Irshad Manji and the dishonesty of UConn’s Metanoia

On Feb. 25, The University of Connecticut will be hosting Professor and Moral Courage Network Founder Irshad Manji as part of this semester’s Metanoia programming. Manji already gave one keynote presentation on Feb. 5 and will be following it up with multiple workshops and training events, all centered on maintaining moral courage within controversial discussion, according to UConn Today. This is the second half of this year’s Metanoia which began on April 17, 2024, entitled “pathways to productive civil discourse.”  

Metanoia at UConn is a special event which convenes during times of great social discord to give the university community, “an opportunity to pause, consider and debate issues facing the community, the nation or the world,” according to UConn Today. The first was held in 1970, following a period of heightened racial tensions on campus, with many more since then covering issues such as the Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal and the attacks on Sept. 11. These are significant processes brought forth when the administration of this school sees a need to specifically address a salient political issue on campus. 

Although the exact reason why this Metanoia was called has not been addressed, the fact that the current conference was made in April 2024 and its strong focus on civil discourse allows people to infer it relates to the Israel and Palestine conflict.  

Now, with that being said, it’s worth going back to the speaker chosen to facilitate such discourse on the subject. Irshad Manji stepped into prominence with the publication of her first book “The Trouble with Islam,” wherein she advocates for the reform of Islam. Since then, she has become one of the most prominent critics of the current state of the religion and “Arab culture” more broadly. She has faced criticism from some scholars for “disproportionately targeting Muslims” and becoming a tool for “anybody who wants to smear Islam and bash Muslims.” This is already a poor start for a speaker chosen to lead discussions within the context of the current conflict, as it is not hard to see how her beliefs on Islam could alienate many of the Muslims on this campus who this Metanoia would hope to bring into civil discourse.  

Additionally, she has published specifically pro-Israel positions throughout the past decades. For example, in 2006 Manji published an op-ed in the New York Times entitled, “How I Learned to Love the Wall,” where she actively defended the West Bank Wall and blamed Palestinians for its creation. She furthers the pretext of defense that was used to justify the wall’s creation, while ignoring how it is both illegal under international law and was originally created with the explicit intention of stealing large swaths of land from Palestinians. She also frequently defended the state of Israel in “The Trouble with Islam” and specifically its treatment of Palestinians.  

The point here is not to disparage one traveling professor’s views but rather question why Manji was chosen to lead a content neutral discussion for this Metanoia when she herself is so clearly biased. If this is the university’s way of dealing of Israel and Palestine, then does their invitation of a speaker clearly on one side of things not reveal something about their position as well? It rings hollow that Metanoia is meant to bring people together when the idealistic language presenting it is underwritten by a complete lack of actual impartiality. The point of criticism is a disappointing lack of oversight into how this event was created, given the current political context on campus and the weight it holds to so many. If UConn wants to address how these events affect its community, it should choose programming that better reflects a desire to have an unbiased discussion. Having Manji, who has a strong public record of supporting one side of the Israeli/Palestine conflict, attempt to advocate for neutral debate over that same issue exposes the bias problem at the heart of this Metanoia.