Good Education is Not a Right, nor a Choice but a Burden

Our world does it resemble yours, where we come from. Our education is drizzled in the blood, sweat and tears of our parents , that are currently locked up and nowhere to be seen. 

Many of you might have heard the ongoing devastating news about Lebanon. I was blessed with access to both worlds, some may say I’m even Hannah Montana, but one world isn’t a Disney movie, it looks more like Paranormal Activity 1 through 5.  And here’s why:  Where we come from, good Education is not a right, nor a choice but a burden.

On December 9th, the American University of Beirut alongside other universities shared their plans to increase the conversion rate of the Lebanese Pound up to nearly 260%. But the horror movie doesn’t start there. Lebanese students have been facing harsh times for about a year now. In October 2019, classes were dismissed for a month as the revolution began, many students joined the streets to fight for basic rights, such as the right to a democratic government, the right to proper education and the saddest thing of all, the right to necessities like electricity and water.

As months passed and new challenges were faced, students had to halt all their studies in February due to the pandemic. By then, the inflation increased dramatically and students weren’t able to afford the appropriate equipment: laptops, headsets and internet to accommodate. The year ended very poorly, most of the official exams offered in Lebanon got cancelled. I think the major jump-scare of this horror movie was on August 4th, a ticking time bomb exploded in the heart of Beirut, leaving nearly 206 dead, 3000 wounded and 300 000 homeless. The sound of the explosion rings to this day in the ears of Lebanese souls, victims of a corrupt government. 

I was fortunate to leave Lebanon and study here at McGill and gain access to all sorts of funding, but many today are having to choose between dinner for a month or a credit at university and with the current changes, they might have neither. And I wish I could tell you how the story ends and what the moral of the story is, but it is uncertain. You can help shape the future of many students by contributing financially or spreading the word. Your knowledge about the current situation is in itself a contribution. 

Saf Hakawati 

U1 

Political Science

My Experience as a Privileged WOC

The first time I, as well as my brothers, realized my grandma was Black, was when I was 5 years old. It was not from spontaneous self-discovery or by doing research that I came to such a conclusion. It was my dad who revealed to me that grandma was, in fact, a Black woman.

Growing up in a small town on the south shore of Montreal, racism, classism, and even microaggressions were never something I experienced. In fact, the middle school I attended was very much diverse – white kids represented less than half of all students. As I became older and was made aware that being mixed, or Black, or Asian, or any ethnicity other than white was deemed different, is when I started noticing subtle but obvious racial facts I was once too young to understand. 

For as long as I can remember, we were the only mixed family in my small town. People would easily recognize my grandma walking around town. They would say, “She is the only black person in town,” A small comment that many would characterize as inoffensive, yet which weighed a lot on my young conscience – we were the only ones in town. I was never ashamed of being so-called different, I never was criticized for it, no one classified me as “the mixed-race girl” when I was younger. From what I can remember, racism was not something I ever experienced, or witnessed my family experiencing, for most of my life. 

I always considered myself very fortunate and highly privileged. All my life, I never lacked anything – we had plenty of food available to my family of six, we were able to afford two vacations a year, my parents both worked full time jobs, my three brothers and I had access to top private education and played sports. In fact, I would consider my family above average because the truth is, my family is part of the small portion of the population located above the middle class. My dad’s dad, my grandpa, founded a very large finance company that has been growing more and more since its creation. Everyone knows my family in my town, and I’m not saying this to brag, but simply to add to my point – I have always been highly privileged. 

I have been playing tennis since the age of four. It was my dad, Sebastien LeBlanc, who initiated my brother Alex and I to the sport that forever changed our lives. Because of tennis, we were able to travel, learn two new languages, make friends, and train in conditions any tennis player would dream of. At the age of 13, both my parents, with my and Alex’s approval, decided to send us to Spain to train at a well-known academy. We attended the private school for four years.

People only associate privilege with being rich and famous, when in fact privilege is also being educated, having a roof over your head, having access to nutritious and healthy food, being loved and supported by your parents, being able to afford vacation getaways, et cetera.

Raphaelle LeBlanc

The Myth of Conservative Censorship on Social Media

One of the biggest myths that is being circulated concerns the alleged censorship of conservatives on social media. They claim that Big Tech purposely ban and censor people with conservative views. Donald Trump has spearheaded this faux movement, first arguing that Twitter unfairly censored him after they started fact-checking his tweets.

