U.S.

First-year course at �鶹��Ƶ explores U.S. history through the lens of Hamilton

Christopher.Sorensen — Thu, 13 Feb 2020 21:46:15 +0000

First-year course at �鶹��Ƶ explores U.S. history through the lens of Hamilton

Christopher.Sorensen Thu, 02/13/2020 - 16:46

Cutline

The hit musical Hamilton is introducing audiences to early American history in a unique way, but a �鶹��Ƶ course focused on the phenomenon reminds students to view pop culture through a critical lens – even if they're big fans (photo by Joan Marcus)

Alexa Zulak

Topic

Our Community

Faculty of Arts & Science

History

U.S.

Undergraduate Students

University College

Victoria College

With 11 Tony Awards and a Pulitzer Prize for Drama, the smash hit musical Hamilton is a juggernaut that’s introducing early American history to new audiences in a unique way – and historians at the University of Toronto are taking note.

Shira Lurie (left), a University College post-doctoral researcher in the department of history in the Faculty of Arts & Science, is exploring early American history through the lens of Hamilton in her new course: Hamilton: Musical and History.

“The class gives students the opportunity to discuss the musical and also think about early American history, issues of historical representation in popular culture and the benefits and challenges of adapting history for the stage,” says Lurie.

Offered as a first-year foundations seminar, Lurie’s course puts students in a small class setting – usually capped at 30 students – where they can meet fellow first-years, have more one-on-one time with professors and gain seminar experience early in their academic careers.

“Everyone in the class loves Hamilton, but that’s pretty much the only thing the students have in common,” says Lurie. “They’re from different disciplines and the diversity of perspectives makes for vibrant class discussions.”

Lurie says the show’s extreme popularity has led to students coming to class with specific questions about the era and the cast of characters portrayed in the show.

“I think the show has definitely increased curiosity about early American history, especially among Canadian students who may not have been familiar with this period before the show became a hit,” says Lurie. “But a major part of my job is also to fill in all of the history that the show leaves out.”

For Lurie, there’s at least one significant gap.

“I find it troubling that you can leave the show and not know that George Washington was a slaveholder,” says Lurie. “In fact, I believe the entire place of slavery in the show – or lack thereof – is a major flaw.

“One of the things we discuss in the class is what it means to have people of colour portraying slaveholders – is this an empowering way to reclaim history, or is it an erasure of the Black past, the horrors of the institution and the central place of slavery in the founding of the United States?”

The course, Hamilton: Musical and History, is a first-year foundations seminar that's capped at about 30 students to allow for more interaction with professors and a seminar-style experience (photo by Diana Tyszko)

Lurie says she hopes her students come away from the course with a more critical perception of how pop culture represents history.

“Part of being a critical thinker is being able to criticize the things we love. Some students have been hesitant to think critically about Hamilton and I’m hoping that the course helps them realize that the best art is worthy of scrutiny,” says Lurie.

Katherine Jung, a first-year life sciences student and member of Victoria College, says she was interested in the course because she loves Hamilton, but had never studied American history or world history before.

“I was surprised to learn Alexander Hamilton was anti-immigration, especially in his later years when he was brutally vocal about it,” says Jung. “It’s shocking since the musical has a pro-immigration message and is seen as an immigrant success story with very strong ‘work hard and achieve the American dream’ undertones.”

It’s a sentiment shared by classmate Phyllis Scully, a first-year student and member of University College, who says she was only aware of America’s founding era through the Hamilton cast recording.

Scully says she’s been enjoying the opportunity to dig deeper into the founding era.

“I love the collaborative aspect of this course,” says Scully. “Everyone is very insightful and doing the readings for this course is actually fun.”

As for Lurie, she says combining her interest in early American history and theatre has been a treat.

“I was a musical theatre fan long before I was a historian of early America, so the chance to chat with students for two hours a week about both of my passions is an absolute thrill,” she says.

Martin Luther King, 50 years after his assassination: George Elliott Clarke on how to carry on the movement

ullahnor — Wed, 04 Apr 2018 17:45:13 +0000

Martin Luther King, 50 years after his assassination: George Elliott Clarke on how to carry on the movement

ullahnor Wed, 04/04/2018 - 13:45

Cutline

American civil rights leader Martin Luther King addresses crowds in 1963 during the March On Washington at the Lincoln Memorial, where he gave his "I have a dream" speech (photo by Central Press/Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

Global Lens

Donald Trump

George Elliott Clarke

Global

Race

U.S.

Fifty years after the assassination of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., George Elliott Clarke, a professor in the University of Toronto's department of English and Canada's former parliamentary poet laureate, reflects on the civil rights leader's legacy.

He says that even as Americans and Canadians today consider King's “I have a dream speech,” we need to embrace the message behind the words and launch another mass movement for change.

