Published by The Daily Publications Society, a student society of McGill University. The McGill Daily is located on unceded Kanien’kehá:ka territory.
Volume 108, Issue 18 | Monday, February 18, 2019 | mcgilldaily.com I’ve seen women since 1911
Pages 10 & 11
Hands Off Venezuela Now open!
Lease today! Now Leasing for Winter and Fall 2019 All-inclusive living in downtown Montreal’s premier student residence.
Call (514) 273-7626
Apply Now at Campus1MTL.ca or visit us at 420 Sherbrooke Street West for a tour TODAY!
Schizophrenia and the City: two novels on Amazon Kindle. Checkout The Parable of Sammy Metro, and Initiation Ritual.
2
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
contents
Table of Contents
Also, for high school teachers - Teaching in High School by Les Short.
3 EDITORIAL Beyond Body Cams: The SPVM Must Be Held Accountable 4 NEWS AUS Candidates Debate AUS Council & POLI 339 AMUSE Pay Equity Settlement No Accountability Without Action Divest McGill’s Fossil Free Fridays Outremont By-Elections Airbnb Raising Rent in Montreal
8 ASTROLOGY! 57 PRINCE-ARTHUR EST • CAFECAMPUS.COM
SHERBROOKE ST-LAURENT
9 COMMENTARY The Truth Behind McMUN Hands Off Venezuela
12 FEATURES An Open Letter to White Boys in Poli Sci CULTURE 14 Buffy’s Medicine Songs Standing Up For Milton-Parc
16AnPOEM Ode to The 20-Year-Old Virgin Photo by Nicolas Lepillier
The McGill Daily and Le Délit have moved to a new location on campus! Visit our new space: 680 Sherbrooke St. W Room 724
www.mcgilldaily.com
Photo credit: Jeangagnon [CC BY-SA 3.0], from Wikimedia Commons
EDITORIAL
Volume 108 Issue 18
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
3
editorial board
680 Ave. Sherbrooke, Rm. 724 Montreal, QC H3A 2L1 phone 514.398.6784 fax 514.398.8318 mcgilldaily.com
The McGill Daily is located on unceded Kanien’kehá:ka territory. coordinating editor
Lydia Bhattacharya
managing editor
Phoebe Pannier coordinating news editor
Beyond Body Cams: The SPVM Must Be Held Accountable
Claire Grenier news editor
Athina Khalid commentary + compendium! editors
Nellia Halimi Yasir Piracha culture editors
Nadia El-Sherif Yasna Khademian features editor
Eloïse Albaret science + technology editor
Nabeela Jivraj sports editor
Vacant
video editor
Vacant
photos editor
Vacant
radio editor
Sian Lathrop illustrations editor
Nelly Wat
copy editor
Julia Crowly
design + production editor
Frederique Blanchard social media editor
Justine Ronis-Le Moal
cover design
Nelly Wat
contributors
Emily Black, Justine Coutu, Nellia Halimi, Zoe Karkossa, Yasna Khademian, Athina Khalid, Sian Lathrop, Kelsey McKeon, Phoebe Pannier, Karla Maria Tejeda-Iglesias, Yasir Piracha, Nishat Prova, Nelly Wat le délit
Lara Benattar
rec@delitfrancais.com
Published by the Daily Publications Society, a student society of McGill University. The views and opinions expressed in the Daily are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of McGill University.The McGill Daily is not affiliated with McGill University.
Content warning: mention of police violence, racism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia
B
etween May 2016 and April 2017, the Service de Police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) implemented a policy to equip 78 police officers with body cameras. This was an attempt to improve police accountability following public outcry over numerous cases of police brutality and murder. On February 1, almost a year later, the SPVM’s final report advised against equipping police officers with body cameras. Dan Philip, president of the Black Coalition of Quebec, condemned the SPVM’s final report, stating, “when there are no body cameras, the injustices continue [...] and there is no recourse, because it will be the word of the police against the word of the victim – and we know which one will carry.” The SPVM’s report states that the cost was not worth the results. Only four per cent of the annual operating budget is needed to implement the body camera program. Regardless, the cost of implementing accountability measures should not matter, especially when police have been so readily acquitted of, or not even charged for, murdering racialized people, queer people, and people with disabilities. We should not, and cannot, stop at body cameras alone. It is still extremely rare for officers to be convicted of their crimes, even when video evidence proves their guilt. While accountability measures and sensitivity trainings are a first step, we need to push further and continuously advocate for the abolition of the police altogether. The recommendation of having police officers wear portable cameras was made in June 2015, as part of an investigation following the murder of 70-year-old Robert Hénault in his home by the Montreal police. The SPVM was also responsible for the murders of Pierre Coriolan in 2017 and Nicholas Gibbs in 2018, consistently showing an inability to properly address police misconduct. Shortly after the murder of Gibbs, the Bureau des Enquêtes Indépendantes (BEI), an independent body that examines incidents of police violence, launched an investigation.
However, the BEI has yet to publish its report detailing the police’s use of violence that led to Gibbs’ murder. Further, the BEI’s investigations have failed to convict a single officer so far. The BEI has a track record of responding passively to officers who purposefully ignore investigative protocol. In the past, they thought it sufficient to send letters to police forces whose officers had violated protocol and did not even impose any concrete punitive measures. The burden of police accountability should not fall on civilians because of the investigative body’s failure to do its job; more importantly, civilians should not have to live under the threat of being killed by the police. Police brutality disproportionately affects people of colour, people with disabilities, and queer, trans, and gender nonconforming people because of systemic biases within the police force. The police have, and continue to target LGBTQ people in areas known to be queer cruising spaces. Moreover, police routinely stop people of colour for baseless checks, which often escalate into violence. The use of racial profiling by police against Black and Indigenous people is glaringly apparent. The numerous cases of police violence provide irrefutable evidence that the police constitute a racist institution. Despite the numerous incidents of police violence, Montreal continues to consolidate and recognize the power of the police as a form of “necessary” control. The municipal government and mayor Valérie Plante must urgently address the SPVM’s violence against people of colour, queer people, and people with disabilities. We must also bear in mind that body cameras are not the ultimate solution for police accountability and that the police must be better trained in nonviolent de-escalation techniques. We further must decentralize the police as universal first responders on a governmental as well as personal level: when calling the police, we must remember the ways in which their presence often puts marginalized people’s safety at risk. Ultimately, we must call for the complete abolition of policing.
Read us online! 680 Ave. Sherbrooke, Rm. 724 Montreal, QC H3A 2L1 phone 514.398.6790 fax 514.398.8318 advertising & general manager
Boris Shedov
website Facebook Instagram twitter
www.mcgilldaily.com www.facebook.com/themcgilldaily @mcgilldaily @mcgilldaily
sales representative
Letty Matteo
ad layout & design
CONTACT US
Mathieu Ménard dps board of directors
Julian Bonello-Stauch, Nouedyn Baspin, Sébastien Oudin-Filipecki, Boris Shedov, Juliette De Lamberterie, Lara Benattar, Lydia Bhattacharya, Phoebe Pannier
All contents © 2018 Daily Publications Society. All rights reserved. The content of this newspaper is the responsibility of The McGill Daily and does not necessarily represent the views of McGill University. Products or companies advertised in this newspaper are not necessarily endorsed by Daily staff. Printed by Imprimerie Transcontinental Transmag. Anjou, Quebec. ISSN 1192-4608.
Coordinating NEWS COMMENTARY CULTURE FEATURES SCI+TECH SPORTS
coordinating@mcgilldaily.com news@mcgilldaily.com commentary@mcgilldaily.com culture@mcgilldaily.com features@mcgilldaily.com scitech@mcgilldaily.com sports@mcgilldaily.com
Managing PHOTOs ILLUSTRATIONS DESIGN + PRODUCTION COPY WEB + Social Media MULTIMEDIA
managing@mcgilldaily.com photos@mcgilldaily.com illustrations@mcgilldaily.com design@mcgilldaily.com copy@mcgilldaily.com web@mcgilldaily.com multimedia@mcgilldaily.com
4
News
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
McGill
AUS Candidates Debate
Mental Health, Students’ Rights, and “Cleaning up SSMU” Yasna Khademian The McGill Daily
O
n February 12, AUS Elections held a candidates’ debate for the upcoming academic year. Three out of the nine positions are contested: Arts Senator, Arts Representative, and VP Academic. The rest of the positions are uncontested: Stefan Suvajac for VP Finance, Maheen Akter for VP Internal, Darshan Daryani for VP External, Kim Yang for VP Social, Yoana Pehlyova for VP Communications, and Jamal Tarrabain for President. The debate began with an introductory statement from each candidate, then included questions from the incumbents, the audience, an online survey, as well as the live feed. Finally, each candidate closed with a personal statement. ARTS SENATOR The candidates for Arts Senator are Chloe Kemeni, Iyanu Soyege, Henrique Mecabô, Lauren Jelinek, and Chlöe Shahinian. Chloe Kemeni is currently the AUS VP Academic, in which she has focused on equity and inclusive spaces. She has worked as the AUS Equity Commissioner, SSMU AntiViolence Coordinator, and as a Floor Fellow at New Residence Hall. Her platform focused on accessibility of services for marginalized and international students, and noted McGill’s missed deadline for its sexual violence policy. Kemeni stated that she hopes to sit on the Committee for Student Affairs and participate in related consultations, ensuring that there is a survivorcentric approach in the policy’s language. Her platform takes note of the future challenges that McGill libraries will face, which she has already begun to address as chair of the Library-Partnership Committee this year. Iyanu Soyege has worked as an executive for the African Studies Students’ Association (ASSA), and represented her constituents on Inter-Residence Council, as part of her mandate as VP External of a residence hall. Throughout her time with the ASSA, Soyege noticed the critical lack of courses in the department, as well as in Latin American and Caribbean Studies, Indigenous Studies, and South Asian Studies. As an Arts Senator, she stated she would fight for these programs in Senate. Furthermore, she noted the
value and importance of student volunteers for safety programs, such as Walksafe and Drivesafe. Soyege stated she would advocate in Senate for greater incentives for students to volunteer for these programs. She also hopes to sit on the Standing Committee on Student Services. The last part of her platform emphasized the importance of student engagement, which she hopes to increase through the use of Google forms disseminated to the student body, and through working with as many Senators as possible.