In reality, his tweets were being circulated and amplified on Twitter and all the major news channels, free of charge, for years. Regardless of his controversial remarks, Mr. Trump acquired an unparalleled following on Twitter. Journalists, pundits, regular people all chased after his tweets, making him the No.1 personality on Twitter. Not only didn’t Twitter suppress him, Twitter made him the person he will forever be remembered as.

This was all before he publicly incited a coup at the Capitol. An insurrection at the temple of democracy was already unthinkable, and yet the President of the United States was the one inciting it. Had social media platforms not suspended him, it could have been a lot worse.

Despite being suspended by all major social media platforms, Citizen Trump in all intents and purposes still has his full freedom of speech unimpeded. He can go on One America News Network (since Fox News might no longer welcome him) and do as many interviews as he pleases. He is also more than welcome to open a Parler or GAB account and communicate with his supporters. He also has his website up and running as well.

Maverick Medeiros

The post Guest Opinions: January in Retrospect appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Centre Black Activism Every Month appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Much of Bill 40’s framework rests on the expectation that parents will take on the primary burden of their children’s education, while teachers and other education partners at the local level will lose authority. School commissioners, who once acted as neutral mediators between schools and the province, will be replaced by a board of directors comprised of volunteer parents and community members. In the case of French-language districts, the board of directors will now be appointed by the Ministry of Education itself, instead of being elected by the community. Switching to a system that relies on appointments is a problematic method of shifting power from community members to biased government officials who don’t have direct knowledge of the community’s needs. English-language districts will continue to elect directors, as part of what Roberge called a “compromise” with English institutions.

These systemic changes risk creating a two-tiered hierarchy in education. By removing neutral offices and placing responsibility on select parents, many schools will no longer have a stable advocate for the equal distribution of resources. Additionally, this system underrepresents often already marginalized families who might not have the capacity to volunteer their time to sit on school boards. The replacement of autonomous school boards and the removal of elections for French-language districts are designed to expand the Minister of Education Jean-François Roberge’s power, which was previously checked by school board unions. This policy especially affects English-language districts, whose democratic and labour operations will no longer be protected by school board unions against any detrimental legislative actions of the provincial government.

For this bill, the CAQ invoked closure: a process that allows governments to heavily limit debate and require a final vote by the end of a sitting. As a result, the assembly over Bill 40 was pressured to last almost twenty hours, proceeding into the early hours of the morning. This is the fourth time the CAQ has abused this policy since being elected: closure was previously used to pass Bill 9, Bill 34, and Bill 21 into law. Bill 40 passed with all 60 attending members of the CAQ voting in favour, and was opposed by the 35 remaining members, who represented all other parties. This adamant push for low-priority legislation like Bill 40 displays the CAQ’s disregard for the needs and interests of their constituents in an arrogant display of control.

Roberge tabled a last-minute amendment during the assembly that would move the extinction of French school commissioners from February 29 to as soon as the bill is passed. This means that instead of having until the end of the month to transition out of their roles, hundreds of school commissioners across Quebec woke up on Saturday, February 8, to the news that they had lost their jobs. Though Roberge claimed the province would continue to pay these commissioners until June 30, the abrupt change is further example of the CAQ’s serious lack of consideration for individuals, especially those who have the potential to speak out against them.

These actions are part of the CAQ’s overarching policy to prioritize their own goals while exacerbating institutionalized discrimination against vulnerable residents of the province. The CAQ has repeatedly used closure to obscure opposing voices, and, in the case of commissioner extinction, has been blatantly inconsiderate of the livelihoods of hundreds of dedicated community members, simply so their agenda can advance faster.

Confront the CAQ about their unnecessary and arbitrary use of closure. Contact the Minister of Education, Jean-François Roberge, and hold him accountable for his disregard of the teachers and families he is supposed to advocate for. Most importantly, support and follow organizations like La Fédération des Commissions Scolaires du Québec (FCSQ), Quebec English School Boards Association (QESBA), Fédération Autonome de L’Enseignement (FAE), and APPELE- Quebec, who regularly hold community hearings and who will be working directly with teachers, parents, and communities during this transition period.

The post The CAQ is Infringing On Education, Again appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Valentine’s Day Classifieds appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Phoebe Pannier

The post Prom Royalty Results! appeared first on The McGill Daily.

On September 10, we received an email from two McGill Law students who wanted us to publish a letter in which they express, among other things, their dissatisfaction with The McGill Daily’s definition of Zionism.

Following a lack of response from our editorial board, these students approached the Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Fabrice Labeau, asserting that the Daily was in violation of its Letters Policy. While the Daily’s position was, and remains, that the letter in question is in opposition to both our Statement of Principles and our Letters Policy, and that we should not have to publish it, Labeau determined that this perspective was not conducive to fostering an open exchange of ideas.’