“You need to have a grassroots movement of the type that King inspired, a mass movement that would bring together Black Lives Matter, #MeToo, folks opposed to wanton gun violence,” said Clarke (pictured right).

“That would be the real legacy of Dr. King – to have that kind of mass movement sparked and active right now.”

What is Rev. Martin Luther King's legacy? Where are we today with race relations?

As we look at 50 years, half a century since the assassination of Dr. King, I think that just as we often celebrate the “I Have a Dream speech,” it’s really important to focus on his entire legacy.

It was a legacy rooted in the struggle for liberation and also involving concepts that he borrowed from Mahatma Gandhi, in terms of Mr. Gandhi’s successful drive to achieve independence for India and simultaneously Pakistan when those two nations were born out of the beginning-of-the-end of British imperialism.

It is very significant that Dr. King adopted the strategy of non-violent mass resistance and civil disobedience from Mahatma Gandhi in order to encourage millions of African-Americans, especially those in the south of the United States, to struggle for their basic human rights and their civil liberties. Because of that, he was able to lead a successful revolution. He was able to move masses of African-Americans from a state of near peonage, from a state of being violently oppressed via police and other instruments of state power into positions of equality, greater power, dignity and decency.

King’s movement also succeeded in getting the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965. He made it possible for more African-Americans to aspire to equality for opportunity, to be able to apply for jobs in whatever field they thought they were qualified, and progress, ascend, move into management, become professionals and become owners of various enterprises. I don’t think it’s possible to understate the magnificence of that achievement. He made it possible for African-Americans to elect governors and senators, and representatives in Congress who reflected their heritage, race, or were respectful of their needs and desires as voters, and in that way made it possible for African-Americans to feel truly a part of the American republic.

His movement was revolutionary, and he did liberate millions of people from peonage, slavery-like conditions, from experiences of inhumane treatment, attacks on their dignity making it possible for them to dream of rising as high as their talent would allow them to, including becoming eventually president of the United States. In all of history, not many people get the right to call themselves liberators.

Like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King is one of the very few who can talk about liberating people. It is one thing to become the leader of the country, to be a prime minister, president or king or dictator for that matter. It is another thing to move millions of people from conditions of pseudo-enslavement to the possibility of living decent lives with the opportunity of economic advancement and even attaining social prestige. King achieved all that. It cannot be understated. He is a true hero for anyone interested in liberating people from conditions of poverty, illiteracy and oppression.

At the same time, at the point of his death he was organizing what became known as “Resurrection City.” The radical idea was that poor people, black, brown, white, yellow from across the U.S. would descend upon Congress and physically occupy the monuments, the buildings in order to impress upon legislators that they needed to have resources redirected from the Vietnam War to uplift millions of Americans from positions of poverty to middle class status. Some scholars believe that it was because of King’s radical agenda in the spring of 1968 that he was eventually assassinated. There are still questions about how James Earl Ray received the money and weapons to carry out the assassination and the connivance perhaps of various branches or a branch of the U.S. government that permitted or encouraged the assassination to take place.

I do think it is important to remember that King did not die simply as a liberal speaker of liberal nostrum of equality and dignity and humanity, but he died as a champion of freedom and equality of poor people. He was simply a Christian humanist who really tried to put those principles into play in a society that viewed itself as being about Judeo-Christian values and humanitarian values. At the time he was struck down by an assassin’s bullet, he was challenging that and calling people to task for their hypocrisy.

Martin Luther KIng (third from left) and other civil right leaders during the March on Washington on Aug. 28, 1963 (photo by AFP/Getty Images)

Have we realized King's dream of racial equity?

King realized some success in terms of opening up the American political process to a more African-American representation, which meant that we finally had a chance to put a lot more Black people in Congress, have a lot more Black people become senators and governors, and even president. He also made it possible for more Black Americans to become middle class, to become professionals, to build businesses. But to a certain extent, the agenda of equality was also short-circuited by the apparent success of the civil rights movement.

Because folks could see there was visible change, it was possible for people to say, “OK, we have accomplished King’s dream. We’ve gotten there. We’ve made it to the promised land.” At the same time that that’s true, there is persistent inequality, underemployment, unemployment, as well as racist behaviours, especially on the part of police forces versus Black youths and Black men in particular. It might sound incendiary, but if you’re a Black American – especially Black male, especially young Black male – and you do not feel that you have the right to move unhindered and unhampered through a city street, drive down a particular road, buy a house wherever you might be able to afford, or aspire to ascend in whatever institution or organization in which you find employment, and if you feel like your life is in constant jeopardy because someone might feel that you are not where you are supposed to be and they can get away with shooting you – whether it’s an armed citizen or a police officer – then you’re still living in a police state.

This is where the teachings of Malcolm X continue to haunt the dream of Martin Luther King Jr.