process, improving student health services, and making our campus more inclusive. With regards to the last initiative, she wants to improve representation among professors, particularly in region-specific studies. While she has experience in advocacy through volunteering at the Legal Information Clinic, there were legal concerns about her proposal for the tenure process. In response, Jelinek acknowledged the legal barriers and proposed “a public forum [...] for students to voice their opinion [that the University
as she is currently on exchange. Andrew Chase, current VP External of the Economics Students’ Association, centred his platform on accountability and his desire to “clean up SSMU for you.” An important part of his platform was his support for student clubs, which he noted as an essential way for students to get involved on campus. In response to a question about SSMU being unable to sustain clubs further, he stated that a solution could be the upcoming referendum on increasing SSMU’s base fee, which he would like to
Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily Henrique Mecabô’s platform focused solely on revising the current assessment policy, which is up for review next year in Senate. He noted that the current policy allows a final to consist of up to 70 per cent of a student’s grade, which he hopes to change in order to reduce students’ stress. When asked about his experience regarding equity on campus, Mecabô responded, “I don’t have [...] specific work experience in student representation or government; [I have engaged] with cultural or ethnic organizations such as the Latin American Students’ Association, and the Brazilian Students’ Association, but I have done no work on the equity front specifically.” Lauren Jelinek is currently an Associate Senator. She proposed three main points in her platform: student inclusion in the tenure
takes into account].” Chlöe Shahinian stated that the lack of awareness among the student body about their rights and how to access student services was what inspired her to run for Arts Senator. She noted that when equity violations happen in class, students often don’t know who to turn to. Her platform calls for an AUS-specific equity advisor. Although her platform brings up important provisions, such as equity outlines specific to certain courses, there were concerns that the addition of a new equity advisor might make the bureaucratic process more complicated, when a SSMU equity advisor already exists. ARTS REPRESENTATIVE The candidates for Arts Representative are Andrew Chase, Adin Chan, Ariana Kaye, Gabriel Ahmad, Ruofan Wang, and Shreya Dandamudi, who was not present,
see partly put towards club funds. He also suggested reducing the staff needed to manage clubs. The base fee has not yet been presented to SSMU Legislative Council, or passed by the student body, and it is unclear what that fee increase would specifically go towards. It seems counter-intuitive for Chase to suggest simultaneously firing staff needed to manage clubs while also suggesting the number of clubs on campus be increased. Adin Chan focused his platform on preparing Arts students for life after graduation, improving the Minerva system, and addressing the lack of bilingual accessibility on AUS’ website. When asked how to bring about an improvement of the Minerva system, Chan responded, “I would wager that half of the [Computer Science] students would do it for free.” There have been numerous
student movements on campus against unpaid student labour, notably the Social Work Student Association strike last semester. To suggest that students would work for McGill for free is a devaluation of student labour and indicates a lack of understanding on Chan’s part regarding students’ labour rights. Ariana Kaye served for one year as VP Internal of the Art History and Communications Studies Student Association (AHCSSA), and two years as its VP External, representing the department at AUS Legislative Council. Her platform focused on equitable representation and advocacy for marginalized students. She stated that she would like to start a committee between SSMU and Rez Life as Arts Representative, working to improve Rez Project for first year students at McGill. She plans to do this by incorporating intersectional elements of social justice into the program, and ensuring there are definitions for marginalized groups that are not currently included in the program. Her platform also included advocating for necessary improvements in mental health treatment and SSMU accountability. Gabriel Ahmad focused his platform on “fresh new ideas.” Among these ideas were advocating for the opening of the Redpath Library doors. In response to cost concerns, he stated that he had looked up the annual salary of a security guard online and found it to be $30,000 to $40,000, which he believed to be contrary to what McGill had estimated: $200,000. This assertion does not consider the likelihood that more than one security guard would be assigned to the door, which could also be open for 24 hours. Ahmad also spoke to women’s involvement in politics. “I think we should market these [political] simulations to women so that they participate in them more, because I’ve seen women that are extremely capable and quite impressive, to be honest,” he said. When asked a follow up question about advocating for women running for political positions while being a man running for a political position, he responded, “I think that one of the most difficult problems for feminism in Canada right now [...] is actually the stigma facing male feminists.”
news
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
Ruofan Wang, currently VP Communications for La Citadelle Hall Council, focused his platform on increasing accessibility for students. He stated he would advocate for better services within the Office for Students with Disabilities, such as note-taking, and exam deferral opportunities. Another key point of his platform was his desire to help first-year students and international students fully experience Montreal and feel included in the McGill community. Wang stated he would work with SSMU and First-Year Council (FYC) to develop more opportunities, and work to ensure that SSMU and AUS services are bilingual.
VP ACADEMIC The last of the contested positions was VP Academic, with candidates Ananya Nair and Wing Wong. Ananya Nair has worked for the Social Equity and Diversity Education office (SEDE) at McGill for the last two years and currently serves as Arts Community Engagement Commissioner at AUS. Her platform focused on making education more financially and physically accessible. One key point she made was that “there are a lot of AUS funds [...] that go unused and I want to [...] redistribute it to students in the
form of student aid, bursaries, and scholarships.” She also noted the immense importance of initiatives such as the McGill Book Fair, which has provided up to $2 million in scholarships, and stated that she would provide more support for this program as VP Academic. Nair also mentioned in her platform the need to fight for student rights with regards to exam scheduling, such as the problem in having three exams within 28 hours. Further, she expressed her desire to work with the VP External to create a job and summer internship fair for Arts
students, ensuring that students of every major have the opportunity to gain experience in their field. Wing Wong has worked as Student Prime Minister of his high school and treasurer for the youth organization Interact. His platform focused a great deal on libraries, student course loads, and reviewing assessment policies to be fairer for students. While Wong’s idea to reserve floors for Arts students in McLennan during exam season is admirable, the incumbent VP Academic raised concerns about its feasibility. In response, Wong
5
referred to the Faculty of Law’s policy, which designates areas for Law students only during finals. However, students of all faculties rely on McLennan for study space, and will especially start to rely on this library more as Schulich Library closes for renovations. Even if the library was closed to non-McGill students during finals as Wong suggested, the majority of people in the library are McGill students to begin with. In response to Senator Wilson’s question about the feasibility of reducing course loads, Wong did not seem to provide an clear response.
AUS Council & POLI 339
AUS Exec Reversal Legislative Council Vote Suspended
Athina Khalid The McGill Daily
O
n January 30, during AUS’ biweekly Legislative Council, members discussed POLI 339. POLI 339 is a proposed summer course for McGill students that would take place at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. As mandated by provincial law, any course with additional fees must be approved by a student body. The $1000 fee for POLI 339, to be paid by each student in the course, was subject to lengthy debate. Those in favour argued that it was an “academic opportunity,” while those opposed argued that this “academic opportunity” discriminated against Palestinian students, racialized students, and students who oppose the Israeli occupation of Palestine, as they could be denied entry at the border and detained by Israeli officials. Ultimately, in a confidential vote, 14
AUS representatives voted against the course, 13 voted in favour, and nine abstained. On February 12, AUS issued a statement via email claiming that “necessary information” was not provided or presented at the council meeting of January 30. Due to the “time-sensitive” deadline for the course approval, “the decision was brought to the Executive Committee [Exec]” rather than back to council. The Exec voted in favour of the course by a slim majority. According to anonymous sources, four members of the Exec voted to overturn Legislative Council’s vote, two against, and four abstained. Arts Representatives also participated in this vote on the basis that they are paid as though they are Executives, a depart from standard procedure. Senators are also paid as though they are Executives, but they did not have a vote.
It was implied that Arts Representative Andrew Figueiredo, the initial motioner of POLI 339, put pressure on the Exec to overturn the Legislative Council’s vote.
From comments made at the February 14 AUS Legislative Council, it seems that all three Arts Representatives all voted to overturn the original decision. Sources suggest that former VP Internal Billy Kawasaki also
voted in favour of overturning the Legislative Council vote. He has since resigned. Later, AUS President Maria Thomas suggested that he resigned after feeling pressured to vote the way he did. The internal proceedings of the Executive vote are unclear, as they happened last minute via Facebook and Slack. Executives gave contradictory reports of their conversations when questioned during the February 14 Council meeting. While there was debate over the constitutionality of publishing Slack and Facebook communications as though they were minutes, the discussion was inconclusive. It was implied that Arts Re p re s e n t a t i ve A n d re w Figueiredo, the initial motioner of POLI 339, put pressure on the Exec to overturn Legislative Council’s vote. Figueiredo admitted to having sent a member of the Exec messages asking, “is there anything I can do so that
you to vote yes?” He was asked whether he intended to resign by Bee Khaleeli, a member of the gallery; he said he was not. The Secretary General, a neutral third-party observer charged with maintaining the accountability of AUS, has launched an investigation into how the Exec handled the situation. As a result, the Exec’s vote has been suspended. At Legislative Council, AUS President Maria Thomas said that the Deputy Provost Student Life and Learning (DPSLL) had said that they would cease action if SSMU agreed. SSMU President Tre Mansdoerfer stated that SSMU would take measures to stop action based on the Exec’s vote in favour of POLI 339 as long as the DPSLL agreed. Neither SSMU nor the DPSLL have confirmed that they are halting action taken by the AUS Exec. This is an ongoing story. Please visit our website for the most recent updates.
