Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
jacee

Quebec student strike

Recommended Posts

I'm starting a new thread because the stupid titles on the other ones bug me.

I don't support "violence" against police, or indiscriminate vandalism, but I do support the student strike wholeheartedly. I believe, and I know the research supports this, that postsecondary education is no longer a 'nice to have', but a necessity, and it should be free to all students just like elementary and secondary.

I believe in the students' right to 'strike' - ie, boycott classes and demonstrate. In fact, I believe in anyone's right to strike/protest/demonstrate against anyone interfering with their legal rights: You do not have to belong to a union to protest your employer, your governments, your school, your hairdresser, landlord, your bank, etc etc: All you need is a protest sign. :)

And frankly, I really don't care much if someone breaks a bank window to make the point that they are parasites making tons of money off the loans that students need to survive. OK, I know that's controversial and I'm never going to be one doing that nor am I going to encourage others to do it, but it really doesn't bother me much. I'm not going to refuse to protest because 'somebody might ..(fill in the blank)....'

Indiscriminant vandalism and looting bothers me.

Assaulting police bothers me ... peaceful protesters being assaulted by police bothers me too, and is much more common.

After 11 weeks of refusing to negotiate with students, then agreeing to a sit down, then trying to divide-and-conquer students by kicking out the association representing college students (ie, more than half of the protesters), then the other student leaders walking out too ... Charest finally "blinked" (ctv) on Friday.

He avoided losing face by doing it through the media.

Students have already expressed disappointment with the offer, and are still on strike and protesting ... but it's a start.

This is a great article summarizing issues and interviewing protesters, not all of whom are students:

Quebec student protests not just about tuition but battle against ‘greedy elites’

Buried in the middle is an incident that raises a key question:

What is the appropriate role of police in public protests?

Do police have the right to interfere with peaceful protesters?

Do police have the responsibility for squashing protests and enforcing the government's agenda?

It is a common theme among the protesters that the police are the ones to blame for escalating tensions.

Aurélie Pedron, a mother of two completing a Masters degree in dance, was certain that the shattered windows were the work of agents provocateurs out to smear the students. ‘Those people are a greedy elite that only sees education as an investment in human capital and only sees a child as a future employee’.

“When there are vandals on bicycles, with rocks so huge that you could not find them on Ste. Catherine Street, when it’s a bookstore whose window is smashed, do you really think it is students who do that?” she asked. “Don’t take us for idiots.”

Few go so far as to accuse the police of planting trouble-making agents among the protesters, but the belief is widespread that the government is playing up the violence to discredit the students.

“The government approach is to present us as a bunch of vandals,” said Antoine S.-Christin, a student in environmenta geography at Université de Montréal. He said there is no excuse for any violence but in reality the damage has been minimal.

The police, on the other hand, have made liberal use of their tear gas and nightsticks, he said, and conduct “brutal arrests.” Not long afterwards, a police officer on horseback ordered Ms. Pedron to move and began pushing her with his horse when she resisted. The officer grabbed an anti-Charest sign Mr. S.-Christin was carrying before backing off.

Questions:

Why is a police officer assaulting and harassing two protesters who are talking to the media?

Is it because he's trying to intimidate them and prevent them from talking to the media?

Ya think?!!!! :angry:

That's NOT his job.

Why is a police officer grabbing an anti-Charest protest sign?

Is it because he's trying to suppress anti-government free speech?

Ya think?!!!! :angry:

That's NOT his job.

It's time to get VERY serious about what behaviour we will accept and not accept from the police, whom we pay to protect our safety and our rights.

Pushing a protester around with your horse is NOT protecting her safety:

It's unprovoked assault on a citizen.

Grabbing an anti-government protest sign is NOT protecting his right to free speech:

It's attempted theft and suppression of free speech.

It's none of their business what's on my sign.

It's none of their business what I'm demonstrating for/against.

It is the responsibility of police to

-Uphold the constitutional rights of every citizen

-Keep the peace

-Prevent crime

IN THAT ORDER

They can't violate the rights of individuals by tear gassing them to clear the streets to 'keep the peace' nor to 'prevent crime': Constitutional rights of individuals take precedence.