While it’s extremely important to have that dream, and work for that dream, I think it’s also important to maintain a degree of Malcolm X realism, that some people who have power and privilege don’t want to give it up and are quite prepared to continue to oppress others “by any means necessary” in order to maintain their own hegemony, their own high status within society. For that reason because of the entrenchment of notions of white supremacy, including the idea that Black people should not be permitted to occupy high office, earn high employment or enjoy high status outside of stereotypical entertainment and sports, it has left people feeling they are still in an unequal position. Keeping in mind that the election of someone who seems to be as president of the United States, quite OK with notions of white nationalism or white supremacy or simple racism against African-Americans, Latinos, Muslims – 50 years after King’s assassination this should also suggest that the dream of real equality and real liberty for all has not yet been achieved.

I would say this is a terrific moment now as we focus on this anniversary, especially for Americans of all backgrounds, to think about rekindling a mass movement that would bring together anti-sexist, anti-homophobic, pro-environmentalist, the anti-gun lobby, progressives and everyday citizens in the United States to turf out all the politicians who represent a backward, regressive, inhumane, environmentally destructive agenda. Vote them all out. Clean house and do it while chanting, “Remember Dr. King, Remember Dr. King.” In order to do that, you need to have a mass movement. You need to have a grassroots movement of the type that King inspired, a mass movement that would bring together Black Lives Matter, #MeToo, the folks opposed to wanton gun violence.

That would be the real legacy of Dr. King to have that kind of mass movement sparked and active right now. If anybody really want to get rid of what people consider regressive backward Republicans, they need to start educating the electorate now.

How should we embrace his message now, especially with the rise of white supremacists?

Look, the whole planet went through 500 years of white European control from the beginning of the 16th century to the beginning of the 21st century. That European Caucasian control of the entire planet, economically, politically and militarily, it had to include notions of white supremacy. Even though many nations are now free of obvious European control and are able to enjoy more self-determination, it doesn’t mean that the underlying ideology of white supremacy has disappeared. It’s still here. We see it in terms of carding here in Toronto where police officers want to stop somebody who happens to be brown or Black, and ask them to explain why they are where they are. This is because of the white supremacist view that Black people especially shouldn’t be able to enjoy freedom of mobility. Even though slavery is long over, it doesn’t mean the attitude that Black people should not be able to move freely has disappeared.

Same with stopping people for driving the wrong kind of car or living in the wrong kind of neighbourhood. The idea behind those notions, right here in Toronto, right here in Canada, is that Black and brown people should be poor. They should have to always justify their possessions, whether it’s an expensive car, expensive house or expensive neighbourhood by essentially demonstrating that we’ve been permitted to have these items because we’re understood to be OK, because otherwise we should be somebody’s employee, somebody’s peon, we should be somebody’s “slave.” Those attitudes, even though they’re not often voiced, still persist in our society. Canada, like the United States, was a slave-holding society. Just because we got rid of slavery, or the British Empire did in 1834, doesn’t mean that the attitudes that supported slavery disappeared. They’re still there. Just like the attitudes that oppressed Indigenous people. Residential schools may be long gone – that does not mean that the attitudes that allowed for residential schools have disappeared. Even though there may be physical advancement, progress, people are not walking around in chains anymore, people aren’t forced at gunpoint to do this or that, it doesn’t mean the underlying attitudes have disappeared.

That’s the struggle that exists now. If we really want to have real liberty and real equality, we have to overthrow all these notions that justify white privilege and white power.

I value being in Canada. I value the multicultural nature of our society, and I think we are going to become more and more multicultural, more and more hybrid, a Métis society. I think that is our future, a beautiful future that we need to nurture and protect, especially since the country adjacent to us seems to be going rapidly in the wrong direction.

NAFTA showdown is about Trump needing to win: �鶹��Ƶ experts

ullahnor — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:12:57 +0000

NAFTA showdown is about Trump needing to win: �鶹��Ƶ experts

ullahnor Wed, 10/18/2017 - 14:12

Cutline

Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland speaks during a press conference Tuesday at the conclusion of the fourth round of negotiations for a new North American Free Trade Agreement (photo by Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

Global Lens

Donald Trump

Faculty of Arts & Science

Humanities

Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy

Rotman School of Management

U.S.

NAFTA talks are now expected to go past this year's deadline, with Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland accusing the United States Tuesday of deliberately trying to undermine the agreement, and calling U.S. proposals “troubling.”

Her counterpart U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer rebutted that his trade partners, Canada and Mexico, have refused to budge on proposals that would help meet President Donald Trump's objectives of addressing the “huge” trade deficit and returning manufacturing jobs to the U.S.

The University of Toronto's Robert Bothwell and Will Mitchell say they're not surprised by the recent turn of events.