AMUSE Pay Equity Settlement
Kelsey McKeon The McGill Daily
A
s a result of a pay equity agreement with McGill, over the next six months, AMUSE must find and contact almost 10,000 union members who worked for the University at some point in the past eight years in order to distribute retroactive payments. The agreement, signed in December 2018, follows a long process of negotiations. A 2010 pay equity report published by the University’s Pay Equity Commission was the driving force behind these payments. The report was conducted following the guidelines of the Quebec Pay Equity Act, which requires all businesses to review employee data every five years to ensure its continued compliance with pay equity standards. The basic principle of pay equity is to ensure that predominantly female job classes
Retroactive Payments to AMUSE Members receive compensation equal to predominantly male job classes that demand similar duties and responsibilities. According to the Act, the purpose of pay equity is “to redress difference[s] in compensation due to systemic gender discrimination.” The Pay Equity Act divides jobs into “male class” and “female class” distinctions. This is relevant to AMUSE as male and female job classes would normally be compared within the institution itself, but given that all AMUSE jobs are female-predominant, differences in compensation were judged using the popular HAY point methodology. Following the University’s release of their 2010 report in 2015, AMUSE filed an official union complaint. AMUSE claimed the report was completed improperly, and consequently, was inaccurate to workplace realities. They challenged the lack of
attention given to the benefits that different job classes receive, including health plans, life insurance, and vacation days. The University also grouped many dissimilar jobs into a single sweeping category entitled “Casual,” which may have made an accurate comparison between job classes unattainable. AMUSE also challenged the exclusion of Floor Fellows from the report. AMUSE and the University agreed to meet in October 2016 to attempt to create a resolution for this dispute. In April 2017, AMUSE proposed a settlement offer which did not receive a response. Also in 2017, McGill’s 2015 pay equity report was released, and the Union found the same errors as in the 2010 report, and proceeded to file another complaint. AMUSE proceeded to work on two separate courses of action: creating a Pay Equity Committee to revise the pay equity reports and establish a committee review
process for future pay equity reports conducted by McGill, and working on a pay equity settlement between the University and AMUSE. In spring 2018, AMUSE and the University began negotiations on the settlement. The settlement included: • $40,000 given to AMUSE to fund their search for the roughly 10,000 former and current employees that are to receive retroactive payments from the University. The Union has six months to find and contact past members. As AMUSE notes in their annual report, “the $40,000 was asked for because it gives AMUSE an average of 15 minutes to contact each of the 10,000 members included in the settlement, assuming payment to the person contacted of $15/hour.” • A 7.5 per cent raise for current AMUSE employees. The University did not agree to the Union’s proposed Pay Equity Committee review process. They
claimed that they could not agree to such a program at the time since negotiations were ongoing with other groups. The University also did not agree to including Floor Fellows in the settlement based on the claim that Floor Fellowship is not a job class that was predominantly female, though the Union’s 2017 list of members who paid dues showed otherwise. The Daily spoke to Meaghan Rye, an AMUSE member and employee for McGill Intramurals, who was compensated through the retroactive payments, as well as the raise for current employees. For Meaghan, this money was entirely unexpected, and will go towards her next semester of tuition. Rye told the Daily, “we don’t really have too much contact with AMUSE, we know they’re there and I guess they do a lot of work in the background. Now with this we get to see how much work they’re actually putting in for us.”
6
News
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
McGill
No Accountability Without Action
Consultations for McGill’s Policy Against Sexual Violence Emily Black Reporter
F
rom February 6 to 13, the Sexual Assault Centre of the McGill Students’ Society (SACOMSS) and the Student’s Society of McGill University (SSMU) held several student consultations on revisions to the University’s Policy Against Sexual Violence. The groups wanted to collect student feedback prior to the proposed policy going to Senate later this month. The consultations co-coordinated by volunteer students from the Support Branch at SACOMSS were held across both campuses, and included closed sessions for survivors. The University’s current Policy Against Sexual Violence, established in 2016, has received
a C- grade from the student-led advocacy group Our Turn, and has not been updated since, failing to meet deadlines set by the provincial government to adopt an approved policy. Consultation sessions went over amendments to the Policy, provided clarification on sections that may be overburdened with bureaucratic language, and gave an opportunity for attendees to voice their concerns about the Policy. Volunteers running the consultation sessions stressed the importance of student engagement and advocacy, emphasizing the need for getting diverse opinions and ideas back to the administration. Additions to the Policy include new definitions of terms, changes to disciplinary decision-making processes, and more explicit
Since known perpetrators remain at McGill, survivors continue to feel unsafe.
procedures of support for survivors. Notably, “the McGill context” now involves off-campus locations and activities. Additionally, the definition of “Teaching Staff ” now includes TAs, lab techs, and athletic coaches. The new policy also bans disciplinary authority in administrative decisions, meaning no external factors will be allowed to sway decisions. A set of new procedures aiming to clarify and simplify the process of reporting incidents of sexual violence are now
included, along with guidelines for investigations of a claim. Participants voiced concerns over accountability: many felt the policy was weak in this regard. Those concerned see the power of the administration and that of the special investigator to be overreaching and potentially unreliable. One participant asserted that accountability measures were meaningless if there was no action. Since known perpetrators remain at McGill, survivors continue to feel unsafe. Participants also posited that serial offences should be a separate consideration, and a distinct category in the updated policy. Despite the University’s new commitment to “support survivors based on their personal experiences, whether or not a criminal offence has been proven,”
participants voiced concern that the specificities of this support are not outlined in the Policy. Participants proposed increased protection measures for survivors, such as access to information concerning the whereabouts of perpetrators, regardless of outcomes. Following the consultations, reports will be compiled and presented to SSMU executives, SACOMSS, and the University administration. These reports will inform ongoing revisions to the Policy, and will be voted on next month. If students want to have a private consultation, or space to voice concerns directly to SACOMSS ahead of the Senate meeting, they can reach SACOMSS’ advocacy branch at advocacy@sacomss.org .
Divest McGill’s Fossil Free Fridays
Demonstrations Against Fossil Fuel Use Happening Every Friday
Justine Coutu News Writer
E
very Friday this semester, Divest McGill is holding demonstrations on the steps of the Arts Building. These weekly gatherings were organized to protest McGill’s continuing investments in the fossil fuels industry. Divest aims to raise awareness about current climate issues and the practice of divestment through these “Fossil-Free Fridays.”
every Friday and voice their concerns regarding the future of our planet. “We wanted to partly affiliate ourselves with Fridays for Future to show our support and gain some momentum. We also wanted a larger presence on campus because not a whole lot of people are fully conscious about what divestment is,” said Violette Drouin, a member of Divest McGill.
“The Committee to Advise on Matters of Social Responsibility is supposed to give a response to their re-evaluation of divestment at the end of this calendar year. However, this [...] could take much longer.”
— Violette Drouin, Divest McGill
The initiative is part of the “Fridays for Future” movement, led by 15-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg. In December 2018, she delivered an internationally renowned speech on the impacts of climate change at the United Nations’ Climate Conference (COP24). Using her new visibility, Thunberg rallied young people to take action against climate change. The movement encourages youth to go on strike
Of the 645 publicly traded companies McGill invests in, 35 are among the world’s largest fossil fuel corporations. Divest McGill’s mission is to make students aware of this fact, encourage the University’s administration to take action, and ultimately, divest. “Our mission is to get McGill to divest its endowment fund from fossil fuel companies, with the goal of making it a statement that they really are divorcing
Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily themselves from anything related to industries that are harming the environment. Here, the main effect of divestment is a political and social one,” explained Drouin. Movements like Divest McGill promote climate action, urging administrations to take a stand against pollution. Although support on campus for divestment is growing, Drouin believes “things
are progressing at an extremely slow pace.” She explained further, saying, “the Committee to Advise on Matters of Social Responsibility is supposed to give a response to their re-evaluation of divestment at the end of this calendar year. However, this [...] could take much longer.” Through Fossil Free Fridays, and their other initiatives, members of
Divest McGill hope to send a clear message to the administration. “We’re here, and we’re not going away until divestment from the fossil fuel industry is complete,” asserted Drouin. For more information about Fossil Free Fridays, Divest McGill’s mission and upcoming projects, visit their Facebook page.
news
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
7
Montreal Outremont By-Elections Liberal and NDP Policy Rundown
Emily Black Reporter
C
andidates will enter their final week of campaigning ahead of the by-election on February 25. Polling indicates a Liberal victory in the riding of Outremont. As of February 15, Liberal candidate Rachel Bendayan is polling at 42.6 per cent, while NDP Candidate Julia Sánchez is polling at 18.5 per cent. Historically, by-elections can be opportunities to test the waters for elections to come. Despite the possible predictive nature of this race, by-elections themselves are rarely significant, due to low voter turnouts and lack of widespread impact, as they only affect one riding of voters at a time. As a result, not much information is available about candidates and their platforms or promises; candidates tend not to run on competitive or ground-breaking policies, instead sticking to party lines. The Daily’s coverage of the by-election has focused on the Liberal and NDP parties due to Outremont’s history as a
Liberal riding, and it’s recent decade of NDP representation. In addition, parties such as the Conservatives, People’s Party, and the Bloc Québécois have either not pursued substantial campaigns, or have only named candidates late in the race. CANDIDATE’S PLATFORMS Local issues Both candidates have mentioned a few standing points for citizens of Outremont. Rachel Bendayan is a self-described protector of the local community, and intends to include Outremont in the Liberal party’s federal policies. Bendayan plans to continue to lower tax cuts for small businesses, in line with the Liberal Party’s nine per cent cuts. She also aims to continue current Building Canada projects in Montreal, including building up the Réseau Express Métropolitain (REM), expanding Université de Montréal campus, and refurbishing the St-Joseph Oratory. Bendayan has also praised the Canada Child benefit
program, claiming it provides over 17,000 children in the riding with funding. Sánchez has been less specific on local issues, but has mentioned her intentions to improve health insurance for the self-employed, and to fight for the rights of workers. Concerning housing issues in Montreal, Bendayan has promised to include Outremont in the Liberal Party’s National Housing Strategy, and to provide 100,000 affordable housing units. Sánchez has also mentioned intentions to facilitate better access to affordable housing for renters: she plans to institute 500,000 affordable and quality housing units over the next 10 years, and remove the federal portion of the GST/HST on the construction of new and affordable rental units. Environment Environmental issues top Sánchez’s platform, and she has recently unveiled a comprehensive plan in direct response to the current Liberal government’s policies, and Bendayan’s limited comments
on these issues. Sánchez’s plan, called the “Grand Transition,” operates off of four main points. • Divest from gas and oil industries: stop fossil energy subsidies and public investment in oil and gas projects • Create policy for Green House Gas reduction targets of 50 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 • Increase support to international climate action initiatives to $4 billion • Establish a decarbonized economy via investment into: renewable energy (Municipal Green Fund; Solon Organization in Rosemont-La PetitePatrie), public transport, energy efficient construction (improve Réno-Climat program; Réno-Vert tax credit), committing to a real strategy in plastic waste reduction (adhering to the Gord Jones motion passed in the House of Commons), and implementing green jobs. Though the plan was originally posited as a challenge to the Liberal candidate, Bendayan has not commented. Regarding environmental policy, the Liberal candidate stands behind the federal
Carbon Tax plan, and expresses pride in Canada being one of few countries with nation-wide carbon pricing. Though there hasn’t been much upset over platforms, both candidates have been victims of vandalism on either their offices or signage in the district. Anti-pipeline and anti-Liberal messages were posted on top of Rachel Bendayan’s campaign poster outside of the Saint-Enfant-Jésus Church. The poster was removed within an hour of its appearance. Alternatively, Sánchez’s office was the subject of graffiti, also anti-pipeline, but Sánchez opted to let the message remain on her windows. Leading up to the election, both candidates have been participating in community engagements. They have not appeared together in any formal debates, and have pursued different avenues of outreach. While Sánchez has participated in a town hall, a debate, and several livestreamed discussions, Bendayan has focused on meeting with local businesses and community organizers to voice support.
