In a letter issued Tuesday, the school’s principal Aaron Hobbs said the intention “was to foster a message of peace and remembrance, reflecting on the importance of unity and reconciliation,” but that he has since become aware the song “caused significant distress to some members of our school community.”
“For this, I would like to offer my apologies,” he said.
The song title, when translated to English, roughly means “This Is Peace.” Many comments on multiple Youtube videos of the song, speak of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the suffering of Palestinians, though the song itself makes no mention of the conflict in the Middle East.
“The inclusion of a song that could be seen as politically charged was not in line with the values of respect and unity that we strive to uphold at this school,” wrote Hobbs
I don’t know the song but this doesn’t look good.
However, several human rights advocacy groups are now condemning the backlash, calling it anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab.
“Just because the language is Arabic?” asked Jamila Ewais, a researcher with the Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East’s anti-racism program. “What if someone was singing this language, let’s say this song or like a similar song in, I don’t know German or Ukrainian language?”
Exactly.
If you think Remembrance Day isn’t extremely political, I dunno what world you grew up in. It’s time for less glorification of war, fewer children marching in parades dressed as soldiers, and more antifascist political statements.
Sometimes war is necessary and showing respect to the people who have the courage to fight in them isn’t “glorification of war.”
I agree with everything you just said (with some assumptions). What you did not say that was necessary for your comment to be relevant, and isn’t true is: “Glorification of war never happens at Remembrance Day ceremonies in Canada.” It absolutely does.
Can you give me an example of something you consider to be “glorification of war?”
I think it’s an issue of interpretation. If you accept that war is sometimes necessary, and armed forces are required to fight in those wars, the country has to take some steps to encourage people to consider military service. Otherwise we won’t have a military when we need it. Plus, showing pride in the role we have played in major wars is a mechanism for generating national pride, which is something that has been in significant decline (partly due to our open immigration policies). I don’t consider these things “glorification of war.”
You used the word pride several times. We should be teaching shame. What we did was shameful, but necessary. Yes, all those examples you give are things I consider glorification. We could show respect and gratitude without glorification. And especially without specifically targeting children with these ideas and not allowing for important counterpoints. That’s propaganda. It sounds as though you are saying, “There’s glorification, but for reasons I agree with, so it’s okay.”
Shame is a bit strong. One might regret that a peaceful solution wasn’t available or wasn’t explored fully, but one doesn’t need to feel shame that armed conflict occurred.
No, we should not be teaching shame. We should be proud of the role we played in both major wars. We had to do horrific things in those wars because war is horrific, but we absolutely should not be ashamed of taking part.