"The U.S. negotiators, pushed by President Trump, are not looking for all-party wins, but are simply playing to what President Trump thinks of as his base, who respond to the idea of protecting U.S. jobs, even though a breakdown in NAFTA will cost many jobs,” said Mitchell, a professor at the Rotman School of Management who holds the Anthony S. Fell Chair in New Technologies and Commercialization.

Bothwell, a professor of Canadian history in the Faculty of Arts & Science and the Munk School of Global Affairs, said psychologically Trump needs “to be seen to win, and nothing short of public and humiliating surrender on the opponent’s part will do.”

Why do you believe the talks are faltering?

Robert Bothwell: They haven’t broken down absolutely. However, very large differences have opened up. That happened in the 1987 Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement too, though the personalities, motivation and issues are rather different.

Will Mitchell: The U.S. negotiators, pushed by President Trump, are not looking for all-party wins but are simply playing to what President Trump thinks of as his base, who respond to the idea of protecting U.S. jobs, even though a breakdown in NAFTA will cost many jobs.

Are you surprised?

Robert Bothwell: No, unfortunately. The U.S. administration and some of its key members are protectionist by deep conviction. This was clear in U.S. trade representative's statement yesterday – he simply believes things that are either illogical or not factual, or both. So that makes it difficult to negotiate. A further clue was a bizarre article in the Washington Post by the U.S. secretary of commerce some weeks ago that contained assertions that were untrue. There is every indication that Trump accepts that rationale – it keeps coming back no matter how much he is presented with arguments against, or contrary proofs. Psychologically, he requires to be seen to win, and nothing short of public and humiliating surrender on the opponent’s part will do.

Will Mitchell: No. This was a very visible plank in President Trump’s campaign.

What is it about the U.S. proposals (auto and dairy industries, or others) that have been particularly upsetting to Canadian negotiators? Can you talk about what the proposals would have meant for Canadian industries and economy?

Robert Bothwell: The auto sector is still an important economic interest, though I’m afraid less important than in 1993 or 1987. Canada like the U.S. has seen factories and production drain away – though in some cases to U.S. jurisdictions with low wages and no unions, but mostly to Mexico. Nevertheless, it is in our interest to maintain as much of the current structure and trade flows as we can.

As for dairy, the social motivation is maintaining the fabled family farm. That is not in itself an invalid or unworthy objective. It’s also electorally important in south central Quebec, and in Ontario and elsewhere, wherever they make cheese etc. One solution – offered rather flippantly – is to suggest to the Americans that more of their farmers would benefit if they too adopted supply management. What is irritating about the U.S. demand is that they subsidize their farmers too – but they don’t want those subsidies on the table.

Will Mitchell: This would mainly be a reduction in market size for many industries, as well as frictions in more challenging export-import regulations that would interfere for trade for all three markets.

What now? Without a deal like NAFTA what happens to Canada’s trade with America?

Robert Bothwell: We would revert to the World Trade Organization (WTO) standard, which has quite low tariffs. However, given the American penchant for unilateralism, that may not be a sufficient defence. The record since January shows great volatility, which put more plainly suggests that Trump’s America is not a reliable partner. We can expect opportunistic and capricious unilateralism, and though we care very much about stability and think in terms of mutual benefit, the U.S. administration does not. Incidentally, the signs are very clear that they would prefer bilaterals with two weak partners, each easier to bully, than a trilateral. They may instead end up with two somewhat disadvantaged and embittered neighbours, with consequent security implications, especially in the case of Mexico. A dumber policy, a more self-destructive policy, is hard to imagine.

Will Mitchell: Hopefully, things will get back on track in the next round of negotiations. When even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is arguing for continuation of NAFTA, there is some chance that the first rounds will go down as posturing, with more fruitful discussions in the next stages. If not, then Canadian businesses have even stronger incentives to seek opportunities in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere. Canadian firms – with support from Canadian trade policy – need to become more global, learning how to compete beyond the northern part of North America. Some have been highly successful (for example, Thomson Reuters, ScotiaBank, Manulife). Others need to be more aggressive in recognizing that Buffalo is not global.

Designing for hurricanes and floods: �鶹��Ƶ students draft urban planning solutions for a Florida county

ullahnor — Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:34:12 +0000

Designing for hurricanes and floods: �鶹��Ƶ students draft urban planning solutions for a Florida county

ullahnor Thu, 09/14/2017 - 12:34

Cutline

Children walk through flooded streets Immokalee, Fla., after Hurricane Irma. A �鶹��Ƶ class is looking at urban planning solutions for flooding and storm surges in a Florida county, just north of Miami (photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Author legacy

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

Global Lens

John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture

Subheadline

The class is made up of third-year master's students at the John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

Tackling an issue straight from the headlines, a group of 19 graduate students from the University of Toronto are looking at flooding in a Florida county and suggesting ways to address rising water levels, hurricanes and development in flood-prone areas.