Airbnb Raising Rent in Montreal Increased Evictions and Changing Neighbourhoods
Zoe Karkossa News Writer
I
n December 2017, Mile End resident Tim Forster was notified that he and other building residents were all being evicted in order for their apartments to be renovated into permanent Airbnbs. The new owners pressured the residents to leave as soon as possible, earlier than the six month notice required by Quebec law. According to the Régie du logement, a landlord is allowed to evict previous tenants if they have plans to “divide the dwelling, enlarge it substantially, or change its destination.” The latter motive implies that converting the apartments to Airbnbs can be legal, but only after obtaining a permit that Forster believes the new owners did not have. According to a 2017 study by McGill Geography professor David Wachsmuth, in March 2017,
only 42 of the over 6000 full-time rentals available in Montreal on Airbnb were properly certified. The tenants of Forster’s building contested the landlord’s attempts to push them out prematurely. During the negotiations, the landlord’s intentions were made clear. “Some of the other neighbors said that they were basically told […] if you win the right to stay, we will make your life hell,” Forster said. Two of the apartments were vacated ahead of schedule. The landlord quickly began renovations, which included unannounced water cuts, walls caked in dust, and endless noise. Forster and his roommate ended up moving out two months early. Airbnb puts pressure on an housing market undergoing rapid gentrification. The Plateau–MileEnd, which currently houses a large portion of Montreal’s student population, is a particularly popular area for new Airbnbs.
As landlords raise rent and evict tenants, students are pushed out. They, in turn, push residents out of working-class areas, namely Parc-Extension, Centre-Sud, and Hochelaga-Maisonneuve. Working-class people bear the brunt of gentrification, as they are pushed out of their homes and away from their communities.
Nishat Prova | Illustrator
Over the last few summers, Montreal has seen a steady increase in the number of tourists. Numbers jumped from 8.4 million visitors in 2013 to over 11 million in 2017, according to Tourism Montreal. Non-traditional vacation lodging, such as Airbnb, has increasingly been taking a larger portion of the housing market in past years.
Government regulations for these ventures have struggled to keep up. These services have opened the door to what McGill’s Urban Politics and Governance research group has named “triple-threat” listings. These rentals are entire homes being rented out yearlong to tourists by hosts with multiple properties available. In some Montreal neighborhoods, these listings have taken over 2-3 per cent of the housing stock, suggests Wachsmuth’s study. Airbnb’s presence in these neighbourhoods are raising rents and increasing evictions. Despite efforts to tighten regulation of these rentals, including a push to restrict short-term tourist residence permits in the VilleMarie borough last summer, most listings still escape notice. To report illegal Airbnbs, you can contact permis.inspections.ville-marie@ville. montreal.qc.ca or call 311.
8
Astrology!
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
HECK’in HOROSCOPES Aquarius (Jan 20 Feb 18)
Dude, last week was rough, but you are gonna rock the Casbah this week! Make sure you wear two pairs of socks, cause no one likes cold feet.
Taurus
(Apr 20 May 20) Yeah….it’s been a long month…. but we can get through this...if we can get through Zionists doing anything... we can do...like anything
Leo (Jul 23
- Aug 22)
This week is going to have its trials and tribulations but refer to Proverbs 31:6 and you will find your answer.
Scorpio
(Oct 23 Nov 21) Okay I’m gonna be honest, you need to check your privilege—tea.
Pisces
(Feb 19 Mar 20)
Okay! So, like it’s your season! That’s so cool and that probably means something.
Gemini
(May 21 Jun 20)
ha ha ha just don’t.
Virgo
(Aug 23 Sept 22) Prepare for an emotionally ~draining~ week. Stay strong and fight against these cis-normative white boys. They are, and always will be, trash.
Sagittarius
(Nov 22 Dec 21) You are feeling your body and OWNING your fucking lewk this week. Wear that zany shirt that you think is too much… big risk=big benefit ;)
Aries
(Mar 21 - Apr 19) Don’t put it off any longer…. you can rock bangs and don’t let your lame friends tell you otherwise.
Cancer
(Jun 21 Jul 22) OKay it’s time to return the favour to your significant other— everyone loves their salad tossed (yes even you Chad).
Libra
(Sept 23 - Oct 22) OMg so the person you’ve been totes crushing on is gonna be at some social function this week. Make the goddamn move!! Or don’t! But they are vibing with you, too so don’t be shy cutie ;)
Capricorn (Dec 22 Jan 19)
Hey, try not to be an asshole this week... this month...just... change... your postal code and move.
commentary
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
9
The Truth Behind McMUN
The Conference is Failing and No One is Taking Action Anonymous 1 & 2 Commentary Writers
O
n the weekend of January 24, McGill University hosted the infamous Model United Nations conference, McMUN. The conference was held at the Sheraton Hotel in downtown Montreal, with over 1,600 delegates attending from all over North America. As two McGill students, we decided to apply for a staffing position, and were assigned the role of food staffers. We did not feel prepared for our roles since we were only given a brief training, and did not end up performing any of the duties we were informed we would. The personal responsibility that we felt after applying for this conference was taken advantage of, and we know that we are not the only ones who felt this way. As two women of colour, we immediately felt isolated within the blatantly white social sphere of McMUN. In one instance, we were having a conversation with a fellow food staffer, and another coordinator, who asked us where we were from. The coordinator assumed we all had the same ethnic background, and was quite surprised to hear that we did not. Even after we corrected her, she continued to exoticize us. We entered that space already conscious of our identities among a crowd of predominantly white men; it was even worse to be a staffer who was constantly reminded that they were inferior. Throughout the conference, we were made to feel useless, incompetent, and invisible. Despite being called staff, we were neither treated as such nor given duties to reflect that. We were essentially filling a volunteer position that anyone could sign up for. Our shift schedule was only sent out two days before the conference, and we were initially scheduled for a 12 hour shift, an eight hour shift, and two six hour shifts. It was not until we spoke out against these unrealistic work hours that our shifts were reduced to four hours at a time. Had we not, our time would have simply gone to waste for so much longer. As two students who are uninvolved in the International Relations Students Association at McGill (IRSAM) scene, we were shocked to see that staffers who had a genuine interest in McMUN were continuously walking on eggshells around their superiors to leave positive impressions. It seems as though these students chase social capital because they’ve been conditioned to do so, and have lost the ability to gain perspective and
reflect on the cycle that they have created and trapped themselves in. The hierarchical system of McMUN is very evident. The first enforcer of this hierarchy is physical appearance – primarily through badge size. The Secretariat members wear the largest badges, and as one moves down the chain to various staffers, the badge size decreases. Whenever we were approached by someone, our badges were the first thing they looked at, and we felt immediately dismissed when they realised we were staffers. Every member of McMUN seems to be striving to move up the social ladder in the hopes of gaining a more prestigious position, hence leading to more social capital. The promise of social capital is reinforced by the social segregation that exists within the conference. On our first day as food staffers, we walked into a room of Secretariat members, and were immediately met with silence and condescending looks. Our food coordinator ignored us until we announced our presence, despite knowing our names and faces from previous meetings. Throughout the conference, this person did not engage with us in the company of more important people, and only made half-hearted attempts at conversation when we were alone. This was not unique to our coordinator, but a common pattern we noticed with other staffercoordinator relationships. All the positive experiences we had during this conference came out of our preexisting relationships. In some cases, even these relationships were pushed to the side within the conference walls, when some of our friends refused to acknowledge us. We felt as though we were being watched when we interacted with our friends who were coordinators, or members in charge of the committees, as if people were surprised that we had these connections. We became paranoid to the extent that we questioned why certain people were nice to us – was it because of who we knew, or because they genuinely wanted to have a conversation? McMUN further enforces hierarchical segregation by keeping certain events and opportunities exclusive. The opportunity to interact with delegates was not afforded to us because we worked “backstage,” and only Secretariat and Dias members (those who run the committees) were allowed to engage with them. It felt like there was a show being put on, and we were surrounded by actors who rehearsed how to sit, speak, and deliver a performance. Coordinators, Secretariat members, and chairs of the Dias were granted VIP status and
Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily access to an open bar at McParte, the grand social event. Meanwhile, delegates who paid for the conference also had to pay for drinks. Even the coat check at this event was segregated into VIP and non-VIP. As food staffers, we did not have a job most of the time. Our first clue should have been the 20-minute introduction by coordinators, which was masked as an hour and a half training. It quickly became evident that there was simply not enough work for a team of eight food staffers, and we sat idle for the first two hours of our shift. Conversations that we observed almost always turned into competitions to see who had accomplished the most. We felt like we were there to feed people’s egos and be the ears for their narcissism. You can’t have superiors unless you have subordinates, and the latter is the role we ended up filling.
