Montreal, November 23, 2002

Subject: Local policies at McGill reflect the world

An open letter to McGill BoG members

I hope that after reading the enclosed correspondence with Mr. B.Shapiro and the others (see http://spop.addr.com) you will share some of my anxieties regarding the future of McGill University.

It seems for example that our current principal, Mr. Shapiro, is now unable to act rationally and represent our university. This may be the time to find some politically correct rationale for his immediate retirement from public life before he can do more harm or find time to revise his legacy at McGill. The eventual debate will also send the right signals to our new principal, who begins her term in 2003, and to the public about the kind of care that should be taken in governing our institution.

The BoG of McGill University reflects the mechanisms and people controlling today’s world on the macro and micro levels. According to your (BoG) unwritten internal code, the most important feature justifying protection in your circle is the ability to manipulate and control people without their direct awareness of it. Principles and morals play only a minor role in this.

Mr. Shapiro’s “crime” may be that he has lost his ability to act covertly. This is evidenced by his inclination to manipulate people with talk of anonymous letters and to use this to openly support a policy of censorship. As if this were not enough, Mr. Shapiro tries to use fear to silence criticism: For example, he told some McGill executives about my exposé of the sort of underhanded manipulation just referred to; and he openly supported Vice-Principal Yalovski and The Gazette editor in abusing and bullying me. These mistakes in handling typical issues are probably enough to earn him a disciplinary note and send a warning to some McGill notables who follow his arrogant model too closely.

Mr. Shapiro’s principalship saw the slow incubation of what might be called the New Nomenclature. This refers to a network of people who use their controlled media (e.g. The Gazette and our internal Reporter) to establish their own monopoly of key social positions. McGill now has almost a cult, devoting its love to “A true leader” with “intelligence, wisdom, insight”, who “has provided the base from which we will continue to develop in the years ahead”, using “the sharpness of his intelligence and wit, his uncompromising insistence on principled action, and his uncanny intuition”, to become "a superb mentor to his own band of philosophers" and what he "gave this University is inestimable" etc. I could go on. These are not important quotations from Cuba, Iraq or North Korea but good ole down-home McGill propaganda written on an exclusive sixteen-page brochure, which appeared on November 20, 2002. It was written by eight of McGill’s most senior administrators including the Provost and Chancellor for the seminar organized to honor Mr. Shapiro, who was in attendance. I hope he was blushing.

They even had an English lord there, his trip all paid, to add some class to the circus.

On the macro side, Mr. Shapiro is now being encouraged, along with the former premier, Mr. Lucien Bouchard, to oversee big money flowing into Montreal. Mr. Shapiro is a well-known supporter of McGill privatization, an attempt to appropriate one of the world’s leading universities for the elite -- to educate the offspring of the New Nomenclature. This marks a dangerous polarization of society. (N.B. According to a recent poll published on April 22, 2002 by the Canadian Press, "70 per cent of Canadians believe that our political systems are corrupt.") He is also an obvious advocate of those dark forces that are trying to drain the government health budget as much as possible by promoting a totally un-transparent and super-expensive Super-hospital. This policy, carried out with marginal public consultation, is only helping to create stronger pressure for health privatization in the near future, for the benefit of the emerging elite. Can we expect more transparency? He publicly proclaimed we could, when he spoke in October this year from Mr. Tremblay’s city office, in the guise of the city’s supervisor of about 2-3 billions of dollars in new city investments.

It is difficult to comment briefly on the whole complexity behind new policies introduced recently into McGill. Thus I would like to propose the new term PALESTINIZATION for the vocabulary of our modern, globalized world. It would better reflect the many secret social manipulations that are bound, sooner or later, to explode in our faces. Your highly respected BoG is the perfect platform for launching this new term. Few will need an elaborate explanation of it, given world events. The disrespect shown towards the lowest-ranking workers at McGill by senior administrators, with the encouragement of Mr. Shapiro’s letters, perfectly reflects the treatment of the poorest people by the most influential. At the same time, there is clear pressure from the local forces below Mr. Shapiro to keep everything secret and hidden from public opinion.

In our University, which reflects today's world, respect is reserved only for those with money and networked social positions.

Each day we have more people who want to impose their power to harm others without trial and with disdain for basic rights. "Palestinization" implies a deadly momentum, the logical conclusion of narrow-minded policies and arrogance.

In the case before us, Mr. Shapiro’s policies would have devastating repercussions on education and social assistance for the most needy in the future. Such policies are being formulated by “visionaries”, who fail to see that the poor are also in need of education and health services.

Mr. Shapiro's arrogance towards the lowest-ranking workers does not play in his favour. There is an obvious deflection away from the pertinent issues in the last, arrogant letter I received from him.

I am sure many people in the BoG understand my concerns and will act according to their conscience. I would like to be able to count on your help not only in solving the problems presented, but also in creating a platform to introduce some deeper changes. Your written response is welcomed.

Regards,

S. Poplawski (M.M.M. Department at McGill)

Special thanks to: Mrs. I. Godefroy (APO), Mr. J. Gruzleski (Dean), Mrs. J. Leake (HR), Mrs.M. Haldane (The Reporter), Mr.R.Pound (Chancelor), Mr. B. Shapiro (Principal), Mr. L.Vinet (Provost), Mrs. K. Williams (URO), Mrs. Wildshire (HR) Mr. M.Yalowski (Vice-Principal) for their provision of proofs that there does exist a higher category of people who do not have to respect the law and the rights of others at McGill. I hope to cooperate with them further in a forthcoming presentation of deeper reflections.

ONLY BY WORKING TOGETHER CAN WE PROMOTE MCGILL AROUND THE WORLD!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -

Montreal, November 25, 2002 ANEX

Dear Friends,

I am very grateful for one MUNACA member's valuable remarks about my last open letter to BoG.  It seems that I owe you a more detailed explanation of my intentions.

We are all focused on the union negotiations about our salaries and there are two ways to success: One is with a strong team who can reach a balanced deal, but I am very doubtful about it. (Hence my comparison to the Vichy government during WWII, which was portrayed as saving the nation.)

The other approach is to expose the real situation (saying clearly with whom we’re really dealing).

We must understand that those with unrestrained power, brought to their position by our passivity, are arrogant, greedy and disdainful of those below. They create a court around them as monarchs and nobody can negotiate as a respected partner. At McGill we already have the court instead of an upright administration, and a new principal won’t change much.  The same team, with Mrs. J. Leake (who lured someone into negotiations and later rudely ignored a partner) or Mr. J.Sztuke (who refused to recognize seniority for research staff but, after losing a case in court, “forgot” to adjust the verdict for others), is going to negotiate our salaries, and there are many more difficult problems in the future. We really need a trustworthy team upstairs. 

Actually, I do not like this "work" as it is very dirty and my religious principals encourage me to focus on less forcible solutions. But in the meantime I think we do have to be tough in exposing the issues, while humbly remembering that we might behave similarly if we were in "their" positions.

Salary negotiations are very important for us now but let’s also “negotiate” for a higher lever of spiritual maturity, integrity and internal balance among our beloved leaders. It is a good long-term investment!

Yours truly,

Yours truly,

S.Poplawski (M.M.M. Department)