Occupons Montréal: Don’t Listen to the Media

He was working at the base of the statue of Queen Victoria when I photographed him. The tools of his trade were a simple black marker & a small sheet of plywood. What he was drawing was a beautiful, if a little terrifying, piece of artwork. This was the moment that my scepticism about Occupons Montréal faded & was replaced with hope – cautious hope, cautious optimism – but hope nonetheless.

The reason I had felt sceptical, the reason I had felt that Occupons Montréal might fade into irrelevance until I saw it for myself, is rooted in my understanding of other occupations worldwide – most notably, Occupy Wall Street, where the message is much clearer than the media is portraying it to be & the protestors’ organizing prowess & sense of community repeatedly seems to win out against the established powers & authorities. Globally, we are seeing a sort of 1968 all over again – a mass protest movement, simultaneously local & international in scope, with issues ranging from ending war, economic justice, student debt, unemployment, animal rights, etc. The momentum of this movement seems implacable & the energy of the people participating in it is contagious when you are around it.

So when I saw, over the weekend, a headline on the Le Devoir website saying that Occupons Montréal was associating itself with a march for Québec independence (the headline has since been removed), I felt my heart sink. The rest of the world was challenging an unfair, unscrupulous & predatory economic system that is pushing governments to austerity & here I was seeing my city’s Occupation rehashing old battles & using old, still-divisive politics to undermine its own message & popular support with nearly half of Québec’s population.

Except it wasn’t, and it isn’t. The Occupation General Assembly’s Minutes don’t mention a word about sovereignty or independence. The Occupation seems to be about changing the system to make it fairer for the people in our society who aren’t at the top of the wealth & power pyramid; the old battles are being brought up in the media, but not in the discussions I heard people having down in Square-Victoria-cum-La-Place-du-Peuple. Some of the ideas being discussed are frivolous, unachievable, blue-sky pushes for revolutionary, total world-system reform, but mostly what’s talked about seems to be about making the movement work, making the occupation durable &, beyond those goals, it seems to be about making the world better for people who need it. Allowing people not just to exist, but to live.

 

So yes, my scepticism faded. It faded because of the message of the Occupation, which is simply “Here are the problems foisted on our society by the wealthy & the powerful at our expense & in our name. Fix them. Now.”; it faded because of the people at the protest, who are living together with a sense of community I have simply never seen in Montreal; it faded because artists are sitting next to enthusiastic political activists, drawing pictures & sculpting stones while someone lectures about inequality and social justice, just because this place has given them the opportunity to express themselves in a way they could not before; it faded because in a city where people will riot because a band can’t play a gig for being held up at the border, there is a village of tents cooperating in an astonishing display of direct, deliberative democracy to change things for the better & not only has it not descended into chaos, but it has grown larger, more organized & more beautiful.

The artist with his plywood canvas sat on the plinth of a statue in a true, 21st Century Agora. If nothing else is accomplished by this movement, the community & the sense of being at the bustling, creative heart of a true democracy will nevertheless stay with me always.

I Was Wrong

Okay, so my prediction could have been a little bit better; the final results can be found here if you haven't gotten a glimpse of them, yet. It's my fault, really, for calling it based on the polls running up to the election; I should have called it based on the fact that the prairies are, by in large, polarized rather than scattered across the political spectrum.

As I drove home, last night, from an evening spent watching the election results come in at my friend's house, I heard commentators on CJAD (a local AM news station located at 800 kilohertz) declare that "the only wasted vote is a vote not used!" Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the function of the Canadian Electoral System knows that such a declaration is naïve in the extreme, the most glaring example of the fallacy of his statement being the polling results for the NDP and the Bloc Québecois versus those same two parties' seat results. With nearly ten percent more votes than the nationalist Bloc, the NDP somehow managed to gather 13 fewer seats.

The fact is that the First-Past-the-Post electoral system is broken, it yields shoddy results at best, and gives a party with less than a majority of the popular vote a carte blanche to do as it pleases at its worst. The fact is that anyone not voting with the majority in their particular riding is wasting their vote, because short of a small stipend paid to their party, the people they voted for can do exactly nothing with that vote.