Every member of McMUN seems to be striving to move up the social ladder in the hopes of gaining a more prestigious position, hence leading to more social capital. Furthermore, our coordinators did not trust the way we did our jobs,
and would recount the inventory after we did it. Despite knowing our names, they consistently referred to us as “the girls,” reducing us to a single staffing unit rather than individuals. They would talk about us in French, deliberately excluding us from the conversation, and then direct orders at us. The Secretariat members and coordinators would consistently mess up the food room, and we were expected to clean up after them. “The girls” were in fact housekeeping staff who would vacuum and scrape crusty salsa off the carpet. One of the food staffers, who had previously held a higher position, did not get the same treatment we did and was excused from most of his duties. This food staffer even admitted that he was not taking the job seriously, and was only there so that he didn’t suffer from FOMO. What kind of social capital warrants this much lenience? It isn’t surprising that this alternate reality is also rife with corruption. One of the most astonishing things about McMUN is the vast budget that is granted to these students. Secretariat members and coordinators were given hotel rooms at the Sheraton, and all their meals were paid for. Meanwhile, no staff members were fed, apart from breakfast, despite volunteering for extensive hours. During the conference, we witnessed an unbelievable amount of food waste. Open food containers would be left out overnight, and hardly offered to staff. Some staff stumbled upon the food room, and would have to beg to eat something, a request that was met with ample hesitation from food coordinators. These staffers were then given illegitimate reasons as to why they couldn’t be offered the food. At one point, we spoke up and overruled the
food coordinators’ order, letting staff have whatever they wanted. It was pathetic to watch the coordinators guard food that would spoil anyway. Watching all that food go to waste became unbearable, and when we asked what they intended to do with it, they told us that it would be used as “drunk food” for the Secretariat members and coordinators. Only after that would they donate it to an “organization,” a response that was met with “aw’s” by everyone in the room. We were left wondering what organization would accept food that had been left out for three days. Food coordinators had also purchased snacks to distribute to students running the committees. There was, however, no systematic way to track the snack inventory, and it was obvious that they were essentially “winging it” every day. Was it carelessness or greed that led them to buy all these snacks, but never feed the people whose labour they relied on? Stepping in to our roles that weekend, we felt as if we were stepping into another world, an alternate reality, where it was easy to forget that McMUN is run by ordinary McGill students. It was shocking to see that these students were running such a large-scale conference with questionable knowledge on sustainability, hygiene, or waste management. McMUN is a flashy experience that attracts a lot of students looking for community and experience, and it’s a shame to watch something so prestigious have such a harmful side. It exploits people’s desire to climb up the hierarchical ladder in order to sustain its existence. Three weeks later, we are still recovering from the four day weekend and are actively seeking closure.
10
commentary
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
Hands Off Venezuela
On Western Imperialism in the Venezuelan Coup
Nellia Halimi, Phoebe Pannier, Yasir Piracha The McGill Daily
O
n January 23, Juan Guaidó, President of the oppositioncontrolled National Assembly, declared himself the interim president of Venezuela. This coup came in the wake of the inauguration of President Nicolás Maduro, who was elected for a second term in May of 2018. Guaidó’s claim to presidency was immediately backed by nearly all major Western powers, and their allies in Latin America, such as the United States, Canada, Colombia, Honduras and Brazil. Less than a week later, under the pretense of democratic concerns, and after being lobbied by the US and Canada, most European countries came to recognize Guaidó as Venezuela’s president. Their justification was based on Maduro’s refusal to call new elections, a demand that all of these democratically elected leaders would have rejected as well. On January 10, the National Assembly decided that incumbent President Maduro’s election was invalid, and began to orchestrate a “constitutional coup,” in order to remove him. Guaidó’s coup attempt has been framed in the Western media as a legitimate democratic opposition to Maduro’s supposed dictatorship. Guaidó’s self-proclamation as president, while Maduro is still in power, is unconstitutional. Under Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution, one is allowed to replace the president in the case of an “absolute power vacuum,” which occurs in a list of clear circumstances. In this case, since Maduro is still alive and performing his duties, and has not been impeached nor declared incapacitated by the Supreme Court, Guaidó’s declaration of leadership rests on the false claim that Maduro has abandoned his duty. Further, even in the case of Maduro abandoning his duties, according to the constitution, Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez should have been sworn in. There is no scenario in which Guaidó can not only take over power, but also install himself as the president for several months. The National Assembly passed a law on February 5 regarding the terms of the democratic transition. Article 26 of this new law extends the maximum period to call new elections from 30 days to 12 months, essentially allowing Guaidó to conserve power for a
Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily full year without any democratic process. The passing of this law by the National Assembly, benefitting Guaidó after his coup attempt, is blatant legislative overreach. This does not differ from past “constitutional” coup attempts in Latin America.
Under the pretense of democratic concerns, and after being lobbied by the US and Canada, most European countries came to recognize Guaidó as Venezuela’s president. The influence of Western propaganda on the coverage of Maduro’s presidency produces a single narrative of the elections as fraudulent, legitimizing Guaidó’s claim to presidency. While most
reports stress that the Supreme Court banned the opposition party in 2018, few discuss the political opportunism of the opposition’s boycott of the elections, which is now benefitting Guaidó. As a result of the boycott, voter turnout in wealthy neighbourhoods was lower than that of poorer neighbourhoods. Naomi Schiller, an Assistant Professor at the City University of New York who specializes in Latin American politics, explains that the boycott was likely a ploy by the opposition party to delegitimize the election of Maduro, which is exactly what we see happening today. According to Daniel Kovalik, US law professor and an observer of the election, the level of transparency of the election surpassed those in Western countries. The West’s refusal to hold Venezuelan democracy to the same low standards they accept for themselves testifies to their hypocrisy. It is clear Western governments value the political and partisan outcomes of elections in Venezuela over the actual legitimacy of democratic processes. Guaidó’s Political Project Unlike the image of a popular leader spread by the Western media, Guaidó was in fact largely
unknown by the Venezuelan population until his coup attempt in January. He was inaugurated as president of the National Assembly on January 5 of this year, only 18 days before declaring himself president of Venezuela. Guaidó’s support comes mainly from rightwing and far-right upper-class leaders, such as Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Theresa May, and Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who owes his power to another Americanbacked coup. This coup has been supported, funded, and orchestrated by pro-capitalist, imperialist states. Their approval is directly linked to Guaidó’s right-wing economic and political positions. Guaidó’s domestic policies include another “transition law,” which specifies a proposal to privatize companies which are currently nationalized under the Maduro government. He also hopes to implement free-market economic policies. Both of these will lead to massive layoffs, and increased unemployment for Venezuelans. In terms of foreign policy, Guaidó has already made it clear that he would turn Venezuela into a pro-US government. The US has been pursuing this
outcome ever since the start of the Bolivarian Revolution by Hugo Chávez in 1999.
There is no [constitutional] scenario in which Guaidó can not only take over power, but also install himself as the president for several months. Guaidó also stated on February 12 that he’s planning on renewing diplomatic ties with Israel, which has also recognized him as interim president. Since 2006, Venezuela has been openly critical of Israel; while still in office, Chávez called Israel “the assassin arm of the United States.” Diplomatic relations were officially established between Venezuela and Palestine in 2009. After Chávez’s death, the Venezuelan government continued its support of Palestine, a position that is now being threatened by Guaidó’s effort to solicit international support.
commentary Western Economic Interests This coup would not have been successful if not for the obstructive and imperialist political intervention of Western powers. Top Canadian and American officials such as Trump, Rubio, Special Envoy to Venezuela Abrams, Pence, and Freeland collaborated with the Venezuelan opposition prior to January 23, in order to ensure Guaidó’s success. While they have claimed that their support for Guaidó was motivated by a will to resolve the “humanitarian crisis” in Venezuela, the brutal economic sanctions imposed by these same countries on Venezuela suggest otherwise. The brunt of economic sanctions is always carried by the middle and working classes of Venezuela, and directly contributes to its current economic crisis. As per usual, the real reason for the West’s support of the coup rests on the economic assets of the region. Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserve, exceeding US partner Saudi Arabia, and the West wants access. US National Security Advisor John Bolton publicly admitted that the coup is “good for business” and stated that it would “make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.” The idea that Western governments are supporting Guaidó to “restore democracy” is shameless propaganda. If Canada and the US are so concerned with democracy, where is their condemnation of authoritarian regimes in countries like Saudi Arabia and Honduras? Further, if their goal was to remediate the “economic and humanitarian crisis” plaguing Venezuela, why do they continue to paralyze the Venezuelan economy with sanctions? On January 28, a week after the coup, the US declared that it was imposing further sanctions on the Venezuelan state-owned oil enterprise, PDVSA. The Venezuelan economy relies on oil exports for over 95 per cent of its revenue. These sanctions are estimated to result in a loss of over $11 billion in 2019 alone, and the immediate freezing of over $7 billion in assets. This is a clear attempt at asphyxiating the Venezuelan economy in order to force Maduro to step down. These measures directly affect the Venezuelan civilian population, and exacerbate the humanitarian crisis. Cutting the government’s primary revenue prevents it from importing basic necessities such as food and medicine into the country. Unsurprisingly, Guaidó’s opposition party backed these sanctions, despite their
dire repercussions on the Venezuelan people. The US has been imposing sanctions on Maduro’s government since he was first elected in 2013, and this has had catastrophic effects on the population. Sanctions allegedly costed Venezuela over $20 billion in 2018 alone. While investigating Venezuela, UN expert AlfredMaurice de Zayas found that international sanctions by the US and Canada are the primary cause of the country’s current economic turmoil. In his report, he notes that these sanctions violate international laws and amount to crimes against humanity. Political and Military Pressure The West’s hypocrisy has no limit: after imposing sanctions, countries such as the US and Canada then rushed to offer humanitarian aid, supposedly to help the Venezuelan population. However, the US has admitted that aid is a political tool aimed at destabilizing the government. The West could have chosen to negotiate with the Maduro administration, as initiated by Mexico, Uruguay, and CARICOM (the Caribbean Community). Instead, they sent a minimal amount of resources to frame themselves as “saving” Venezuela, and frame Maduro as culpable for the economic crisis. This politicization of humanitarian assistance has been condemned by the UN, especially in the context of Trump threatening military action, and Guaidó announcing he was “not ruling out” supporting this imperialist intervention. Another tool of political pressure has been the Lima Group. Formed in August 2017, it is composed of 12 out of the 33 Organization of American States (OAS) members, including Canada, Brazil, Argentina, and Honduras. Both the US and the European Union have positioned themselves as supporters of the group. Its main goal is to “resolve the crisis in Venezuela,” which is apparently synonymous with interfering with the Venezuelan democratic process. Canada has assumed leadership of the group, and according to official sources, Foreign Affairs Minister Freeland talked with Guaidó merely two weeks before the coup,
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily congratulating him on “unifying the opposition.” These talks have been framed by the media as “quiet diplomacy,” rather than a concerning exchange between Canada and Guaidó, days before the coup. Further, the speed at which the Lima Group threw their support behind Guaidó, and its creation a year and a half prior to the coup in the midst of the Venezuelan constitutional crisis, suggests that it was first and foremost created as an antiMaduro alliance. The Lima Group is not an established international body, but, as explained by analyst Nino Pagliccia, an “ad hoc group of governments with no other purpose than to promote the overthrowing of the legitimate Maduro government.” They have served to destabilize the legitimate Venezuelan government through statements of condemnation and calls for elections, which have been rejected by some of its own members, including Mexico. Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution Guaidó’s illegitimate claim to presidency on January 23 continues a trend by the Venezuelan opposition of co-opting significant leftwing revolutionary moments. January 23, 2019 marked the 61st anniversary of the 1958 Venezuelan coup, where dictator Marcos Jiménez was overthrown. This radical movement was largely student-led, spearheaded by Black, Indigenous, and poor activists, as well as feminist movements. The historic event continues to be honoured today in Venezuela by national leftwing mobilization. By planning their right-wing political moves during categorically left-wing anniversaries, Guaidó, and the light-skinned, elitist, wealthy opposition party of Venezuela have in recent years framed themselves as the “democratic” revolutionary movement. This coup is a direct attack on everything that Venezuela has worked towards since the Bolivarian revolution, a rebellion against an elitist government and global capitalism. On February 27, 1989, began what is now known as Caracazo, arguably the beginning of the pushback against neoliberalism in Venezuela. This mass riot in Caracas by the poorest of the Venezuelan population led to a
The West’s hypocrisy has no limit: after imposing sanctions, countries such as the US and Canada then rushed to offer humanitarian aid, supposedly to help the Venezuelan population.
