to protect themselves when the laws make some more equal than others. Is that the outcome we desire?

The BC government seems determined to abandon principles of equality, to ignore uncomfortable data, and to force a racist and society-dividing solution onto a problem that people, of all backgrounds, don’t even agree exists.

David L. Thomas is a lawyer and mediator in British Columbia and a Senior Fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. From 2014–2021, he served as the Chairperson of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in Ottawa.

Up Next

Don’t celebrate yet: The WHO could still sneak the pandemic treaty through a back door

Don't Miss

The Housing Debacle: How Trudeau Turned Off Millenials

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Congressional investigation into authors of ‘Disinformation Dozen’ intensifies

Bruce Dowbiggin / 3 hours ago

The Pathetic, Predictable Demise of Echo Journalism

Business / 5 hours ago

CBC’s business model is trapped in a very dark place

Business

Canada’s struggle against transnational crime & money laundering

Published on November 10, 2024

Todayville

From the Macdonald-Laurier Institute

By Alex Dalziel and Jamie Ferrill

In this episode of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s Inside Policy Talks podcast, Senior Fellow and National Security Project Lead Alex Dalziel explores the underreported issue of trade-based money laundering (TBML) with Dr. Jamie Ferrill, the head of financial crime studies at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, Australia and a former Canada Border Services Agency officer.

The discussion focuses on how organized crime groups use global trade transactions to disguise illicit proceeds and the threat this presents to the Canada’s trade relationship with the US and beyond.

Definition of TBML: Trade-based money laundering disguises criminal proceeds by moving value through trade transactions instead of transferring physical cash. Criminals (usually) exploit international trade by manipulating trade documents, engaging in phantom shipping, and altering invoices to disguise illicit funds as legitimate commerce, bypassing conventional financial scrutiny. As Dr. Ferrill explains, “we have dirty money that’s been generated through things like drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms trafficking, sex trafficking, and that money needs to be cleaned in one way or another. Trade is one of the ways that that’s done.”

A Pervasive Problem: TBML is challenging to detect due to the vast scale and complexity of global trade, making it an attractive channel for organized crime groups. Although global estimates are imprecise, the Financial Action Task Force and The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) suggests 2-5% of GDP could be tied to money laundering, representing trillions of dollars annually. In Canada, this could mean over $70 billion in potentially laundered funds each year. Despite the scope of TBML, Canada has seen no successful prosecutions for criminal money laundering through trade, highlighting significant gaps in identifying, investigating and prosecuting these complex cases.

Canada’s Vulnerabilities: Along with the sheer volume and complexity of global trade, Canada’s vulnerabilities stem from gaps in anti-money laundering regulation, particularly in high-risk sectors like real estate, luxury goods, and legal services, where criminals exploit weak oversight. Global trade exemplifies the vulnerabilities in oversight, where gaps and limited controls create substantial opportunities for money laundering. A lack of comprehensive export controls also limits Canada’s ability to monitor goods leaving the country effectively. Dr. Ferrill notes that “If we’re seen as this weak link in the process, that’s going to have significant implications on trade partnerships,” underscoring the potential political risks to bilateral trade if Canada fails to address these issues.

International and Private Sector Cooperation: Combating TBML effectively requires strong international cooperation, particularly between Canada and key trade partners like the U.S. The private sector—including freight forwarders, customs brokers, and financial institutions—plays a crucial role in spotting suspicious activities along the supply chain. As Dr. Ferrill emphasizes, “Canada and the U.S. can definitely work together more efficiently and effectively to share and then come up with some better strategies,” pointing to the need for increased collaboration to strengthen oversight and disrupt these transnational crime networks.

Looking to further understand the threat of transnational organized crime to Canada’s borders?

Check out Inside Policy Talks recent podcasts with Christian Leuprecht, Todd Hataley and Alan Bersin.

To learn more about Dr. Ferrill’s research on TBML, check out her chapter in Dirty Money: Financial Crime in Canada.

Immigration

ISIS and its violent Central Asian chapter are threatening Canada and the West with jihad. Hussain Ehsani for Inside Policy

Published on October 27, 2024

Todayville

From the Macdonald Laurier Institute

By Hussain Ehsani

Recent terrorism-related arrests in Canada and the wider West are evidence of the resurgence of ISIS, and especially its ultra-violent Afghanistan wing… recently revealed internal memos by Canada’s Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre (ITAC) highlighted ISIS’s growing role in inspiring domestic terrorism

Ten years ago, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria waged a holy war that threatened to engulf the wider Middle East. At its peak, ISIS conquered nearly 200,000-square-kilometres of Iraq and Syria, inspiring thousands of jihadis to join its crusade against the West.