It’s timely given that Hurricane Irma hit Florida this past weekend.

Even before this year’s monster-sized hurricane, landscape architect, planner and urban designer Fadi Masoud had been working with Broward County alongside the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), on large-scale environmental issues, and the role of planning policies and tools.

This semester, the assistant professor at the John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design is charging his graduate-level class to come up with design and zoning solutions for the county, which sits just north of Miami.

Assistant Professors Fadi Masoud (left) and Elise Shelley (right) teach a class of third-year master's students at the John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design (photo by Dale Duncan)

On the first day of class this week, he moved through a power-point presentation filled with graphs of changing water levels, views of the region’s complex stormwater management system of levees and canals, and aerial shots that clearly show how Florida’s key east coast cities face flooding problems with the Atlantic Ocean on one side and the swampy Everglades on the other.

He told the class that a report last month showed sea levels rising six times faster than average. The problem has been exacerbated with rising sea levels leading to saltwater entering into canals and destroying vegetation. It’s a region he described as being trapped between the political rhetoric of climate change skepticism, developers not responsibly addressing rising water levels and operating with a “laissez-faire, Wild West mentality,” and local officials who are desperate for solutions.

“Luckily enough this didn’t pan out to be the disaster that it was supposed to be,” Masoud said of Irma. “But the chances of this happening soon are not all that low. None of this is resilient or adaptable. This is going to flood. If one of those gates, pumps, canals fails, this place is just awash.”

And with that he painted a pretty dire picture of the problem at hand. But, he added, there’s a silver lining.

“Working with a city government, such as Broward County’s Environmental Protection and Growth Management Department, that thinks really progressively and is hungry for help from a design perspective has been really rewarding,” he told the class. “For example, some of the student work we proposed last year, at least three or four project ideas have already been adopted as implementation strategies. You being in a design school and in an academic setting, you have the luxury of thinking big and thinking ambitiously.”

Syrian doctor affected by Trump travel ban tells his story

ullahnor — Fri, 18 Aug 2017 19:52:56 +0000

Syrian doctor affected by Trump travel ban tells his story

ullahnor Fri, 08/18/2017 - 15:52

Cutline

Syrian doctor Khaled Almilaji greets his wife at Pearson Airport following U.S. President Donald Trump's travel ban for Muslims. He was refused re-entry to the U.S. and offered a scholarship to �鶹��Ƶ (photo by Carlos Osorio/Toronto Star/Getty Images)

Topic

Dalla Lana School of Public Health

Toronto Life features Syrian doctor Khaled Almilaji's story in his own words.

The Brown University graduate student found himself stranded overseas by the Trump administration’s travel ban. With his wife pregnant and unable to return to the U.S., the Syrian physician was offered a scholarship to �鶹��Ƶ for the executive master of health informatics program.

The couple were reunited in Toronto in June. As a recognized humanitarian who has worked closely with the World Health Organization and United Nations to co-ordinate the delivery of vaccines to 1.4 million Syrian children and provide health care in Syria during the six-year-long civil war, Dr. Almilaji's tuition is being covered by the university. Dr. Michael Dan and Dr. Amira Dan and other private donors have come forward to support Dr. Almilaji while he is in Toronto.

Dr. Almilaji, who was also featured on CBC's Metro Morning, will be studying at the Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health.

“I know the travel ban is all about politics, not security,” Dr. Almilaji says in the article. “It’s a game. But the people on Trump’s list have been suffering for many years, and the ban only increases that suffering.”

Read the article

Bannon out: �鶹��Ƶ political scientist reflects on chief strategist's exit

geoff.vendeville — Fri, 18 Aug 2017 18:21:05 +0000

Bannon out: �鶹��Ƶ political scientist reflects on chief strategist's exit

geoff.vendeville Fri, 08/18/2017 - 14:21

Cutline

Steve Bannon, U.S. President Donald Trump's controversial chief strategist, at the White House earlier this summer (photo by Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Geoffrey Vendeville

Author legacy

Geoffrey Vendeville

Topic

Subheadline

Trump 'lacking a way to herd the cats in the legislative process, and Bannon doesn't contribute to that one iota'

Steve Bannon, the Trump administration strategist and former editor of conservative website Breitbart, left his post on Friday, according to multiple reports. His is the latest in a string of departures from the White House, including former chief of staff Reince Priebus and communications director Anthony Scaramucci.

Bannon, known for being a white nationalist, is said to have pushed Trump toward his hardline approach on immigration and trade. Instead of distancing himself from these views with Bannon's exit, Trump may be preparing to “double down” on them, says �鶹��Ƶ political scientist Ryan Hurl (left).

The assistant professor at �鶹��Ƶ Scarborough explains what led to Bannon's depature and speculates on how it will affect the administration.

Steve Bannon was rumoured to be on the outs for a while. What was the straw the broke the camel's back?