We pay the police to uphold our rights ... so that governments can't use them to suppress protest.

That is perhaps THE fundamental element of our democracy and free society.

We ARE free to disagree with our governments.

We ARE free to protest.

And the very first and most important responsibility of the police is to protect our rights, to protect US from our governments.

It's what distinguishes democracies from totalitarian regimes that intimidate people to prevent protest, throw protesters in jail, torture them and/or kill them or 'disappear' them.

And if you think none of those things would ever happen in Canada ...

Ask an Indigenous person.

Or ask the two protesters (above) who had their right to protest interfered with

BY POLICE ... IN MONTREAL ... YESTERDAY!

Maybe this seems like a small niggling point to some, but perhaps I've seen it too often.

The police have forgotten their primary responsibility to us, and instead act as agents of the state against us.

If we allow that to continue, allow them to intimidate us into staying home from protests, then we are giving up our right to freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and freedom of peaceful assembly.

This was the lesson from the G20,

This is the lesson of the Quebec student strike.

Don't let the police push you around. :)

They have no right.

Remind them that their first responsibility is to protect our right to protest (Section 2 of the Charter).

Then holler their badge number as loud as you can - especially toward the media - and holler "Section 2 violation".

That should do it! :D

They won't like it, but they can't stop you.

And it has to be done.

The police have made it necessary.

Edited by jacee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Police, seemingly in most countries and especially in Canada, aren't very good at handling themselves during protests. Police in Canada all need to go back to school and learn some new training on the rights of citizens vs police rights, and hammer into these idiots' heads the exact protocols they should use and how to remain "professional" when things get very heated and emotional on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with protestors and most people who support protestors is that they seem to think their right to protest supercedes the rights of everyone else. They'll block traffic, prevent other people from getting to work, smash and steal the private property of inustries they don't agree with, then shout "oppression! Police state!" When police are called in to protect the rights of non-protestors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with protestors and most people who support protestors is that they seem to think their right to protest supercedes the rights of everyone else.

I doubt if that's what's going through their minds at all. They're almost entirely focused on raising everyone else's awareness of the issue their protesting about.

They'll block traffic, prevent other people from getting to work, smash and steal the private property of inustries they don't agree with, then shout "oppression! Police state!" When police are called in to protect the rights of non-protestors.

Perhaps, they'll often also just become more determined or desperate the longer they're ignored or repressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And frankly, I really don't care much if someone breaks a bank window to make the point that they are parasites making tons of money off the loans that students need to survive. OK, I know that's controversial and I'm never going to be one doing that nor am I going to encourage others to do it, but it really doesn't bother me much.
I don't agree with your opinion and you are obviously wealthy since you have a window.....so you would not mind if I hurled a rock through your window then?
Perhaps, they'll often also just become more determined or desperate the longer they're ignored or repressed.

That is pretty funny, a bunch of middle and upper class poseurs being desperate or repressed.

After all, as we all know, low income university students in Quebec already pay nothing for their education, and they will continue to pay nothing under the new govt scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting a new thread because the stupid titles on the other ones bug me.

Speaking of thread titles, yours says "negotiating a way forward" but nowhere to you address the negotiation aspect. It's mostly devoted to a condemnation of police action/inaction and the loss of our right to protest.

And frankly, I really don't care much if someone breaks a bank window to make the point that they are parasites making tons of money off the loans that students need to survive.

They do? Since you seem to have researched this matter, what is the interest rate charged by banks for student loans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They do? Since you seem to have researched this matter, what is the interest rate charged by banks for student loans?

I had both osap and a student line of credit from a bank.

Osap was prime +1.5%, the line of credit prime +1%.

Damn osap parasites!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had both osap and a student line of credit from a bank.

Osap was prime +1.5%, the line of credit prime +1%.

Damn osap parasites!!!

This seems misleading. Bank line of credit kick in right away, and are dependent on what you borrow (if you plan on borrowing 1000 dollars you can get a very small rate if you borrow say 30 000 dollars you know what you need for school you get 2-3% above prime) they also factor in how long will be borrowing for and how long it will take to pay back.