Canada is not a democracy - as long as we have minority governments, it is close to one, but do not, for even one moment, think that we live in a country which in any way democratic. If we did, the liberals would have two thirds of the seats of the conservatives (and not a small fraction up from half) and the NDP would be a close third, with the BQ trailing far behind and the Greens a little bit behind them.

Oh, and we might have a minority that represented us, for once.

The English Patience Update: Pauline Marois Reaffirms her Wad-ness

Pauline Marois made it known yesterday that she simply would not stand for the "prevailing unilinguism" of Montreal's downtown core. She called for tighter laws and more fascism (forcing more francification of the downtown core, strengthening the loi 101 and - I love this part - pushing for the acceptance of the Québec Identity Act).

There is no prevalence of unilinguism in Montreal. Nearly everyone in this city is bilingual - which is a good thing. I always address the employees of a commercial business in french, out of courtesy and I've spent the last 5 years nearly constantly in the downtown core; I've never once been answered in anything but french. Yes, some people struggle with the language, and it sucks for them, but it's not a problem.

Pauline Marois is a reactionist who's having a groundless fit and is not helping anything. She is a wad and, in the words or a scotsman I once met, a doss cunt.

Status Update: Pauline Marois Still a Wad

You've probably heard about it already, though if I know you, my compatriots, as well as I believe I do then you have yet to read the actual wording of the Quebec Identity Act. This is a hateful piece of legislation which - while the rest of the modern world hurtles towards a more open and accepting society, replete with the freedoms and rights that Mill and his ilk yearned for one hundred and fifty years ago - seeks to turn back the clock of Québec's social development something on the order of two hundred years; minus the catholic church, of course.

It proposes a "Québec Citizenship" in which new applicants cannot "(1) run in municipal, school and legislative elections; (2) participate in the public funding of political parties; [or] (3) petition the National Assembly for the redress of grievances" unless they "(1) has been a Canadian citizen for at least three months; (2) is domiciled in Québec; (3) has effectively resided in Québec for six months, including the three months preceding the date of the person's application; (4) has an appropriate knowledge of the French language; and (5) has an appropriate knowledge of Québec and of the responsibilities and advantages of citizenship." This is essentially an attempt at exclusionism, an attempt to keep not only immigrants but also anglos moving from elsewhere in Canada from having any say in Québec's political process.

Besides the fervent nationalism, redundant ammendments to the Quebec Charter of Rights & the provocateur BS this bill - which is destined to die on the floor of the National Assembly - obviously represents, there are far more insidious motivations at work here than most people understand. This bill is an attempt at pushing further the meter of acceptable legislation in Québec, legislation being set up in order to further isolate - hermeticize - Québec's legal system from the Canadian one which - you no doubt anticipate me here - is another step towards, say it with me, referendum!

That's right, even from the back bench, the PQ is harping after their founding goal which, let's face it, most of us are fed up with hearing. So they don't talk about it out loud, instead they lay the scaffold & the foundation; they attempt to create a seperate and complete social, legal, judicial, diplomatic and political infrastructure within Québec so that it shall be a simple matter of cutting the umbilical when their prophecied national rapture pops back onto the provincial radar and we're once again - for the third time - asked to endorse an unrealistic and unfeasible goal which will, whether it passes or not, decimate our provincial economy for at least a decade thereafter.

Who else is tired of repeating history?

Accommodating Accommodation

The debate is officially in full swing; ignorant bigots debating with religious fundamentalists can actually be spotted on city buses calling each other liars and making outrageous claims as to the nature of the administration of foreign countries they have either never visited or know only from the biased propaganda of their own home countries.

I know, because I had to crank the volume on my CD player (yes, I'm a dangerous anachronism) up to dangerous levels just to tune them out whilst I read a very interesting book by late history writer, poet & novellist Martin Booth. Unfortunately, concerned as I am for my own hearing, I had to tolerate some intrusion into my personal bubble and I did glean one thing from their conversation; Québecois absolutely refuse to accept that the "they'd do it to us so it's okay to do it to them" argument just doesn't hold any water.

There is an undercurrent of bigotry in this province the likes of which we haven't seen in a very long and which every one of them will deny vociferously with the tried and true claim of "I'm not a racist! Some of my best friends are muslims!" Sound familiar? People have been saying that since the civil rights movement gained enough ground to establish its own taboos & stigmas.

