Nominations
Une nouvelle doyenne adjointe pour McGill
Éric Martel
2018-11-14 08:30:00
Futurs étudiants, c’est à elle que vous devrez plaire pour entrer à McGill!
C’est donc un retour dans son alma mater pour la juriste qui y a complété deux baccalauréats en droit et en environnement.
« Je ressens beaucoup de fierté en ce moment. Je respecte énormément cette université et suis très heureuse de pouvoir y travailler. »
Chez CN, l’avocate représentait régulièrement des communautés autochtones. C’est un sentiment qu’elle pouvait en faire encore plus pour ceux-ci qui l’a poussé à accepter un poste avec l’Université McGill.
Un intérêt marqué
Lors de ses études à la maîtrise en géographie et environnement à Concordia, Me Syvanen a l'opportunité de travailler étroitement avec une communauté crie située près de la Baie-James.
Cette expérience n’a fait qu’augmenter sa curiosité portée vers les communautés autochtones.
« Pendant mon baccalauréat à McGill, j’ai également suivi un cours sur le terrain à Kahnawake. Je suis tombée en amour avec le droit autochtone. Je voulais pouvoir professionnellement soutenir leur vision et leur offrir des opportunités d’emploi. »
La doyenne adjointe estime qu’à l’Université de McGill, elle aura la chance d’amener plus d’étudiants autochtones dans la faculté de droit.
Pour ce faire, elle planifie accroître la présence de son université dans les communautés autochtones éloignées de Montréal.
« Déménager n’est pas facile pour eux. Ils sont tellement loin des centres urbains… Il faut essayer de leur faire comprendre tout ce que l’on peut leur apporter. »
Qui sélectionnera-t-elle?
Les étudiants en droit peuvent en témoigner : être admis à la faculté de l’Université McGill peut être excessivement difficile.
La nouvelle doyenne adjointe a accepté d’énumérer les qualités qu’elle recherche chez ses futurs étudiants.
« Ils doivent être curieux et ouverts à la diversité. »
À son avis, ces deux qualités permettent aux étudiants de trouver des solutions aux enjeux qu’ils rencontrent, en plus d’être naturellement impliqués dans leur communauté.
Si vous vous préparez à l’entrevue de la faculté de droit de l’Université McGill, gardez ces deux aspects en tête…
7982
Anonyme
il y a 6 ans"La nouvelle doyenne adjointe a accepté d’énumérer les qualités qu’elle recherche chez ses futurs étudiants.
« Ils doivent être curieux et ouverts à la diversité. »"
A part les enfants de l'aristocratie locale, dont la place est assurée à l'entrée et à la sortie, et qui complèteront leur curriculum dans des universités prestigieuses ailleurs dans le monde, on peut assez sûrement prédire le résultat d'un tel filtrage pro-diversitaire chez les reste des candidats.
Alors que l'élite continuera de faire du droit des affaires en peuplant les organes d'arbitrage commerciaux où se décident les litiges se chiffrant en milliards, et fournira les quelques juges qui sont nommés là où ça compte, pour que les grands intérêts ne soient pas bousculés, les autres deviendront des animateurs socio-juridiques (les plus chanceux devenant juge dans des tribunaux de droit de la personne, ou quelque chose d'autre du même genre).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8M2tg2RkIQ
DSG
il y a 6 ansMcGill tries so hard to stand out in niche areas of law that it's no wonder that their graduates are surprisingly unprepared to handle the common stuff upon graduation.
Legal Counsel
il y a 6 ansFirst they start to branch off into "non-traditional" areas of the law. Then, as McGill has done, they publicly identify as promoting "social justice" and "diversity"; code words for the fact that they're indoctrinating students into being these anti-capitalist, anti-establishment idiots who never cease to play identity politics games.
Diversity is not, in and of itself, a "net positive". It is not a net negative either. It is purely neutral. Why should someone be punished or rewarded for their immutable characteristics, like race, gender, ethnicity, etc? Who you are, and what you contribute as an individual matters most, not your group identity. Western Civilization came to this conclusion during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. It is the foundation of our Western societies. Yet, if you say that out loud today, they call you a racist. The irony is so thick, you could cut it with a non-gender binary knife.
Anonyme
il y a 6 ans"Why should someone be punished or rewarded for their immutable characteristics, like race, gender, ethnicity, etc? Who you are, and what you contribute as an individual matters most, not your group identity. Western Civilization came to this conclusion during the Renaissance and Enlightenment."
Yes, happily since that time in Western Civilization discrimination, systemic or otherwise, stopped. Principles are one thing, the application quite another.
DSG
il y a 6 ansSo true, and I must say that the quality of comments has drastically improved lately. This comment is worthy of Jordan Peterson. Nicely done, Sir.
Legal Counsel
il y a 6 ansIndividual discrimination will always exist, to a certain extent. Human beings are inherently tribal. We're afraid of the "other". The majority will always look upon the minority with suspicion, and sometimes even contempt and disdain. This isn't exclusive to Western societies, by the way, even today. The only way to really combat this is by raising your kids to value individuality, and to judge a person based on their individual worth, not whether or not they belong to X or Y identity group "du jour".
As for systemic discrimination, simply calling out "systemic discrimination" at rallies and on message boards doesn't actually help anything. Point to these institutions that are supposedly discriminating systemically against people. Who are these institutions? What are these discriminatory policies? We all want to fight unjustified discrimination, but you need to point to specific examples so that we can all take it down together. But simply calling it out is tantamount to virtue signalling, and attributing to one's self a greater moral authority than they actually deserve.
And thinking that, by admitting pro-diversity students, McGill is doing anything concrete to combat these issues, is foolish at best. It's moral self-aggrandizement and virtue signalling. Admitting undeserving members of vocal identity groups (trans, homosexual, black, latino, First Nations, women, etc) at the expense of the Jews and Asians who should be admitted (like Harvard is doing) doesn't help anyone. It celebrates victimhood, and it's an attack on individuality and competence. Judging a person's "worthiness" based on nothing more than their membership in one or more identity groups is, in and of itself, discriminatory. That's the irony here.
DSG
il y a 6 ansYou mentioned Harvard and I read that despite being a private institution the federal government is trying to force them to reveal their admissions criteria. They're threatening to cut federal funding on account of suspicious practices. McGill has been illusive as far back as I could remember. They claim to be Canada's ivy league and favor foreign students in order to get international recognition, yet like all universities most of their funding comes from the provincial government. If the government were to impose any form of oversight, they would play the anglo victim and say that the French are trying to shut down an English institution. So they play by their own rules and get away with it. That's why so many anglos end up studying law in French universities.
Anonyme
il y a 6 ans"Diversity is not, in and of itself, a "net positive". It is not a net negative either. It is purely neutral. Why should someone be punished or rewarded for their immutable characteristics, like race, gender, ethnicity, etc?"
I don't disagree if you look at it from the POV of the individuals. But you also need to look at representation of the communities and their specific circumstances.
Is it good for Natives, who come from a very different background and perhaps don't have the same opportunities for schooling, to be allotted a few spots in a faculty to ensure that they will have native lawyers? I believe that it is.
Stated otherwise, if, for example, a person distinguishes themselves in a poor academic setting (think extreme poverty regions or very small schools with multiple levels in one grade), perhaps it is appropriate to tweak the admissions criteria for them, especially if it allows a community to be represented and to benefit. Think of blacks in the south 50 years ago, natives from small northern communities.
Otherwise, people who are able to pay huge private school fees to ensure their kids get the best education will simply pass this on to their children while communities get left behind.