It's increasingly clear, from the way the protesters in Montreal are acting, how nonsensical their cause for protest is.
Culminating in a march of some 100,000 people, Tuesday marked the 100th day of the student strike in Quebec. Why this is a cause for celebration is beyond me, but one supposes that when there is little else to celebrate (i.e. change), any three-digit number will do.
The original cause for the student strike, a hike in tuition fees, seems almost to have been forgotten in the deluge of violence, vandalism, Bill 78 and the general brouhaha, that has taken over the protests. To reiterate: This "hike" in tuition costs is an increase of $254 every year, over the course of seven years.
That's less than an extra dollar a day -- 69.5 cents to be exact, which comes out to be less than five dollars a week. In college student terms, less than the price of a pint at the bar.
So in order to save themselves that quasi-pint, protesters have vandalized windows, thrown molotov cocktails and destroyed cars.
Suddenly, it becomes so much clearer how petty of a matter this is. And there is little to debate here. Sixty-nine cents a day is a paltry amount. It is something anyone can afford.
What has happened in Montreal is what often happens to couples when they fight: pretty soon the argument ceases to be about the actual argument, and the parties start fighting about the fight.
But whatever happens in Quebec happens in Quebec; it is beyond our control here in Ontario. What is alarming however, is that, as of this Victoria Day weekend, Ontario students have begun to petition to bring the movement to their province. And all in the name of that often-used, deflated word "solidarity."
This would be disastrous.
Solidarity is not always good, nor is it a substitute for actual action (something which the left, as noted by David Frum, seems incapable of initiating). "Solidarity" is a feel-good word, an ideological substitute for an actual ideology.
Why in God's name would Ontario students even consider standing alongside their Quebecois brethren?
Already, the Canadian Federation of Students is viewed as a quasi-communist shadow government as far as students are concerned, much like its spawn, the University of Toronto Students' Union.
If Ontario students wish to have their tuition prices lowered -- a desire more justified here than in Quebec where our costs are much higher -- then they should stay away from the student strike across the border. There is no sense in standing alongside those who are in the wrong, and indeed, the protesters in Quebec are in the wrong.
Initially, the protests were given the benefit of the doubt. Not all agreed with the rather petty demands of the students, but nonetheless, their cause was deemed justified, or at the very least, understandable.
But that benefit of the doubt has flown out the window quicker than the molotov cocktails coming in.
It does not matter how honest or noble the initial intention, once the cocktails start to fly and windows are being shattered, it becomes very difficult to support the message, especially when it is one that would do little more than force students to shell out 69 cents a day.
In this country, protests are shaky from the very beginning. The reason being, of course, that this is not some oppressed Eastern European state, or a blood-soaked African nation. This is Canada, and while there are those who are quick to criticize Harper's government at every turn, the fact remains that we actually have it pretty good here.
So when there are students who adopt these extremist actions, actions which are in fact only justified in countries where freedom of speech is non-existent, they lose their credibility, their support from actual policy-changers, and their steam.
Should this extremism come to Ontario -- one which is sponsored by a litany of members of the University of Toronto's Marxist student organization, Fightback -- those hopeful of reducing tuition fees to "the levels in Quebec, as a step towards abolishing all tuition fees in the country" will not only have to contend with even more glaring failures, both in terms of ideology and action, but will further impede hardworking students from completing the degrees they pay so dearly for.
Follow Daniel Alexandre Portoraro on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dportoraro
Dave Kaufman: I'm Not a Quebec Protester, But Police Assaulted Me Anyway
Supriya Dwivedi: Charest's Death by Bill 78
David Frum: Quebec Students Should Be Protesting the Elderly
Andrew D'Amours: Quebecers: Wrong on Tuition, But Not Laissez-Faire
Why are student fees lower in Québec? They'd be higher if it weren't for past protests.
Fantastic that news organizations have incorporated blogs into their mainstream reporting now. It means they can wipe their hands of journalistic ethics and get cheap-o citizen journalism. You get what you pay for.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2010/nov/10/demo-2010-student-protests-live
&
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/nov/12/tuc-joins-student-protests
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-austerity-program.htm
http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/2166
http://www.rense.com/general33/sheeple.htm
&
http://www.naturalnews.com/032415_sheeple_quiz.html
Millions of workers went on strike in Italy, Greece and France to oppose proposed "austerity plans" which would cut social spending and impact wages.
New studies of European and OECD countries in the British Medical Journal found that cuts to social welfare programs result in increased mortality rates, in some cases more so than cuts made directly to health care spending.
