What's happening in Québec

[sabotabby]

I am a bad, bad blogger.

Like the rest of the English-language media, I've been totally crap about blogging what's been happening in Québec, which is only the most politically significant event in the country right now. I mean, I've been re-linking to a bunch of things on Facebook, but that's not the same as getting the word out about what's been going on there, what those red squares are all about, and the massive violations of civil liberties that are taking place while the rest of Canada has a long nap.

Okay, so it all started with a student strike over tuition rates. Yes, Québec tuition rates are the lowest in the country. Entitled Boomers, forgetting all about their own advantages, say that Québec students are spoiled brats for wanting them to stay that way. I say, if your city has the lowest amount of homicides, does that mean you should raise that rate to be on par with the rest of the country? A post-secondary education is mandatory for any job above minimum wage (and increasingly required for minimum wage jobs), and tuition rates are a barrier that keeps lower-income people out. Period. Québec's low tuition rates have kept the province more egalitarian (that and universal daycare).

So it's not just any strike, but the largest in Canadian history. And it's been violent. By which I mean the cops have been gassing and shooting these kids. Several young people have lost eyes because the cops are aiming for their heads.

If that's not enough to hit all your rage buttons, the government just passed an emergency law, Bill 78, drastically restricting civil liberties, particularly around campuses. It initially defined a "riot" as a gathering of 10 or more people; that was later amended to 50, which still rules out some of your more exciting dance parties. There have been mass arrests and kettling, the same techniques that, two years after the G20 here, have been deemed illegal and immoral.

And yet the movement keeps growing. The students aren't discouraged, the protests keep getting bigger, and are drawing international support. Even—and you're going to love this one—the National Post is coming around:

“Entitlement.” We hear that word associated again and again with student protesters in Quebec. Usually, it’s preceded by the words, “sense of.”

“They think someone owes them a living,” disgruntled critics harrumph. “Wait until they get into the real world.”

Setting aside the fact that this intergenerational hectoring dates back to Socrates, let us ask: Who exactly is making the charge? Quebec has had low tuition rates for a half century. That means almost every living adult in the province, having already been afforded a plum goodie, is now wagging his finger at the first generation that will be asked to pay the tab. So who really is entitled here?

So that's why a lot of us are wearing red squares. This has become much more than disgruntled students not wanting to spend half their careers repaying a massive debt. This is about class, and wealth distribution, and equal opportunities for all.

And it's kind of amazing.

Comments

[tuff-ghost.livejournal.com]

great post, thank you

[hano.livejournal.com]

those kids are a f**king inspiration. As you say, it's about class and what kind of society they want to have. It's been barely reported here in the UK, cos you can bet your last minimum wage slip, our political elites are scared shitless that we might get the same idea. And they're right to, especially as the thirty plus years of neo-liberal consensus is slowly losing its credibility and ability to enforce compliance from the population. I just wish it was happening faster.

[lienne.livejournal.com]

this video gives me feelings i am not awake enough to understand

[symbioid.livejournal.com]

Wow, even that National Post? Is it the token liberal that wrote that (Like Forbes has Rick Ungar, and everyone's like "Look what Forbes wrote, something sensible!" but it's just the token liberal...) or is that the official editorial line? Cuz woah.

[the_axel]

Sadly it is the NP's token lefty.

[cacahuate.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this.

(Parenthetically, I know it’s not all roses for you guys up there, but sometimes as an American you read phrases like “universal daycare” and “50 weeks paid maternity leave” and think, Jesus, really why haven’t I moved to Canada?)

Another thank-you

[ed-rex.livejournal.com]

I too am guilty of having paid for too little attention to what (in my case) has been going on right across the fucking river from me.

It's so much easier to rail against things (even when most of said railing goes on inside one's own head or around the dinner table) than it is to rail in favour of Very Good Things going on around right here and now.

As someone else said here, those people are an inspiration and they at least know it's about a lot more than a few hundred bucks a year.

[pofflewomp.livejournal.com]

I had heard nothing whatsoever about it. Admittedly I have not watched news for a long time, but then I bet it aint on the news over here anyway. To be honest, I don't even know where Quebec is...
Is there evidence that tuition fees keep children from lower income backgrounds form going to university? Here they (as in, discussions you see or read in media, politicians etc.) talk of it as a yet-to-be-seen point. Personally it would not have stopped me going to university, but then I have issues with university being about getting jobs rather than about education, and never expected or expect to earn enough to have to pay the loan back anyway. But then my loan is only £5000, rather than tens of thousands, so maybe I would feel differently if faced with current levels of loans. Or is it not a loan over there - I mean, obviously if it is an upfront fee most people will be prevented from going to university.

[pofflewomp.livejournal.com]

Er, I should add that obviously I think education should be free for everyone, and that students should not be attacked for protesting! Just wondering as it is always talked about here as something very new and yet-to-be-seen, whether fees deter people from lower incomes from university, whereas you'd think countries that already have fees would have evidence already.

[sabotabby]

It's nothing new here, at least in most of Canada. But fees have gone up hugely, even in my lifetime (and I thought our tuition was ridiculous, given that I invested tons of money for a professional degree and the average salary if you could even get a job in my field was low, most jobs were contract, and benefits were unheard of), and that is talked about quite a bit as something new.

[pofflewomp.livejournal.com]

The tuition fees are the new-ish bit here. When I was a wee lass there were half grants and half loans for living expenses, as they were slowly introducing them.

If it were true that there is not enough money to go around and that university has to be paid for if we are to give everyone an opportunity to go, it would make sense that some sort of fee system is needed. BUT I don't believe for a moment that stopping tax loopholes and diverting money from nuclear submarines couldn't pay for universities instead.

What confuses me is the idea that graduates earn more than non-graduates, as my own experience (of people I have met) is that plumbers, electricians, carpenters, builders etc. earn a lot more than any most people in graduate officey jobs, and people working in the service industry tend to earn a lot more once they go into management and businesses. I suppose maybe that is just the case for arts graduates, whereas graduates in professional or science and engineering are of course more employable.

I think teachers' salaries outside London in the UK are just below the threshold for having to pay back the tuition fee loans, but that is because their salaries are shockingly low rather than that the threshold is reasonably high!