Dobler, our semi-regular guest, joins us to discuss the growing university campus protests in the Global North against the genocide in Gaza, and compare action and inaction that is happening in Canadian higher education spaces. We discuss the performative nature of Canadian academia’s dedication to decolonization and how their settler colonialism truth and reconciliation promises reveal themselves to be disingenuous as administration clamps down on students trying to bring anti-oppression theory into action.

We continue our discussion of the 2022 decision made in arbitration between York University and the York University Faculty Association regarding making justice public and connect administrative tactics of using racial stereotypes to elicit shame and a desire for secrecy (NDA) in the target of discrimination. We also discuss Shai Davidai, a Columbia University business professor, and his request to make public a tirade against student protesting against genocide and, what he states is the “cowardice” of the university principal. Davadai claims he is vulnerable, but do his words and extreme anger suggest otherwise? Are White professors like Davadai given a pass and/or rewarded for their rage, while BIPOC in universities must guard themselves against simply the imagination of being a threat?

The #metoo movement publicly named and exposed individuals who were accused of sexual assault, therefore should individuals accused of racism in academia get the same treatment? In this episode, we discuss the efforts from universities that shield the names and actions of White people accused of racism within these institutions, yet who allow the BIPOC accuser’s name to be sullied through retaliation by the White accused. With victim and perpetrator reversed, Higher Education administration argue that the White victim must be protected from the BIPOC perpetrator often relying on racialized stereotypes. In a 2022 decision made in arbitration between York University and the York University Faculty Association, our own co-founder Aime Avolonto’s case of wrongful termination was deemed to be “public”, thus revealing names of both accusers and witnesses, despite the administration’s attempts to maintain secrecy. We discuss the ruling, along with why the decision is an important first step in curtailing systemic racism on campus.

In this episode, we continue our conversation about Columbia University and the corporate administration (and faculty) attack on students’ liberties to do what youth are supposed to do in higher education: Think critically. Protesting injustices, freedom of expression, liberties to speak against prevailing norms, questioning authority and other counterculture acts are all hallmarks of the student experience. Unfortunately, academia fostering critical thinking is often falsely promoted by the corporate wing of academia to entice prospective “clients”, but students quickly learn that when they protest accepted discrimination within the university, they are shut down. Protesting the ongoing slaughter of Palestinians and their own university’s complicity has become a taboo, and not even the physical danger endured by protestors by counter-protestors is enough to make academia’s status quo question their own racial biases.

Columbia University Professor and Secretary Hillary Rodham-Clinton, takes the stage to give her unbiassed and neutral analysis of women as targets of sexual violence in war, with the support of her Dean, Keren Yarhi-Milo, retired IDF intelligence officer, and both are SHOCKED to receive pushback from university students questioning their complicity in ongoing violence against the women of Gaza. In this first episode of two, we discuss the example of Columbia University students still bravely pushing back against White Liberalism’s guise of being the beacon of all things good and just, while they actively curb dissent to maintain academia’s status quo.

Recovering from a backlog of recorded episodes (due to technical and health issues) this discussion was recorded the day after International Women’s Day. While White women in Canada, the USA and the rest of the West overwhelm most of the attention, we discuss how BIPOC women’s opinions, research, life experience and issues are overlooked. White women, like Nancy Pelosi, tweet protecting women's reproductive freedom, ignores the massive amount of murdered Palestinian women and those who are giving birth in forced archaic medical conditions. We also discuss British Columbia’s (former) Minister of Higher Education, Selina Robinson, racist statements about Palestine. Christopher Darius also shares his opinion on the pain of childbirth; much to Christine’s approval.

We tackle one of the most frightening, predictable, calculating, and exhausting phenomena facing BIPOC in higher education: White Women’s Tears. White women’s tears as a weapon have been an accusation and/or debate in the media and arts for decades, and include fictional accounts, such as the novel and film, A Passage to India, and historical realities, such as the lynching of 14-year-old Emmit Till, who was falsely accused by a 21-year-old White woman of “flirting”. Although the historical power dynamics are no longer so overtly prejudicial, the criticism of White Women’s Tears still exists and now also analyzes the Liberal context along with its existence within White Feminism to dominate anti-racism discourse. Robin Diangelo was by no means the first academic to write about White Women’s Tears, but her analysis has become the most pervasive. In this episode we examine the accuracy of Diangelo’s description, if it accurately describes life in Higher Education, and most importantly, if White people in academia would argue the weaponization of White Women’s Tears to counter real anti-racism change.

Recent US house congressional hearings on “Antisemitism on College Campuses” witnessed three university (Harvard, MIT & University of Pennsylvania) Presidents (all women) respond to accusations on the lack of safety for Jewish Students on campus and hear politician opinions on Pro-Palestinian voices being akin to calls for genocide. Republican, Elise Steffinik, received the greatest amount of media attention for her less than nuanced approach, making statements and accusations, rather than posing questions to the administrators. Proceeding the hearings, Steffinik stated, “one down, two to go”, when the U of Penn president stepped down. Although Harvard’s Dr. Gay received initial support from faculty, the first Black President of Harvard was accused of plagiarism and ultimately stepped down from her position as well. Join us as we discuss what this recent form of McCarthyism means for BIPOC in Higher Education.