This is a clear display of administrative interference in the Daily’s Letters’ Policy, as the Deputy Provost referenced a “nuclear option” – arbitration between the Daily and the administration over interpretation of the Memorandum of Agreement. This process would ultimately require time and money which the Daily does not have, but which the administration does. If the Daily were to lose in arbitration, it would mean our funding would be withheld, as would funding for Le Délit Français, thereby jeopardizing the existence of both papers.

Any dialogue that gives a platform to ideas which dehumanize a group of people only serves to amplify those views. It is deeply disappointing that Labeau did not recognize the inherent anti-Arab racism and dehumanization of Palestinian people present in this letter, which we will address further in this response

We have made a commitment to our readers to publish letters that are written to us in good faith and that hold us accountable, as per our Statement of Principles. However, citing our Letters Policy, the Daily and Le Délit reserve the right to reject “any letter whose content displays racial, ethnic, sexual, and socioeconomic prejudice.” This letter falls into that category. Our policy also states that we reserve the right to not publish any letter that is longer than 500 words in print, so long as it is in accordance with the rest of our policy. However, Labeau made clear to the Daily that this letter had to appear in our next print issue regardless and it can be found within this issue on page 13.

The content of the letter is unconscionable in its dehumanization of the Palestinian people. We therefore want to apologize to our readers for its presence in our paper, and provide the following response to it.

We would also like to apologize for our previously-published definition of Zionism for not being comprehensive. We hope our response here will address this lack of depth. In addition, we would like to apologize for the definition’s lack of acknowledgement of anti-Zionist Jewish groups such as Independent Jewish Voices (IJV), who do extremely important work in dismantling the idea that anti-Zionism is inherently anti-Semitic.

The Daily’s previously-published definition of Zionism in the issue that the letter is referencing reads as follows:

“A modern political movement advocating the colonial establishment of a Jewish state in the biblical land of Israel. Zionism’s ideological roots can be traced to the nationalist and European colonial movements of the 19th century. Two-thirds of the Palestinian populace were displaced in the war that led to the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. Zionism has come to represent a racist attitude and violent practice towards Palestinians that recognizes only Israeli/Jewish hegemony and legitimacy to self-determination in Palestine. (For more depth and historical context, the Daily recommends visiting the website of the BDS movement.)”

Please note that the following response contains quotes from books referenced in the letter we received. These excerpts may be difficult to read due to their overtly racist content and we urge people to proceed with caution. We are choosing to publish this response because we would like to make clear our reasoning behind our anti-Zionist stance.

Our Response

The acknowledgement of a connection to the land itself is not inherently colonial. Jewish, Christian, and Muslim people all share a religious connection to the land. However, Zionism, at its inception, was a political, colonial movement. Theodor Herzl, whose work is endorsed by the authors of the letter, openly acknowledges this. To state that Zionism has always been peaceful is to erase the very history of those sources to which the authors direct us. Further, it not only shows a contradiction in the authors’ own arguments, but displays acute disrespect and disregard for the humanity of the Palestinian people.

The term “Zionism” was coined by Nathan Birnbaum in the late 1800s, following his description of Jewish nationalism in Palestine and “reclaiming” the land. In this vein, Birnbaum founded the “Zion Union of Austrian Associations for the Colonization of Palestine and Syria.”

Herzl further legitimized the colonization of Palestine through his racist, colonialist, and Orientalist rhetoric. Herzl’s Der Judenstaat demonstrates this explicitly. When talking about forming the state of Israel in Palestine, Herzl writes, “We should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism,” referring specifically to the “East” and deeming the Eastern peoples and Arabs to be “barbarians.” The fact that these students direct us towards this racist and colonialist book shows that their rhetoric is oppressive and harmful.

Further, in Altneuland, Herzl’s fictional descriptions of Palestine depict a barren land in need of saving from the Arabs who live there; he describes Jewish colonies in Palestine as “oases in the desolate countryside.” “Now everything is different,” Herzl has a Muslim character say, “They benefited from the progressive measures of the New Society whether they wanted to or not, whether they joined it or not.”

In a speech that Herzl gave in London in 1899, he told the audience, “And so I should think that here in England, the Zionist idea, which is a colonial one, should be easily and quickly understood.”