That's a little difficult to say. One possibility was his rather unusual interview in The American Prospect, a left-leaning American publication. Bannon had a conversation with the editor Robert Kuttner, talking about a number of sensitive subjects including military strategy in relation to North Korea – not really the kind of thing you want to be discussing off the top of your head in an open interview.

He may have been talking to the press in an unthought-out way, or it may have been completely thought out. It's hard to know. It's almost as if Bannon was searching for the perfect straw to break the camel's back.

What did Bannon bring to the White House in terms of strategy and influence?

If you were President Trump, you would ask yourself: "What does Bannon bring to the table, given the kind of issues I'm facing now that I'm actually president?" The answer is, not very much.

What Trump is pretty sorely lacking at this point is a way to herd the cats in the legislative process, and Bannon doesn't contribute to that one iota.

Was his departure related to what happened in Charlottesville?

Is this in some way a response to [Trump's] bungling response to the Charlottesville incident, and the need to remove the taint of association with white nationalists? That could perhaps be part of it. I think Bannon disavows extreme right-wing nationalism. I think he'd say himself that he's not someone like Richard Spencer, who's drawing on a weird European Carl Schmitt and Martin Heidegger version of nationalism.

Nevertheless, there can be some kind of overlap [between Bannon and Spencer]. And it's not crazy of course that the Trump administration has been tainted by that association.

How will Bannon's absence change the policy direction of the Trump administration?

At this point, I don't think it's about policy direction per se. Of course with this president, who knows? In terms of any kind of policy direction set during the campaign, it's always a difficult question of how much is purely strategic, how much is off the cuff and how much is a long-term strategy as opposed to an electoral strategy.

I suppose it's a sign that Trump wants to back away from some of the unconventional commitments that he made during the campaign season. That is, unconventional vis-a-vis the mainstream Republican Party as represented by, say, Mitt Romney and John McCain.

“Perhaps getting rid of Bannon allows him, ironically, to pursue Bannon-like policies.”

Whether this politically makes sense for Trump, that's very much unclear.

Politically speaking, there's no reason for Trump to back away from some of the main positions that Bannon would have been associated with, which is to say immigration reform of some kind, immigration restriction, a more hard-headed perspective on questions of trade and a much more limited, less interventionist, quasi-isolationist foreign policy.

Those are all winning issues politically speaking for Trump. I don't see reasons why that would have changed. The problem was the association with the alt-right. Perhaps getting rid of Bannon allows him, ironically, to pursue Bannon-like policies.

The alternate position is that this is Trump becoming a Mitt Romney, John McCain-style Republican and that he's going to go in that direction. I don't really see a huge political upside to that for Trump. It's too late in the day for that.

What I would predict is that getting rid of Bannon is a prelude to doubling down on some of those policy commitments. What he perhaps realized is that Bannon doesn't help him achieve that. Bannon doesn't know anything about Washington or how the legislative process works.

There have been reports of infighting followed by high-profile departures lately from the White House. Will Bannon's exit steady the ship?

That's a very difficult question. It doesn't take a PhD in political science to see that Trump responds to some issues in an emotional, knee-jerk way. It is possible that he might have come to some realization after this week that presidential rhetoric and presidential demeanour matters. There's been a slow erosion of even his supporters, let alone people who weren't initially supporting him. He has to change the tone, find a way to work with Congress and reconnect with the broader public in some way. This could be the first step in that direction. Certainly, it's the only way for Trump to have a successful administration.

A constitutional crisis if Trump chooses to pardon himself: �鶹��Ƶ law professor

ullahnor — Mon, 24 Jul 2017 19:46:28 +0000

A constitutional crisis if Trump chooses to pardon himself: �鶹��Ƶ law professor

ullahnor Mon, 07/24/2017 - 15:46

Cutline

U.S. President Donald Trump has suggested pardons, including for himself, over probes into Russia's role in last year's election (photo by Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Author legacy

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

When U.S. President Donald Trump asserted his “complete power to pardon” on Twitter last week, speculation erupted over whether he planned to pardon relatives, aides or possibly even himself.

Professor David Schneiderman of the Faculty of Law says that while the president does have the power to pardon aides and relatives, the ability to pardon himself is up for debate.

“There is no precedent – indeed, it would likely lead to constitutional crisis – for a president to pardon himself,” says Schneiderman, who is also associate professor of political science in the Faculty of Arts & Science.

Below Schneiderman speaks to �鶹��Ƶ News about the constitutional law behind what is already becoming a highly contentious issue.

How broad is the president’s power to pardon?

The president has the constitutional power to "grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” The president cannot forestall impeachment proceedings nor can he issue pardons for violation of state law. Otherwise, the power is expansive and seemingly unlimited.

Under the U.S. constitution, can he pardon relatives and aides close to the investigation? Can he pardon himself?