It's enough. We've heard enough. Culture is not static and the Québec's insistence that it must be is counter to the nature of the human being as a social animal. Protectionism must end because its continued existence is a threat to peace in our country. It's a threat to decency in our country. It's a threat to civility in our country.

So, as I've asked before, as I've pleaded with my readers & will continue to plead with all Québecois, please, for the love of Mill & Nietzsche & Stirner & Locke & all the glorious intellectuals of our great, western civilization, stop.

Pauline Marois is a Wad

"Il faut briser la perception voulant que le Québec soit bilingue et expliquer aux immigrants que le Québec est une nation francophone qui respecte les droits de la minorité anglophone." -Pauline Marois

More on this when I'm less pissed off.

-Update-

I sent a letter to my MNA, Pierre Curzi. Chances are nothing will happen, but I figured I'd republish it here and hope for the best:

Monsieur Curzi,

Mon nom est Steven Alleyn, je suis un membre de votre compté électorale et je n'ai pas manqué la chance de voter depuis que je suis rendu à l'age légale de voter. Je vous écrit pour vous communiquer mon inquiétude par rapport au propos récents de la dirigeante de votre parti.

Je parle, bien sûr, de sa déclaration alors qu'elle parlait à l'assemblé nationale, au sujet de l'immigration: "Il faut briser la perception voulant que le Québec soit bilingue et expliquer aux immigrants que le Québec est une nation francophone qui respecte les droits de la minorité anglophone."

Elle a raison qu'il y a une perception qui se doît d'être briser, mais ce n'est pas celle là; la perception qui a réussi à s'insinuer au centre du débat nationaliste, celle que les droits de la collectivité prennent précedence sur les droits de l'individu.

L'individu est l'unité de base de la collectivité et on parle ici d'une question de la liberté d'expression. Alors que le droit de l'individu de s'exprimer se trouve brimer, l'habileté de la collectivité de faire pareille est abimé; détruite, complètement. L'immigration n'est pas une question d'assimilation des immigrés à notre société, mais plutôt d'une ouverture de notre société aux bienfaits que les immigrés peuvent nous apporter. Les lois protégeants les individus du danger n'ont pas à être changer; l'abus des femmes et le port d'armes dans les places publiques ne sont pas des questions d'ouverture culturelle: on parle ici seulement d'une ouverture par rapport au droits d'expression et de religion des nouveaux venus ainsi que ceux des Québecois "pure laine."

J'aimerais, s'il l'est possible, que vous puissiez faire parvenir cette lettre à Madame Marois. De ma part, je la republirai sur mon blogue (http://moopthas.blogspot.com/) sous mon nom-de-plume en espérant suciter l'intérêt des citoyens de notre province. Il n'est plus acceptable de brimer la liberté d'expression de nos propre citoyens au nom d'une entité qui ne peut exister sans ces mêmes citoyens.

Merci de votre attention,
Steven Alleyn
Otterburn Park, Québec
Compté de Borduas

The Debate on Accommodation

Welcome to the new racism.

The fact that we even need to have these accommodation hearings is disturbing in the extreme. Religious acceptance isn't what I'm known for, but I don't think that other people's minds is any more my jurisdiction than anyone else's. We have to realize this, collectively, as a society. Ideas in people's heads are important because, as John Stuart Mill said in his trailblazing essay On Liberty, very rarely are the opinions we possess the entirety of the truth; it is through discussion and interaction with people of different mores, values, opinions, ethics and traditions that we continue to approach a more complete, more factual version of reality and truth.

I saw a headline today on a newsstand; rough translation "Is diversity detrimental to society?"

That question is offensive simply for being asked. Diversity is the engine of improvement for a society. The most heinous, totalitarian and immoral societies in history have been homogeneous; united in all their ideas and opinions and mores and values. The more I see this sort of thing pop up, the more I believe that On Liberty should be required reading in ethics & diversity classes in high school and recommended reading in every level of higher education.