It took a global coalition of 87 nations and groups, led by the United States and including Canada, to defeat Daesh for good. By December 2017, the damage was decisive: ISIS had lost more than 95 per cent of its territory. The coalition members celebrated the defeat of ISIS and thought it could no longer pose a threat, in the Middle East or anywhere else.

The moment lasted only a short time.

Recent terrorism-related arrests in Canada and the wider West are evidence of the resurgence of ISIS, and especially its ultra-violent Afghanistan wing. At the same time, recently revealed internal memos by Canada’s Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre (ITAC) highlighted ISIS’s growing role in inspiring domestic terrorism, and in particular, potential “lone Wolf” attacks against Canada’s Jewish community.

The memos – issued on June 24 and July 10, 2024, and later obtained by media – were prescient: On July 31, Canadian police detained two alleged ISIS-affiliated men in Richmond Hill, Toronto, apparently based on a tip from French intelligence. In September, the RCMP in Quebec – working with the FBI – arrested a Pakistani national on a student visa for allegedly plotting an attack on a Jewish centre in Brooklyn, New York. These events were especially shocking since it was widely believed that ISIS was confined to Iraq and Syria. But ISIS is clearly influencing a new generation of terrorists around the world. Indeed, it’s suspected that ISIS inspired, and possibly directed, a plot to attack the Jewish community in Ottawa last February. Police arrested two Ottawa youths in relation to the alleged plot and charged them with attempted murder.

American authorities have also thwarted ISIS schemes, resulting in the arrest of ISIS-Tajiki operatives in the US earlier this year. The arrests continue: On October 7, the FBI apprehended an Afghan national and a juvenile co-conspirator for allegedly planning an attack under the Islamic State banner on November 5 – the day of the US presidential elections.

These US arrests point to a new trend: the rise and global reach of the Afghan branch of ISIS, known as the Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP). Some background is necessary. ISIS officially emerged in 2014, following rapid territorial gains in eastern Syria and northwestern Iraq. Rooted in the ideology of Salafi Jihadism, ISIS sought to establish a “Caliphate” governed by a strict interpretation of Sharia law. The group declared its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as Caliph in June 2014 after capturing Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city. This marked the height of ISIS’s power, controlling large swaths of Syria and Iraq.

As ISIS entrenched itself, it began expanding its influence beyond Iraq and Syria. Various affiliates, known as “provinces” or “wilayat,” emerged worldwide. Pledging allegiance to the central ISIS leadership, these groups dedicated themselves to establishing a global Islamic State.

That is one reason for the group’s resilience and recent resurgence. The ISKP was one of the most deadly branches to emerge. Founded in southeastern Afghanistan in 2015 on the border with Pakistan, ISKP immediately sought closer ties with the core ISIS group in Syria and Iraq to gain legitimacy and embolden its fighters and middle-rank commanders to conquer more territory. Those efforts came up short, and ISKP failed in its first years to win ISIS’s support.

Since then, ISKP has redoubled its efforts to impress its ISIS masters – and in many ways, it has succeeded. The group is now among the strongest of ISIS’s adherents.

Turning Point

The collapse of the former Afghan Government on August 15, 2021, was the turning point, when a host of transnational extremist fighters were released from prisons of Afghanistan. Aside from rejoicing about the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan, they prepared to take up their “holy duty” to expand ISIS’s regime. ISKP initially in 2015 drew its fighters from disaffected and wayward elements of the Taliban, Haqqani network, and Pakistani Taliban. The release of an additional cohort of Salafists (Sunni fundamentalists) aided its recruitment.

ISKP moved quickly to expand its influence and operations. The first attack in this new era was devastating: it stormed the Abbey Gate of the Kabul Airport on August 26, 2021, killing 170 Afghan civilians and 13 US soldiers. The US Department of Defense later released a report that Abdul Rahman al-Logari, one of the prisoners released on the day of Kabul collapse, was behind the Abbey Gate attack.

The message was clear – ISKP was on the march.

ISKP on the International Stage

To gain “formal” admission to the ranks of ISIS’s provinces, ISKP would have to show initiative and capability, not just in Afghanistan but in the wider territory of Khorasan: Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and the eastern part of Turkmenistan.