While a provincial student loan does not kick in until you are out of school thus not compounding interest, and you get the same rate no matter what you borrow. You are either being purposely misleading with this statement you have no clue what you are talking about. I think it is the second one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems misleading. Bank line of credit kick in right away, and are dependent on what you borrow (if you plan on borrowing 1000 dollars you can get a very small rate if you borrow say 30 000 dollars you know what you need for school you get 2-3% above prime) they also factor in how long will be borrowing for and how long it will take to pay back.

While a provincial student loan does not kick in until you are out of school thus not compounding interest, and you get the same rate no matter what you borrow. You are either being purposely misleading with this statement you have no clue what you are talking about. I think it is the second one.

I got prime +1% on 20k from the bank.

It does start compounding immediately though and isn't tax deductible afaik.

I'm not being misleading.. Just pointing out that the banks aren't "parasites" with student loans. Overreact much?

And for the record, I know more about finances than you or 99% of dippers ever will. B). Why is it that arts grads always act like they're experts on everything? You don't see me pretending to be an expert on shakespeare and aristotle.

Edited by CPCFTW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for the record, I know more about finances than you or 99% of dippers ever will.

Somehow I feel that if you really knew so much, you wouldn't be here telling everyone how much you know (without going into detail). :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow I feel that if you really knew so much, you wouldn't be here telling everyone how much you know (without going into detail). :lol:

What else would I do on a Saturday?

I'm not saying I know everything about finance... but I have a degree in the field, a professional designation, and I work in the industry. I'm sure that is a lot more than punked and most of his fellow dippers. ;)

Not trying to have a e-penis measuring contest, but punked said I have no clue what I am talking about and I responded accordingly.

Edited by CPCFTW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The latest student protest in Montreal was generally peaceful thanks to those protesters who cooperated with the police to weed out the troublemakers.

« Des manifestants nous ont aidés », a affirmé le porte-parole du SPVM Yannick Ouimet. Le SPVM a estimé que 98 % des participants étaient pacifiques, expliquant que des appels au calme avaient été entendus et que la procession s'était même immobilisée pour permettre l'intervention de policiers contre des casseurs.

---

Des casseurs ont brisé une vitrine, et une bagarre a éclaté entre ceux-ci et des étudiants qui voulaient leur montrer qu'ils n'étaient pas les bienvenus dans la manifestation.

http://quebec.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/28/bilan-manifestation-27-avril_n_1461156.html?1335619195

(no English link available yet)

It seems the student leaders got the message that the bad publicity brought about by the vandalism and violence was harming their cause, and they managed to bring their peers on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The students in Quebec have nothing to protest about. Quebec has some of the lowest tuition rates in Canada, and there is plentiful financial aid for students who need it. I support protests when people are really fighting oppression, tyranny, a regime that violates their human rights. But that is not what is happening in Quebec. There we just have a bunch of entitled slackers that think everything should be handed to them for free (or nearly free) and go destroy the private property of others when it isn't. Disgusting.

Edited by Bonam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems the student leaders got the message that the bad publicity brought about by the vandalism and violence was harming their cause, and they managed to bring their peers on board.

I read a story in the local paper that quoted one of the student leaders on this, he had a very responsible attitude.

One thing that jumped out in his quote was that he was 31 years old.

31 years old and still in free school.

Hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a story in the local paper that quoted one of the student leaders on this, he had a very responsible attitude.

One thing that jumped out in his quote was that he was 31 years old.

31 years old and still in free school.

Hilarious.

My sister went back to school in her thirties. She now has a Masters Degree.

Why is this unusual to you? And how is it free?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with protestors and most people who support protestors is that they seem to think their right to protest supercedes the rights of everyone else. They'll block traffic, prevent other people from getting to work,

Aawwwww ...

Take the opportunity to have a bite to eat to stabilize your blood sugar and get rid of your 'road rage', eh?

You live in a city. Traffic tie ups happen all the time, mostly because of accidents. If you can't deal with reality, live elsewhere.

smash and steal the private property of inustries they don't agree with,

Aawwwww ... did the poor little megabankie get it's window broke? Maybe poor little megabankie should stop gouging its customers, eh?