chain reaction throughout the country over the next decade, including the rise in popularity of Hugo Chávez. Chávez emerged as a figurehead of the Bolivarian revolution. He was propelled into the public eye by grassroots leftist workers, leading to his election in 1998. In 1999, Venezuela radically rewrote the constitution under Chávez. The people of the country decided on the constitution by popular referenda, which transformed the economic and political landscape of the country. For the first time, it gave identity and recognition to the Black and Indigenous populations of Venezuela, and took major strides in gender inclusivity and women’s rights. This period also saw a dramatic reduction in poverty and increases in social welfare for the poor, in terms of goods, income, and education. The latter almost eliminated illiteracy in the country. Venezuela transformed from one of the most inequitable countries in Latin America to one of the most equal. Capitalist Hegemony The West, watching this socialist ideology spread throughout Latin America during the “pink tide,” has had a vested interest in ensuring its failure. As the figurehead of global capitalism in the post-Cold War era, the US has continuously attempted to undermine the Bolivarian project, and this coup is just the most recent attempt. In 2002, before Chávez’s full turn towards socialism, the Venezuelan opposition staged a similar coup. The same rightwing, elitist opposition that is being led by Guaidó today saw Chávez as an illegitimate president, largely due to his skin colour and status as an Afro-Indigenous person. Their attempted coup lasted only 47 hours – overwhelming popular support for Chávez and mass resistance in the streets by radical grassroots movements led the coup to be reversed almost immediately. Even then, the US was funding the opposition party, and were quick to support the coup that subsequently failed. It was after this that Chávez realized that a more socialist ideology was necessary, including direct democracy, the vast decentralization of power, and transforming production. As author and activist George Ciccariello-Maher articulates, ‘what we see today in Venezuela is not the product of too much socialism, but too little.” Venezuela has been punished by the West for not adhering to the norms of global capitalism since the Bolivarian revolution. Any
11
country that attempts to deviate from this oppressive standard has historically been an enemy of the West, and this is no exception. By destabilizing the Venezuelan economy, the West is ensuring that the Venezuelan people lose faith in the Bolivarian revolution and turn to capitalism instead. The interest in the regime change clearly stems from a desire to crush the independence movement which began in 1999 in Venezuela and spread throughout Latin America. Contemporary foreign intervention is strikingly reminiscent of US intervention in the continent throughout the twentieth century. It is solely for personal gain under capitalism that the US and Canada continue to impose sanctions, while also providing strategic political aid to maintain appearances.
As the figurehead of global capitalism, the US has continuously attempted to undermine the Bolivarian project, and this coup is just the most recent attempt. #HandsOffVenezuela Venezuelan activists have called on the international left to help block the coup, but most news sources have chosen instead to side with Western imperialist countries such as the US and Canada. Regardless of one’s opinions of Maduro, the fact remains that he was re-elected by the Venezuelan people in a voting system which was, until recently, praised as being among the best in the world, and thus should be supported by nations that label themselves as democratic, such as the US and Canada. To stand in solidarity with the Venezuelan people is to stand in solidarity with the leader they have chosen, not with one who has asserted himself against their will. Neither Canada, nor the US, nor any other country, has the right to decide what Venezuela’s future ought to be, especially not if that future is an illegal right-wing coup. Support for the Maduro government is widespread in Venezuela, and even more widespread is a desire for America to stop intervening. Not only do Venezuelans have a right to self-determination, but the effects of America’s decades of American imperialism have had consistently negative outcomes. Why would this case be the exception?
12
letter
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
An Open Letter To White Boys In Poli Sci By: Anonymous
Dear White Boys in Poli Sci, I wonder what your lives must be like. I always wonder this when I see you clustered in the hallways, or standing in the aisles of lecture halls, not realizing how much room you take up. You just stand there, so unapologetic, as the sea of people parts around you. I wonder this when you play devil’s advocate in class and you think you’re being clever, but you’re just shitting on someone else’s personhood. I wonder this when you talk over other people, or comment on what the professor is saying without raising your hand, as if a lecture is just a dialogue that only the two of you can engage in. I wonder this when you spread yourself out on your desk so that your things spill over onto mine, and you don’t apologize, but instead continue as if nothing is wrong – meanwhile, I am too passive to say anything. I wonder this when you exist so loudly and so largely because you’ve been allowed to exist like this your whole life, and I am left to carefully defend the scraps of space that I have left. So this is a letter to you. For all the times I have wanted to punch you in the mouth and refrained, here’s to you.
Even those who don’t actively engage in any type of belittling behaviour still watch it happen and stand idly by. Even those who consider themselves “allies,” continuously speak on behalf of groups whose hardships they have never experienced, thereby effectively robbing marginalized people of the chance to speak for themselves. The term “white guy in poli sci” is of course a generalization because all sorts of people can be downright awful. However, the white guy represents the apex of privilege, and I do sincerely believe that this, and other groups who are so privileged in some respects, can be ignorant to the struggles of others. Therefore I use the term only to represent the height of privilege. But by all means, if you recognize any of these types of behaviours in yourself regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, class, etc., feel free to identify with them and ask yourself, “why do I act like such an asshole?” Now for the juicy stuff. It’s a shame that the same type of people who exhibit these behaviours m a y
I felt bad for your own body. Your own muscles and vocal cords were plagued with the task of speaking your amazingly ignorant words. Before I get into the nitty gritty of just how awful it can be to study political science as a woman of colour, I would just to like to say that this does not apply to all of you in the same ways. Not all of you are ignorant and oblivious to those around you, and not all of you deserve to be lambasted in this open letter for what you have said or done. But I’m also not sure any of you can safely call yourselves “innocent.”
never feel inclined to read an article like this, or own up to it, but this first story of
dick-bag behaviour goes to one of my classmates. Yes, one particular person inspired this open letter. I hope you read this and know that I tell my friends about this day in class, I tell my family, hell, I’m even telling strangers now. This is exemplary of the type of backwards, bullshit comments that I have to put up with regularly, and I tell them about you. Yes, you. I really hope you pick this up and read this and know that when I look for the pinnacle of whiteprivileged, poli sci bro, I tell them about you. You might be wondering, what could possibly be so upsetting to inspire such a lengthy diatribe? One day in conference, the class was pitching our research paper topics. I wanted to examine the impacts of gender quotas on female representation in Parliament. Near the end of the conference, my topic had sparked an especially heated debate between this bro and I about the validity of such an approach to fix the gender gap. (I’m seething while writing this, just so you know). I remember feeling frustrated because I worked in the House of Commons for a year, so I knew what it was like to be a woman there. I saw women bring their sleeping babies into the House in a system with a socalled “feminist Prime Minister” that has not ensured enough resources for young moms in the House. I saw the way women staffers were treated a n d
sexualized, the pervasive toxic masculinity, the aggression of certain men, and it was frightening. I told you I would support a gender quota wholeheartedly, if only so I could look into my own parliament one day and see a face that looked like mine. You were dismissive, to say the least. I can understand how this means almost nothing to you because
unlike you, I can try and relate to people of a different gender. If I were a white boy like you, I too might be unconcerned, because men are heartily represented and you have no reason to feel like you have to fight for anything. Your voice is always heard, sometimes it’s the only one that’s heard, and you are always safe. But my voice is almost never heard and you could never muster enough empathy for a fraction of a second to consider why I might be invested in this case. You said, and I quote: “women are just less interested in politics.” I spluttered for a second, looked at my conference where women were the majority, and wanted to cry. I argued this wasn’t true, and even if that vast and entirely unfounded overgeneralization did have any inkling of truth, it
may have something to do with the systemic barriers women have faced for centuries. You replied: “I don’t get upset that there are more women in art history than there are men, that’s just the way things work.” At this point my replies were a little sharper and I could feel my emotions getting the better of me. Can you imagine what this must have felt like for me? Actually, no you can’t. To hear that the underrepresentation of women in politics was somehow a natural reflection of interests was so absolutely ignorant of all the struggles women face in this particular field. So, yeah, it got personal. And when I started to cut you off and interjecting because your argument was premised on inaccuracies, you replied in the most patronizing way. You asked me if I could just stop cutting you off and let you finish your argument. I wanted to yell. I wanted to scream and flip a table and throw myself on the ground and rip myself in half. I didn’t want to hear what you had to say anymore. I felt bad for your own body. Your own muscles and vocal cords were plagued with the task of speaking your amazingly ignorant words. I was emotional because my hopes and ambitions were up for debate. Did my voice really need to be heard? Do women really need to be treated as equals? The answer is a stupid, and painfully indisputable YES. And here I was, talking to some dude who pulls up in a Patagonia sweater and acts like these and my own existence were up for debate.