These roving hearings are going to reveal one thing; the isolationist sentiment which has dominated Québec politics for nearly forty years has had a detrimental effect on the social and political (sociopolitical?) climate and has left the province (are we still saying nation?) outside of the island of Montreal virtually inhospitable to immigrants; there's a certain spillover effect as the venom from the more isolated regions of the country and the current global climate of xenophobic paranoia (thank you, Osama) gradually infiltrates Québec's multicultural metropolis and poisons the citizens there against immigration. It is ironic that some of the most vocal opponents of integration (reasonable accommodation, I guess) - in my experience, not in any sort of scientific polling - are italians, second only to Francophone proles.

There is no accommodation, accommodation implies an expected standard; we must tolerate all actions and ideas and hold no standard, as long as those actions and ideas affect only those who they belong to and are not detrimental to anyone else. This is not for their good, but for ours; we benefit from the polylogue (dialogue means two interlocutors) of multiculturalism, just as everyone else does. We would be remiss were we to pass up such an opportunity.

Rushing to Get Things Done

Québec's agriculture lobby (farmers' union, whatever) has asked for a grace period (moratorium) in order that they might be able to comply with recent changes to environmental laws without bankrupting themselves in the process. The union represents independent farmers who cannot afford the massive technological, technical and chemical changes that their massive corporate cousins can get away with and, let's face it, their grace period is not an unreasonable one - the government has agreed to it for that reason; the environment has survived some very abusive conditions since the beginning of the industrial revolution (150 - 175 years ago...) and three years to allow some hard-working people to keep their livelihoods is a perfectly acceptable compromise which will not adversely affect the environment very much more than is already the case.

Greenpeace disagrees; they have demanded that the Québec government rescind their moratorium so that a few thousand fish may live while dozens to hundreds of farmers get deeper into debt or go altogether bankrupt, robbing the food supply of some of its power to stay as cornucopian as we're used to here in North America in the process. Their claims that there is no time to allow for any sort of transitional greening of the UPA would be more credible if they weren't in the habit of using scare tactics to force government hands.

It is unfortunate that Canadian libel laws prevent me from saying that Greenpeace is a terrorist organization without any proof. I have to find more roundabout and indirect ways of saying Greenpeace is a terrorist organization. What is true is that Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth advised a Zambian leader not to accept food offered to his country in foreign aid that Zambia desperately needed because they said it would cause allergies in his citizens, essentially they scared him into not taking food that could feed thousands, saving them - at least temporarily - from starvation and death, by saying it was poisonous. They used fear to get a high-level political leader to say something bad about GMOs so that they could claim that capitalism is destroying the world.

The use of fear and sacrifice of innocent lives to achieve a political aim... Wow, I really shouldn't say that Greenpeace is a terrorist organization.
A side note - I'd like to thank 'This Hour has 22 Minutes' for teaching me about how libel laws work.

Lucid Lucien Ludicrousness

The former Québecois Premier, the Honourable Lucien Bouchard, is hellbent on getting his provincial compatriots to put their noses right up to the grindstones - even if that means getting those noses ground off. The premier's position, and the province's current statistics / predicament were perfectly outlined in the Montreal Gazette by Janet Bagnall [Link] and I shan't delve much further into those aspects of the situation. Instead, I wish to examine Mr. Bouchard's motives in suggesting a surge towards economic growth through the abolition of free time.

Essentially, the purpose of economic growth is to increase the material prosperity of the individuals who contribute to the economy. Why? Well in capitalism growth is for growth's sake, but the idea is that increased material prosperity leads to happier, healthier, more content little capitalist citizens.

And therein lies the essential protest, the argument against the call to the grind. What good is it to work every waking minute of every day, increasing wealth and accumulating stuff if the individuals working don't have the time to themselves to enjoy those things? Mr. Bouchard is having a conniption fit because, of the 260 days he would have Québecois work, annually, they take an absolutely terrifying 14.3 days! A terrible 5.5% of the time he wants all of us to reserve for our corporate overlords!

Let's be serious; senseless growth for growth's sake accomplishes nothing. A little bit of leisure, especially for people who're a bit further down the financial food-chain than Mr. Bouchard and his 400$/hour law practice, is something that, in at least some small measure, is absolutely necessary.

Because sometimes a two day weekend just isn't enough to catch your breath.