The president can pardon aides and relatives. The interesting and unresolved constitutional question is whether the president can pardon himself. Constitutional opinion is divided. There is no limitation mentioned in the constitutional text other than “Cases of Impeachment.” If only impeachment is mentioned, can he pardon his own criminal conduct? The better view is that the U.S. Constitution is structured so that no one can be a judge in his or her own cause. This is a power, then, exclusively about pardoning others.

Do you know if there’s a precedent for this? Has any U.S. president ever been in a similar position and considered pardoning close aides or relatives?

There is not a great deal of precedent. The most notorious example of a president wielding the power to absolve a political ally is President Gerald Ford issuing a pardon to his former superior, President Richard Nixon.

Another example is George W. Bush pardoning former defence secretary Caspar Weinberger over the Iran-Contra affair. There is no precedent – indeed, it would likely lead to constitutional crisis – for a president to pardon himself.

International applicants increase for Canadian universities, but research funding is limited

ullahnor — Mon, 17 Jul 2017 13:45:51 +0000

International applicants increase for Canadian universities, but research funding is limited

ullahnor Mon, 07/17/2017 - 09:45

Cutline

While more international students applied this year to Canadian institutions like �鶹��Ƶ, many won't be accepted because of limited resources, reports Times Higher Education (photo by Riley Stewart)

Topic

Global Lens

International Students

U.S.

India

After double-digit surges in international applicants to Canadian universities, Times Higher Education reports that campuses may not have enough research funding, space or supervisors to accept many of them.

At the University of Toronto, the number of postgraduate applicants went up 25 per cent, but only about one in 15 of the applicants can be admitted, Professor Ted Sargent, vice-president, international, told THE.

“The thing that limits us is funding for students,” Sargent said. “We could bring so much additional brilliant talent to Toronto and Ontario and Canada if we could get past these funding limitations.

“We’re saying no to a remarkable number of incredibly qualified people. That’s also a good problem to have in the sense that [those who are admitted] are absolutely superlative. They’re coming from the best universities from around the world.”

Read the article in full

Gun violence in the U.S.: �鶹��Ƶ expert helps undergrads understand school shootings, serial killings and gangs

ullahnor — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 19:58:40 +0000

Gun violence in the U.S.: �鶹��Ƶ expert helps undergrads understand school shootings, serial killings and gangs

ullahnor Mon, 06/12/2017 - 15:58

Daviel Lazure Vieira

Author legacy

Daviel Lazure-Vieira

Topic

City & Culture

Guns

Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy

U.S.

One year ago today, the United States witnessed the deadliest mass shooting in its history when 49 people were killed and 58 others wounded inside Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla.

But like the Sandy Hook kindergarten massacre of 2012, the Pulse shooting failed to bring an end to the widespread availability of guns across the U.S.

Jooyoung Lee, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Toronto is teaching a fourth-year undergraduate course this summer on gun violence in the U.S.

“There’s a bit of insularity when we think of cases of gun violence,” Lee explains. “I wanted to show that everybody is affected in some way by gun culture – all communities, even if some are especially more vulnerable yet get the least attention from the public.”

Lee is one of the first two Bissell-Heyd Fellows at �鶹��Ƶ's Munk School’s Centre for the Study of the United States, who are provided with resources to conduct further research in American studies, while giving them a platform to showcase their work with students and the general public. Just a few weeks ago, Lee organized a workshop on gun violence and its impact on urban Black communities in the U.S.

Lee’s interest in gun violence goes back to his time as a graduate student. Back then, he was writing his dissertation, which would become his first book, Blowin’ Up: Rap Dreams in South Central, an ethnographic study of young African American men from South Los Angeles who were trying to make it in the music industry.

Renegotiating NAFTA: �鶹��Ƶ political scientist and economist on what's at stake

ullahnor — Mon, 29 May 2017 20:54:41 +0000

Renegotiating NAFTA: �鶹��Ƶ political scientist and economist on what's at stake

ullahnor Mon, 05/29/2017 - 16:54

Cutline

As Trump fights for a new trade agreement, he has taken aim at various Canadian industries including the dairy sector (photo by JvL via Flickr)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Author legacy

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

Rotman School of Management

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met privately with U.S. President Donald Trump during the G-7 summit this past weekend to discuss, among other issues, bilateral trade.

With Trump beginning the countdown to renegotiate the 23-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement, Canadian industry is nervous. Everything from the auto sector to dairy and softwood lumber could be affected.

But trade economist Dan Trefler says keeping an eye on legal protections for intellectual property will be critical since Canada's economic growth depends on innovation.

“I am most worried about Big Pharma and the new breed of giant technology firms – Google, Amazon and Uber for example – who are trying to sew up access to data... Without equal access to such data, smaller Canadian firms will be at a competitive disadvantage,” he says.