Every time I see a female professor, lawyer, politician, or in any other field, I think to myself: it’s safe. These waters have been tested. This was not the only time the gender quota issue would spark some debate, and it manifested
letter
itself in strange ways. A longtime friend of mine, a white guy (see, I can be friends with white guys, this isn’t misandry), said that, while women in Parliament should be represented more, he didn’t like the idea that a gender quota might force us to overlook the most qualified candidate. I don’t understand how he and so many other people have this impression that the most qualified politician would always be an old, white, dude. Not to mention the job of an MP is one that actually has spectacularly few requirements, and therefore what really constitutes a “qualified candidate?” Some would have argued that Tony Clement, former Harper Cabinet Minister, was a “qualified candidate” up until he sent dick pics to people and caused a nation-wide scandal. Farmers can be qualified, and lawyers can be qualified, and my favourite example, Ms. Ruth-
Ellen Brosseau can be qualified. She has now successfully been elected twice and she got pregnant at 16, dropped out of school, finished via distance learning, and didn’t campaign in a traditional sense. She was originally elected in the orange wave in Quebec, and proved herself a qualified candidate again in the 2015 election. The job of MP has few requirements and perhaps even fewer clear job descriptions. So how can you even evaluate what it means to be qualified when there are so few qualifications in place? The gender quota/women in politics discussion is just the tip of the iceberg. Those white guys who trample all over women’s rights are just as eager to do it to minorities and Indigenous people. In class about a week ago, the most vocal critic of Canada’s
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
treatment of Indigenous n a t i o n s was some white guy. It’s one thing to support Indigenous nations, but to speak on their behalf and pretend to feel some righteous indignation seems wrong. You just don’t get the right to talk about other’s pain and suffering, and raise your voice and feel justified in your
anger when it isn’t yours. If somebody stood up and spoke about Afro-Latinas and claimed to understand my pain, my confused identity, my personal struggle with my homeland and culture, and the biases I face, I would be offended, especially if they were to do it as if they have the right to feel those things on my behalf. Now, obviously, this highlights the greater issue that Indigenous people are also
In political science, I feel like I have to constantly defend my right to be represented
severely underrepresented in McGill at large and and in its poli sci program, but instead of passively deferring to other people to speak on their behalf, when these topics do come up in class, guest lecturers or
world, society will only continue to reinforce it. It’s something so deeply held and something so deluding that I am actually amazed people like that can walk through the world so unaware, even today. You seemed genuinely upset when you said this – like you thought I was stupid for needing to see myself represented in politics. So, here is why representation is
Indigenous writers should be at the forefront, not you, white guy. In political science, I feel like I have to constantly defend my right to be represented, which may prompt some of you to ask why I didn’t choose something a little less emotionally exhausting. It’s because I saw what politics was like for a woman of colour and I wanted to ensure that no one else who looked like me or had experienced what I had experienced would question their right to engage in political dialogue and be heard. Another white poli sci bro asked me why representation was so important anyway. He said: “I don’t need to see a white person doing my job to know that I can do it too.” And I think this is pretty much a remarkable level of privilege. This is something that you are born with and as you slip out into the
so important. Every time I see a female professor, lawyer, politician, or any other profession, I think to myself: it’s safe. These waters have been tested. I’m not diving into a pool of sharks. Or if I am, at least I know I’m not doing it alone, and that other women have survived, and even thrived, so I can too. I need a testament to the fact that pursuing something will not exhaust me emotionally, or crush my spirit, or defeat me, because even though it may be difficult and I will be the minority, I will know I am not alone. But can you imagine how hard it was for the first women in graduate seminars, surrounded by white men? Can you imagine how fucking hard it must have been to know that there is no path, you are the first one to walk it, and you must make the way easier for others who will follow? If I can
13
only muster as much strength as she did, I will come out of this okay, and maybe even stronger. Lastly, before I collapse into yet another heap of helpless tears about how stupidly awful poli sci can be, let me just say to the guy in the Conservative Association on campus who wore a “Make Canada Great Again” hat courtesy of Rebel Media: fuck you. It was Activities Night and you made me fucking scared for what poli sci here might be like because I thought it might be filled with the likes of you. I believe that the MAGA hat, in all its incarnations, is an act of violence and if you’re reading (if anyone knows this guy please direct him to this letter), just know that what you wear is not about “free speech” in some asshole Jordan Peterson way. It is dehumanizing and offensive and you disgust me. I don’t know if this letter has accomplished anything besides allowing me to say what I have
been thinking for so long and ease my own pain. Like I said, I doubt any of you bros will pick up this letter and read it and actually change, or call out your buddies and ask them to change. I bet some of you will even boycott the Daily, if you don’t already, as if throwing away this paper will stop the Daily from calling out men on toxic masculinity. But I would be oh so grateful, if just this once, you proved me wrong about your behaviour, and looked inside yourself, and did some good with your immense privilege. Sincerely,
Your equal
14
culture
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
Buffy’s Medicine Songs
Buffy Sainte-Marie on Indigenizing Music and Environmental Justice Sîan Lathrop & Yasna Khademian The McGill Daily
T
he McGill Daily had the chance to interview Buffy Sainte-Marie while she was in Montreal for her February 16 show at Corona Theatre. The show promoted her 2017 album, Medicine Songs. We discussed her identity as an Indigenous artist in the ‘60s, environmental justice, and her efforts to decolonize the music industry through her activism and music. The McGill Daily (MD): Where do you draw inspiration from when writing your music? Buffy Sainte-Marie (BSM): For me, it’s like I have a little camera in my head, and I’m always taking little snapshots, and then when life does something impressive in front of me, I’ll take a picture or I’ll write a song or I’ll get inspired to make a painting. It’s just the everyday stuff that inspires me. It’s the same stuff that happens to me and to everybody who’s listening. It’s very ordinary things. Sometimes it’s things that most people are not seeing. I have the great advantage of having all these airplane tickets that have allowed me to travel to, not only the great stages of the world as a concert artist, but also small Indigenous places in Scandinavia, Australia, or in the Americas. I get to report back on things that most people are not getting to see. MD: What do you see as the role of music and social activism, and more specifically, how do you use music as a form of activism? BSM: Oh golly, you know it’s so natural to me that it’s almost hard to look at it in that way. I don’t feel as though music is required to do anything because music is about
everything, just everything. Think of a 360 degree sphere: musicians come from every part of that sphere and we appreciate, write, and develop all kinds of things. So I don’t feel a responsibility to write activist songs. For instance, the songs that have enabled me to make enough money to be in show business, which is very expensive, are love songs. Like “Up Where We Belong,” which won an Academy Award, and “Until It’s Time for You to Go,” which was recorded by Elvis Presley and hundreds of other artists. So it’s funny for me. It’s a very good question from you, but I don’t have a great answer for it. It happens pretty naturally for me. I think it’s who I am and I think it’s who I was as a little kid, too. I never played sports, and I never played with Barbie dolls. I got bullied and because of this, I was the kind of kid who was really happy to go and teach myself how to play the piano because it was just so much fun. So my activism really comes from a sense of enjoyment and play. Even if it’s a tough subject that I’m writing about, even if it’s angry, even if I’m crying when I’m writing the lyrics to some song that deals with a human event that’s just awful, I still feel the same kind of motivation that most people would feel if they were playing. It comes very naturally to me. MD: Has there been a political or social experience that shaped your music more than others? BSM: I think that what has shaped me is the sense of, “holy smokes, it’s still that way?” I mean most Americans don’t realize that we, Indigenous people, didn’t even have religious freedom until the 70s. Just that kind of inequity, unfairness, and the fact that our fellow North Americans are not even aware of it.
Courtesy of Matt Barnes
It’s a big picture thing that inspires me. It’s not one incident. I’m not looking for show business material. Life is happening to me and, as an artist, I’m lucky enough to have the motivation and the interest, as well as a little bit of skill, to turn it into something! But I’m not doing “activist music” as career fodder. I mean, activist music is what I’m doing anyway. Show business is the vehicle through which I’m trying to do other things, like letting people know about important issues. MD: I know that you were blacklisted from the radio in the 60s because of the issues you chose to sing about. BSM: Maybe not. Maybe yes, maybe no, we don’t know for sure. It was no single song, people just became suspicious of me. The administrations of Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon didn’t want me opening my mouth about the environment. They especially did not want Indigenous people interfering with their complete control of available land and natural resources. It’s kind of a complicated issue, the reason why I was blacklisted. MD: What would would say to young activists and musicians today? BSM: If you really do want to change the world, you have to take care of yourself. Don’t burn out. Don’t get involved with some troll on the internet and discourage yourself. You’ve got to let some things go in one ear and out the other and just keep on with whatever your mission is. And, you know, your mission changes all the time, but if you’re a person who really wants to solve big picture issues, it’s not difficult. Just do it one day at a time, and if you have an opportunity to speak up, or to offer something, or to help, you do it. Next month, it might be something else. But if you’re a lifelong positive person and that’s the heart of your mission, you find ways to be involved, sometimes in a very small ways, and other times in big ways. MD: You have been singing about the environment and environmental justice since long before it became a mainstream concern, can you speak to how you have centered Indigeneity in environmental justice? BSM: Oh gosh, you know, if you had been walking in my shoes these past 50-something years, it would become very obvious that colonialism is based in European greed, control, and lack of understanding. And the lack of understanding about the environment is primary.