Spain – May 27, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Geg_6Xoy04s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEdUaMESkec
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLQZriGkxa8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ74LLJhsGs
Georgia – May 26, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciPRfNPcmbQ
Greece – May 30, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVY-IF3hA_A
Peru – May 27, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmMQ_0hWEQs
Mongolia – May 29, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9FZ5cZA6YQ
Morocco – May 29, 2011
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2011/05/morocco-protesters-clash-police-king-elite-makhzen.html
Sri Lanka – May 29, 2011
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/30/us-srilanka-unions-idUSTRE74T4MV20110530
France – May 29, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQEXQqCWBbk
India – May 30, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAaXaT4uHEU
These would be on top of the protests we've heard about in recent months in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, England, Bahrain, Albania, Oman, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Ireland, Bangladesh, Portugal, the States, and so on...
If fuel and food prices go up over the summer, I really wonder if there will be more, especially in the less developed countries.
Portoraro’s insistence that the kind of protest movement we have seen is only justifiable in dictatorships is disturbing. It is a view that reduces democracy to occasional elections and a charter of rights and freedoms. In other words, it reduces it to two of the tools used in a democracy but forgoes the spirit of democracy itself. It’s saying, “now that you have a right to protest guaranteed in the Charter, well, you lost the moral right to protest because that’s only justifiable where there is no constitutional right to protest.”
Portoraro’s statements also negate the history of this particular strike. The rapid escalation – the conflict started over a year ago when the hike was first announced – that we have witnessed over the past few months is to be blamed almost entirely on the government’s unwillingness to compromise, or even talk about it, and willingness to use batons and tear gas, and now a repressive law that reduces civil liberties and muzzles potential popular mobilization against its own decisions. Students didn’t start by breaking windows for the sake of it. There was a process of escalation, and Portoraro’s stance negates the existence of this process, either because he has only recently started paying attention and is ignorant of what came before, or because he willingly wants to turn facts upside-down, as in “Ignorance is Strength”… ok, you get where I’m going with this.
Signed, a sociologist.
“There is no sense in standing alongside those who are in the wrong, and indeed, the protesters in Quebec are in the wrong.” Ok, well, then, students in Ontario would also be in the wrong should they ask for lower tuition… although Portrataro just said they might be more justified. Which one is it, then? This clearly demonstrates that Portoraro’s beef with Quebec students isn’t about the pros and cons of striking as a tactic or about the usefulness of solidarity actions but about the wrongness of asking for low tuition, whether in Quebec or Ontario.
Thirdly, the statement about not being in Eastern Europe or ‘blood-soaked’ African country is either ludicrous or loudicrously condescending. So what if it “we have it pretty good here”? We do, but why should that prevent us from striving for social justice, for equity, for equal opportunity? I thought the idea in life, civilization, everything, was to strive for things to be better than they were. This is often a favourite tactic of the right, but how would the right react if we were to raise taxes and then tell them, “Hey, you’re not in North Korea, so don’t complain”?
“If Ontario students wish to have their tuition prices lowered -- a desire more justified here than in Quebec where our costs are much higher --” This makes a strange circular contradiction : it is more justifiable to ask that Ontario-level tuition be lowered towards the Quebec-level, but once it’s there it is unjustifiable to oppose it’s increase back towards its previous level. The snake is eating its tail it seems. Either that or Portoraro has a specific tuition price in mind, arbitrarily located somewhere in between Quebec and Ontario levels, that would be the only justifiable one.
“--then they should stay away from the student strike across the border .” This statement is contrary to all logic. If, as the first half of Portoraro’s sentence posits, Ontario students wish to have their tuition prices lowered, it only makes sense that they use Quebec as an example for it is student strikes like this one that have kept tuition lower than in the rest of Canada. Either Portoraro doesn’t know this about Quebec history or he’s deliberately claiming that War is Peace and Ignorance is Strength.
Not everyone is lucky enough to find a part-time job that is flexible enough to allow them to continue their schoolwork unhindered, while many have to take unpaid internships in order to increase their chances of getting a job once they do graduate, but for the sake of argument, let's assume the best of worlds. A student would thus make $6800 in a summer and $5600 the rest of the year for a total of $12,400. So the $1778 hike is equivalent to over 14% of their income. Now I wonder what these right-wing types would say if someone proposed an increase of 14% on taxes for the rich or for corporations....
Rhetoric aside, $1778 is even more if you consider that after paying rent ($400/month), utilities ($100/month), and food ($300/month), which adds up to $9600 in this estimation, our lucky student would have only $2800 left over for the year. That amount is already insufficient to pay current tuition rates (if we include the mandatory administrative fees that all universities charge), let alone if it were increased to around $5000 by 2019. In this rapid calculation, that is equivalent to 180% of disposable income.
Now that sounds like a lot more than 69c/day. And that’s for the lucky students.
Then there’s the very lucky ones: those whose parents pay or provide rent and food; those who, like Portoraro it seems, spend their disposable income on leisurely afternoon pints.
Furthermore, this amount may not seem huge for someone making $80,000 per year, but it is gigantic for students. I don't know how Portoraro, who claims to be a student, earns his money, but students typically have 15-17 weeks to work full-time and the remainder of the year can only work part time, usually at minimum wage jobs.