With the Canadian government estimating that trade between Canada and the U.S. is valued at nearly $882 billion, �鶹��Ƶ political scientist Grace Skogstad says Canada needs to make the case for negative impacts to American jobs.

�鶹��Ƶ News spoke with Trefler and Skogstad about renegotiating NAFTA.

Grace Skogstad, professor of political science at �鶹��Ƶ Scarborough:

With Trump launching efforts to renegotiate NAFTA, what Canadian industries will likely be targeted?

If American rhetoric is to be believed, the renegotiation will focus on some industries that are already covered by NAFTA, like the auto sector, and some that are not, like the dairy and supply managed sectors. Any sector where the U.S. believes Canada has an unfair advantage either in gaining access to the U.S. market – autos, softwood lumber – or where Canada puts up barriers to American imports – like the dairy sector – is potentially vulnerable.

How will this affect average Canadians?

Jobs could be lost for Canadians if industries that rely on the American market face new barriers to entry into the U.S. And jobs will be lost in the dairy industry if the sector becomes more open to American dairy products.

How should Canada approach the renegotiations especially with an opponent as volatile as Trump? On what points should we remain firm? Where can we be more flexible?

Congress will need to approve any renegotiated NAFTA, and Congress will be the body that has to deal with Trump's volatility. Canada should, as it is already giving signs of doing, make the economic case for NAFTA, including pointing out negative economic impacts on American jobs of proposed rule changes. Canada will need to mobilize support in American states that would be harmed by changes to existing NAFTA rules. Canada has a lot of good expertise on how to handle trade negotiations. It recently concluded the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the EU, and our trade negotiators are well briefed on American trade priorities as a result of taking part in the TPP negotiations. We should – and they will – remain firm on not making concessions in any industries where we'd lose Canadian jobs – autos, softwood lumber.

We should remain firm on the right to regulate our financial sector/banks. We avoided the 2007-08 US financial crisis because of our much better regulated banking sector. No one goes into a negotiation promising to be flexible, but one potential bargaining chip is water. California is short of it – we're not. I understand that Trump's Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, is a not a fan of free trade but rather believes in managed trade. A managed trade approach is effectively what characterizes softwood lumber exports to the U.S. As long as it is not U.S. alone doing the 'managing,' a managed trade approach may give Canada more latitude to secure concessions for vulnerable sectors.

Will NAFTA actually get completed under a Trump presidency?

It depends how long the Trump presidency lasts – that is, whether he serves out his four-year term. Even so, four years is not a long time for a negotiation.

Dan Trefler, economics professor at the Rotman School of Management:

What could be the effect on Canada’s economy of a renegotiated NAFTA?

Despite all the attention given to dairy and lumber, the fact is that these disputes are minor irritants. Our economic growth, first and foremost, is driven by innovation. Legal protections for intellectual property (IP) can help promote innovation-led growth, so the IP negotiations will be critical. If done correctly, a renegotiated NAFTA will be a boon to Canada.

What should we be wary of when it comes to demands the U.S. will put on us during negotiations?

Here is the kicker. Economists unanimously agree that the U.S. patent system is now so overly protective of IP that the system has become a drag on innovation and growth. Yet, we know from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) that some of the most powerful firms in the U.S. will be lobbying hard to remold Canada’s patent system into the American image. This will stymie Canadian innovation so the Prime Minister’s team must work hard not to give in on this. I know that his team is fully aware of this.

What industries are you most concerned about?

I am most worried about Big Pharma and the new breed of giant technology firms – Google, Amazon and Uber for example – who are trying to sew up access to data. They generate data through biologics, harvesting the web, monitoring our movements etc. Without equal access to such data, smaller Canadian firms will be at a competitive disadvantage. We cannot allow that.

U.S.

First-year course at �鶹��Ƶ explores U.S. history through the lens of Hamilton

Martin Luther King, 50 years after his assassination: George Elliott Clarke on how to carry on the movement

NAFTA showdown is about Trump needing to win: �鶹��Ƶ experts

Designing for hurricanes and floods: �鶹��Ƶ students draft urban planning solutions for a Florida county

Read more about flooding issues in South Florida

Syrian doctor affected by Trump travel ban tells his story

Read more about Dr. Almilaji

Read the article

Bannon out: �鶹��Ƶ political scientist reflects on chief strategist's exit

A constitutional crisis if Trump chooses to pardon himself: �鶹��Ƶ law professor

International applicants increase for Canadian universities, but research funding is limited

Read more about international applicants at �鶹��Ƶ

Read the article in full

Gun violence in the U.S.: �鶹��Ƶ expert helps undergrads understand school shootings, serial killings and gangs

Read more about the book

Read more about Lee's research

Renegotiating NAFTA: �鶹��Ƶ political scientist and economist on what's at stake