To do so, it had to find new targets. Traditionally, the Hazara community, the most persecuted ethnicity in Afghanistan, was the main target for Islamist groups, along with former Afghan security forces. They remain primary victims. However, ISKP’s range of targets and ability to strike them has grown. It added new targets in Afghanistan, attacking the Russian embassy in Kabul in September 2022, and a Chinese facility in December of the same year. Then it started reaching beyond the borders of Afghanistan: ISKP has carried out terrorist attacks in Central Asia and plotted a number of them in Pakistan.

Targets even farther away have now been hit. In January 2024, ISKP executed a complex attack in Kerman, Iran, at an event commemorating Qasem Sulaimani, the former commander of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Qods Force, killed by US forces in 2020. On March 22, 2024, it hit a concert hall in Moscow – an operation that took the international community by complete surprise.

These operational successes mattered, but ISIS’s core leaders in Syria and Iraq demanded signs of ideological subservience as well. Under the leadership of Sanaullah Ghafari (also known as Dr. Shahab al-Muhajir), ISKP worked hard to prove that its propaganda machine is an engine of ISIS Salafist ideology.

ISKP uses fluency in a variety of languages, including Urdu, Russian, Tajiki, Uzbeki, Turkish, English, and Pashto, to spread its message. It seeks to extend its ideology to other fighters in the region in order to recruit transnational Salafi Jihadists. It has already recruited a vast number of terrorists from the ranks of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan in the north of Afghanistan. ISKP also exploited propaganda and demand from the diaspora of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to plot attacks against Western countries.

The attacks and ideological efforts seem to have worked. ISKP now appears to have become the operational wing of the core ISIS group. After the ISKP attack on Moscow, an ISIS spokesman released a 41-minute audio message praising the attack by “Mujahidin” and called on other “dormant” provinces of the “Caliphate” to rise up and follow ISKP’s example.

The terror spreads

ISIS leader Abu Hafs al-Hashimi al-Quraishi has more work in mind for his prized ISKP group. His priorities include freeing jihadists detained in Syria and attacking targets in Europe and North America.

In Syria, Al-Quraishi has encouraged ISIS terrorists to redouble efforts to attack the Syrian Democratic Forces, a US-backed Kurdish militia in the country’s northeast, and try to break detained comrades out of SDF-run prisons. These facilities host thousands of ISIS fighters, including women and children. Given the success of ISKP’s operations and recruitment, ISIS is likely trying to implement the same tactic of jailbreaks in Kurdish territory in Syria and Iraq, to replenish its ranks.

ISIS spokesmen have also called for all Muslims to attack Christians and Jews in the broader West.

In September 2024, Türkiye’s domestic security agency (MIT) arrested Abuzar Al Shishani, who allegedly was plotting an attack on Santa Maria Italian Church in Istanbul in early January 2025. According to MIT, ISKP recruited him in 2021. The arrests in Canada, the US, and Türkiye are proof that ISKP’s reach is growing.

How can Canada fight back?

Canada and its allies in the West must act now to counter the terrorist threat posed by ISKP and ISIS. Fortunately, the RCMP and other Canadian police forces halted the recent spate of planned domestic terror attacks. However, stringent immigration screening is also crucial to keeping Canada and its allies safe. The Canada Border Services Agency needs to be ready to deal with the ISIS/ISKP threat.

To that end, Public Safety Canada should examine ways to enhance inter-agency targeting and intelligence sharing. A task force consisting of Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada, Canadian Heritage, the Canadian Revenue Agency, and FINTRAC – given their respective roles in immigration processing, countering disinformation and anti-terrorist financing – could help to ensure maximum coordination against the group.

Canada must also guard against the threat ISKP/ISIS poses to religious and minority communities in the country. ISIS’s call to target Jewish and Christian communities presents a special challenge. The Jewish community is particularly vulnerable due to the rampant antisemitism seen at pro-Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran rallies across Canada. But Christian sites, like churches, are also vulnerable. ISKP/ISIS are also likely to target Muslim groups that speak against its violent ideology.

Canada should collaborate with international partners to support communities and groups opposed to ISKP/ISIS. These include the Hazara, Kurdish, and Yazidi communities in Afghanistan and Kurdistan, as well as allies in the Kurdistan Regional government, and the Syrian Democratic Forces. Canada should also support initiatives led by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Cooperation Council countries to strengthen the voice of moderate Islam in the Middle East and Central Asia. Such initiatives require careful diplomacy with allies and a range of partners. That is what Canada will require to counter the evolving threat of ISIS and ISKP.

Hussain Ehsani is a Middle East affairs analyst with expertise on the Islamic State and al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is currently exploring the foreign policy relationship between Saudi Arabia and Canada. In addition to MLI, he also contributes to the Jerusalem Post, BBC Persian, and The Hill.