Courtesy of Brian Campbell Indigenous people throughout the world are very close to nature. Europe was an anomaly. Europe was governed by popes, kings, serial killers, and people who thought, “if we don’t control it then it must be of the devil.” That kind of control of women, of money, and of nature comes right down the pecking order from the popes and the kings who wanted to control everybody. There’s a huge difference between Native America and European colonialism when it comes to nature and the environment. The Europeans were taught for generations that you’re supposed to defeat it, you’re supposed to fight it, you’re supposed to get rid of it and control it. It’s primary material, not secondary material that I had to read about. I’ve been in these Native communities. They go to a clean spot and pray and work together to preserve nature, to bring back the buffalo, to bring back wilderness in areas that have been mistreated by colonialism. In my song “No No Keshagesh,” keshagesh means greedy guts. The song is saying, “no no greedy guts, you can’t do that anymore.” So in that way, I am coming from an Indigenous point of view, and from primary experience in the Native community. Why not speak from that platform since that is who I am, what I know, what I do. It can be very tricky as a songwriter. I mean, how do you actually put that into a format that doesn’t sound like a speech, that doesn’t sound like some politician yelling at you? You have to be clever. So you put it in a rock and roll track, you give it a great video, you make it danceable, and once people do hear the words they say, “oh, wow, you know, that makes a lot
of sense,” but it has a sense of humour to it too. That’s part of not burning out. You have to take care of yourself. Sometimes what you need is a bed and a bath and time to think. You don’t just pedal to the metal all the time. Basically you’re turning shit into Shinola. MD: In Andrea Warner’s book, Buffy Sainte-Marie: The Authorized Biography, she mentions the creation of the Indigenous Music Album category at the Juno Awards. Can you tell us a bit about how that category came about, and the work you did to decolonize the Junos in the 1990s? BSM: Well, I heard that Elaine Bomberry and Shingoose were trying to set up a “Music of Aboriginal Canada” category for the Junos. I called Elaine and I said, “you need any help?” and she said yes. So the three of us went in. The Canadian Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, who are the parent organization of the Junos, don’t establish a new music category because they think you deserve it. You have to come up with the numbers and actually show that there are people making records. Show that there are recording studios, producers, engineers, musicians, songwriters, etc. So Elaine and Shingoose did that, and we got to establish the “Music of Aboriginal Canada” category. Sometimes you get a chance to do that and you do it. Medicine Songs can be streamed online. You can find more information about Buffy Sainte-Marie’s music, activism, and upcoming tour dates on buffysainte-marie.com This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Culture
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
15
Standing Up For Milton-Parc The Making of the Milton-Parc Cooperative Movement
Kelsey McKeon The McGill Daily
M
ilton-Parc: How We Did It is an exhibition at the Canadian Centre for Architecture (CCA) that tells the story of how Milton-Parc residents halted developers’ plans to demolish their community. In the process, they began a collective movement that continues to advocate for the residents of Milton-Parc, and engage with them through petitions and workshops. The exhibit is curated from the CCA archives by Dimitrios Roussopoulos, Josh Hawley, John Goedike, and Hassoun Karam. The central narrative of the exhibit is told through a 70 page spiral-bound booklet published and written by members of the MiltonParc Citizens Committee (CCMP; Comité des citoyennes et citoyens Milton-Parc). The booklet intends to remind members of the Citizens Committee of their own history, as well as to disseminate Milton-Parc’s history to a wider audience. As an ode to the collective efforts of this movement, the book does not name a single individual throughout the telling of this history. The history of Milton-Parc has largely been obscured by complicated legal jargon that renders it inaccessible to the broader public. Fortunately, the booklet is incredibly effective in simplifying legal terms and the sequence of events, and helped to inform much of the history described in this article. In 1968, a group of developers, who would later become known as “Concordia Estates Ltd.,” announced plans, backed by Jean Drapeau’s city administration, to tear down six blocks of residential buildings. Prior to this announcement, the developers had spent years inconspicuously buying properties within the
neighbourhood. These six square blocks, an area marked within the limits of Milton, Hutchinson, des Pins, and Sainte-Famille, were to become grand apartment buildings, high-rise offices, and commercial shopping complexes. The exhibit at the CCA displays the developers’ proposed plans as well as photographs of a 3D model of their plan.
Milton-Parc residents halted developers’ plans to demolish their community and began a movement that continues to advocate for residents today. From the onset of the plan’s reveal, the Citizens Committee began organizing active resistance through what they described as non-violent “militant action.” This included petitions, marches, sit-ins, and the formation of housing cooperatives. Housing cooperatives are a form of collective home ownership where members are often united by shared economic, social, or political needs. Within one home, they pool their resources to create a space for members’ needs to be met. Members of a cooperative will buy in and own a share of the cooperative. As the Committee organized itself, the developers carried out phase one of their three-part plan. Among the buildings constructed during this phase were a hotel, now McGill’s New
Residence Hall, the underground mall now known as Les Galeries du Parc, and the La Cité apartment high-rises. Shortly after, Concordia Estates Ltd. ran out of funding and put the remainder of the property up for sale. The Canadian government bought the property in 1979, via its Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, with the intention of helping residents form cooperatives. The Citizens Committee’s mission evolved into seeing the formation of cooperatives and nonprofits through, and they started the Milton-Parc Housing Project. In time, the group created a set of agreed-upon social values; they wanted each cooperative group to have full ownership over their property, rather than being controlled by a larger entity. They urged the government to impose restrictions that would ensure the preservation of the heritage of the buildings. They also wanted to be assured that the housing would remain affordable despite the properties’ inevitable appreciation of market value over time. The group worked to configure the legal ownership and financing of these cooperatives in a way that allowed them to work in tandem with their established set of values. The significance of this project is the steps the Citizens Committee took to accomplish this, despite the lack of a preexisting legal framework that could outline all that they were trying to achieve. They created a “Declaration of Coownership,” which granted each cooperative ownership over their own building and its land. Through this configuration, they could ensure the historical preservation of the buildings, and their heritages, without submitting to being governed by a larger entity. Instead, the declaration created a governing body made up of representatives from each of the
Courtesy of Canadian Centre for Architecture
Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily cooperatives that collectively own and manage the properties, called the CMP (Communauté Milton-Parc), which remains intact today. The land in front and behind each building is collectively owned by the CMP. The declaration also set out legally binding conditions that members had to abide by, such as allocating a certain portion of vacant space to low-income residents. Once adopted as a bill under the Quebec National Assembly, it became the legal governing framework of the cooperatives. The Committee’s activism did not stop with the establishment of the cooperatives and nonprofits, however, and the streets that surround McGill function as testament to the efforts of countless individuals over the span of many years. Sit-ins by the Milton-Parc Citizens Committee are the reason why the top section of Jeanne-Mance, near des Pins, is closed to traffic, and why Hutchinson is a one-way street, as well as why its intersection with des Pins has been reduced to only one lane. The Committee can also be accredited with the plaque on the exterior wall of La Cité, which acts as a token of reconciliation between the Citizens Community and the initially unwelcome apartment complex.
Yellow Door, a nonprofit on Aylmer, was awarded property through the Committee’s Milton-Parc Housing Project, and remains a significant legacy of this cooperative movement. The photos in this exhibit show a version of Milton-Parc that is uncannily similar to the one that exists today, diverging from the common use of visuals within the retelling of history to portray how drastically things change over time. Instead, the images show how little has changed, and pushes viewers to recognize the community responsible for preserving the neighborhood. This exhibit forces its viewers to recognize the history of struggle behind the neighborhood that many members of the McGill community reside in. It also reminds us of the effectiveness of direct action and non-violent forms of protest, as well as the spirit of community behind the Milton-Parc area as it stands today. The efforts of the Milton-Parc Citizens Committee should guide us when property developers inevitably return to our communities. Milton-Parc: How We Did It runs until March 17 and is open to the public, free of charge. For more information, visit the CCA’s website at cca.qc.ca.
16
poetry!
February 18, 2019 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily
Lies, half-truths, and smashing a car for charity.
Ode to the 20-Year Old Virgin Karla Maria Tejeda-Iglesias
You realize two things on your walk of unfulfilled shame.
With your birthday rapidly approaching, and your virginity as
One, you are happy that you did not have sex with someone
;
absolutely intact as a social construct can be, this is for you.
for the sake of having sex with someone. And two, you forgot your Lord of the Rings DVD at his house, and you’ll
When you turned 16, you were in the throes of your first and only
have to make up an excuse if ever anyone wants to watch
relationship, to a girl. Your days together were numbered, and you
it again, because there’s no way you can return.
were as star-crossed as any two lovers could be, and when you
7
talked about that weird concept, made weirder by the fact that
And you’ve heard enough stories about your friends
you both only vaguely knew about the logistics of lesbian sex, she
who “did it,” but the truth is, if it’s described as
> <
something you lose how good could it be?
Now you scoffed, but she insisted that, by her standards, this, and she
Your one friend did it in a shower. This guy handed her a bottle
waved her hand vaguely between the two of you, would not “count.”
of something, and she was so nervous she assumed it was
"
said, whatever happens, I’ll still be a virgin when this is done.
shampoo. It was of course body wash for her to scrub away at
The relationship dissolved one month later, and in your
that dirty dirty boy, but she dumped it in her hair and started
head you said “fuck you,” and to her you said “I’m sorry, I’ll
to lather. It dripped into her eyes, until they stung and they had
leave that up to someone who’ll actually matter,” and you
strange and uncomfortable shower sex as her eyes watered.
9
moved across an ocean and cursed her for weeks on end.
=
So now you’re 19, and still a virgin, but you read that Tina Fey
On your wild European adventure there was no shortage of youth
was a virgin until 24 so I guess it’s okay? And it’s funny how
hostel beds and eager partners, but when you have to keep quiet
something can matter to you and everyone else so much and
because you’re on the top bunk and the Brazilian couple beneath
so little. And it’s not something you can feel or touch or see,
>
you are light sleepers, sex in this space sort of loses its appeal.
it’s not some cherry poised to be popped, it’s no tangible and
:
absolute thing that you can surrender or take. It’s just an idea.
And finally, you go over to a guy’s house that your mutual friend set you up with, but his idea of a fun time is letting
And here is a better idea: you are a 20-year-old poet, 20-year old
his limp tongue sit inside your mouth while Lord of the Rings
prime minister to be, 20-year-old professional flower picker and
plays in the background and so you zip up your pants, feign a
20-year-old pottery enthusiast. And here you are dwelling on being a
crisis, and leave before he starts petting your hair again.
20-year-old virgin. What a silly thing, my friend, to think more about what other people can make you, than what you have made yourself.
56
3
1 4 2