You need to provide a link to evidence of "protesters" stealing ... and don't confuse "protesters" (eg, Quebec students, G20) with drunken rioting hockey fans (Vancouver).

Waiting for evidence ....

then shout "oppression! Police state!" When police are called in to protect the rights of non-protestors.

"oppression! Police state!" is quite appropriate when police try to provoke trouble and use the actions of a few as an excuse to brutalize innocent protesters and shut down LEGAL political protest. Repression of legitimate protest and opposition by brute force police thugs IS the defining quality of a 'police state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Police, seemingly in most countries and especially in Canada, aren't very good at handling themselves during protests. Police in Canada all need to go back to school and learn some new training on the rights of citizens vs police rights, and hammer into these idiots' heads the exact protocols they should use and how to remain "professional" when things get very heated and emotional on both sides.

Exactly.

They need a hard reminder that the reason they exist is to protect democratic rights from intrusion by the state: We don't pay them to protect the state from us; We pay them to protect us from the state.

They also need to be reminded that covering up crimes of colleagues is what criminals do.

And as you said, they need to be trained/retrained in dealing appropriately with public protests: It is NEVER appropriate to start billy clubbing innocent people indiscriminately, I don't care how many 'criminals' 'might' be hiding among them.

We can't just ignore or fight against bad policing because policing is the bedrock of our free society. We have to work to change and improve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of thread titles, yours says "negotiating a way forward" but nowhere to you address the negotiation aspect. It's mostly devoted to a condemnation of police action/inaction and the loss of our right to protest.

I did address it here:

After 11 weeks of refusing to negotiate with students, then agreeing to a sit down, then trying to divide-and-conquer students by kicking out the association representing college students (ie, more than half of the protesters), then the other student leaders walking out too ... Charest finally "blinked"(ctv) on Friday. He avoided losing face by doing it through the media Students have already expressed disappointment with the offer, and are still on strike and protesting ... but it's a start.

There isn't much more to say until the students respond to the 'offer' and perhaps present a counter-offer.

Keep in mind that until Friday, we couldn't have even had a thread about negotiations, because the government refused to negotiate. Their only 'negotiation' tactic was increasing police brutality against peaceful protesters, punishing all of the protesters for the acts of a few.

As such, it is very appropriate to address police oppression of legitimate student protest as a 'negotiating' tactic, because it is being used as a weapon to stop the protests and get students to give in to government demands.

They do? Since you seem to have researched this matter, what is the interest rate charged by banks for student loans?

Irrelevant: Why are students forced to survive on (and mortgage their future with) bank loans, credit cards and lines of credit?

Used to be that upon graduation, students became gainfully employed, taxpaying consuming contributers to the economy, who spent most of their working lives paying off a mortgage on a house. Now they spend most of their lives paying off mortgage-size student loans on McJob-size earnings, not able to buy houses cars etc. The whole economy suffers as a result.

Postsecondary education is a necessity. Access should not be determined by wealth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....Irrelevant: Why are students forced to survive on (and mortgage their future with) bank loans, credit cards and lines of credit?

Students aren't forced to do any such thing. Nobody is holding a gun to their heads. Spoiled brats....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrelevant: Why are students forced to survive on (and mortgage their future with) bank loans, credit cards and lines of credit?

The majority of them don't. In fact, evidence shows that those students borrowing from banks to fund their studies are in the minority.

Personal savings were the most commonly cited source of funding,

followed by employment earnings and family support

The three sources of funding used most often by young postsecondary students in

2001-02 were personal savings, income from current employment and nonrepayable

money given to them by family members, partner or friends (Table 3).

The more expensive the program, the more likely it was that students made use of

personal savings (money from investment income such as trust funds, RESPs, RRSPs

or savings bonds and money saved from jobs prior to starting postsecondary) to pay

for their educational expenses.

More than three quarters of all students used money from their personal savings

to finance their postsecondary education. It was the most commonly reported source

of funding used by students from all three program price categories. Overall, 79%

of students reported using savings, ranging from 72% in the less expensive programs

to 85% in the most expensive.

Income from employment held during the current academic year was the

second most commonly used source of funding for all postsecondary students in

PEPS (63%). However, this time, the less expensive the program, the more likely

students were to report using money from current employment to finance their studies.

About seven out of ten students from the less expensive programs used employment

income, compared to about six out of ten in the other two groups.

---

Family support in terms of non-repayable money provided by family member,

partner or friends were also used by almost two-thirds of students to pay for their

studies. Use of family support did not vary significantly by price of program.

---

Conclusion

Personal savings, employment earnings and

money from family are the most commonly cited sources of funding, followed by

grants, bursary, award and scholarship and government student loans.

http://publications.gc.ca/Collection/Statcan/81-595-MIE/81-595-MIE2006042.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The majority of them don't. In fact, evidence shows that those students borrowing from banks to fund their studies are in the minority.

http://publications.gc.ca/Collection/Statcan/81-595-MIE/81-595-MIE2006042.pdf

And the rest don't matter?

The issue is accessibilty of postsecondary education for all who get in, not just "the majority".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These jack-ass, head-up their ass, entitled studens (who pay less than any other place in Canada for tuition), have a miss-directed protest on thier own hands. Dont protest the "establishment", put the focus on the greedy teachers and heads! The wages for the insructors and EA's is waaay out of line and they hold the campus hostage internally every negotiation period.. Even these idiotic student should be able to understand the "trickle down effect".

Let the cops open up on them with Rubber bullets... Help them understand how "every action has an equal and opposite reaction"...

Crap, I held a full-time job to pay my way through a private school; what kind of lazy slack-tards are we raising now-adays?? Teachers??? "Environmental studdies associates"? Theologists??? Rubber bullet time....

And the rest don't matter?

The issue is accessibilty of postsecondary education for all who get in, not just "the majority".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My sister went back to school in her thirties. She now has a Masters Degree.

Why is this unusual to you? And how is it free?

31 years and continually in school? Ridiculous. And when it costs the state $20K plus per year per student for undergrad education, and Quebec students pay $1500, you can call that free. Even the $5k to $6K per year paid for undergrad degrees is nothing compared to the earning power it generates for a lifetime.

If I wish to invest in my future and increase earning power, I expect to pay for it.

What does your sister have to do with anything, are you providing examples of more postgrad parasites?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

31 years and continually in school? Ridiculous. And when it costs the state $20K plus per year per student for undergrad education, and Quebec students pay $1500, you can call that free. Even the $5k to $6K per year paid for undergrad degrees is nothing compared to the earning power it generates for a lifetime.

If I wish to invest in my future and increase earning power, I expect to pay for it.

What does your sister have to do with anything, are you providing examples of more postgrad parasites?

Who said "continually" besides you?

You have a problem with people going back to do masters and PhD's, law, medical school, etc after working for a while?

You have a problem with parents trying to make a better life (than a Mcjob) for their kids?

Or do you just have huge personal resentment of anyone who is better educated than you?

I trust you never need the services of any "postgrad parasites" like a doctor, lawyer, scientist-consultant - engineer, geologist, etc?

Edited by jacee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said "continually" besides you?

You have a problem with people going back to do masters and PhD's, law, medical school, etc after working for a while?

You have a problem with parents trying to make a better life (than a Mcjob) for their kids?

Or do you just have resentment of anyone who is educated?

Even if it is not continual, is there no limit to how much time or for how long you support free education? kindergarten to age 30? 50? 80?

I have no problem at all with postgrad degrees, but I see no reason to provide free education so somebody can bump their salary a few grand. Even if they pay their own measly tuition to get a postgrad degree, I am still subsidizing that in a very major way. The tuition paid is a fraction of what is costs each of us as taxpayers. There is no pressing need to compeltely trivialize it by making it free.

I have no problem with childrens education, but there are (nominally) no children at universities. At some point, you have to take responsibility for your livelihood, including the investment that is an education. I freely admit I don't expect you to understand the concept of personal repsonsibility.

I have no resentment at all toward people who acknowledge the great gift they get now in every province at postsecondary institutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...