It bears mentioning that this idea was, in fact, “easily and quickly understood in England.” The 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which the British foreign secretary of the time promised that the British government would do their best to establish a “national home” for the Jewish people in Palestine, paved the way for the creation of the 1918 British mandate of Palestine and the 1948 war which resulted in the establishment of the state of Israel.

The authors of the letter challenge the characterization of the state of Israel as a colonial project, but in looking at its origins and history, it is apparent that it is one. They argue that Zionism’s principal goal is to promote equality between Israeli citizens and the “non-Jewish minority.” The language in this phrase homogenizes the “non-Jewish” population, erases the lived experiences of Jewish Palestinians, and implies that this “minority” came into being naturally instead of as a result of the forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of more than 80 per cent of the pre-war population in 1948.

In the letter, there is a vague reference to Israel having erred in some ways, which is a mischaracterization of what undoubtedly has been and continues to be ethnic cleansing. Plan Dalet drove Palestinians out of Palestine both through the material destruction of people’s homes and the threat of violence, which made it necessary for Palestinians to flee for their safety. By the time the 1948 war ended, around 750,000 Palestinians had been forcibly displaced and many still cannot return home, while others continue to live under violent occupation more than 70 years later. Further, even though the Israeli declaration of establishment claimed that the state would “ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants,” Palestinians who were not ethnically cleansed lived under military rule until 1966.

We cannot allow the harmful arguments put forth by the authors to go unaddressed. The Orientalist and racist rhetoric put forth by Herzl heavily parallels European scholars’ justifications of colonization in the Middle East and elsewhere, and the fact that the authors recommend reading Herzl’s work is a large part of why the Daily was unwilling to publish this letter.

The Daily would like to thank SPHR and IJV for their help in composing this response. IJV recommended the essay, “Zionism is Not ‘Not Judaism’” by Ben Lorber, which we would like to share with our readers as well.

If you would like to read the letter in reference, click the link below.

Response to McGill Daily on Zionism

The post Our Response appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Open Door shelter is a vital resource for the Milton- Parc community, especially Montreal’s disproportionate Indigenous homeless population, serving approximately 150 clients each day. The shelter is dedicated to allowing these individuals to preserve their culture, offering them space to eat and prepare country food, as well as having a dedicated carving room. Geta Etorolopiaq, a client of Open Door, also told The Linkhat the new location is preferable due to its proximity to the Native Friendship Centre on St. Laurent. According to APTN News, Open Door is also the only shelter in Montreal that accepts clients who have been using drugs or alcohol and clients with pets .

Operations Manager Dudley resigned from her position in October 2019 following a number of other staff resignations. These resignations came after the shelter’s director, David Chapman, was fired for insubordination in June. Chapman was not replaced, and the understaffing at Open Door has led to unsafe management.Since then, the shelter staff have been subjected to “instances of violence,” according to Dudley. One employee was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder from physical assault. The shortage of employees has resulted in longer, more strenuous shifts with limited breaks. Zack Ingles, Dudley’s predecessor, told The Montreal Gazette:“ Sometimes, someone would be in a crisis and you just stay with them after your shift for hours […] There wasn’t any kind of robust support from [the Board of Directors]. You feel like you’re on your own sometimes.”

In an effort to improve working conditions, the shelter staff have been given OMEGA training, an intensive three-day conflict de-escalation course. Furthermore, the shelter has implemented a policy where there must be at least three people working at any given time.

However, as of October 2019, there are only four trained employees at Open Door – the rest of the labour is done by unpaid volunteers. Ruth Bresnen, who sits on Open Door’s Board of Directors, says that this understaffing is largely due to a lack of funds, as the shelter does not receive government funding and therefore relies on public grants and donations.

Recent media coverage of Open Door perpetuates harmful stereotypes about the homeless population. The Montreal Gazette ’s article sensationalizes the situation and misattributes Dudley’s resignation to her having witnessed an act of violence; however, her resignation was ultimately a symptom of the lack of a support system for crisis workers at the shelter. In an interview with the Daily, John Tessier, an intervention worker at Open Door, criticized this type of coverage, saying that “sometimes when people are in pain, if we’re not understanding the type of pain that they’re in, we may mischaracterize them […] it’s just not a true perception.” We must commit to providing accurate, responsible coverage of issues involving the homeless population.

As the shelter does not receive government funding, individuals and groups can offer support by making donations to the organization’s CanadaHelps page or contributing items such as food, clothing, and hygiene products. Individuals can help the shelter through volunteer labour, which they can get involved in by contacting the shelter by telephone at (514) 939-1970. It is also important to support the creation and maintenance of shelters that accommodate those who have been using drugs or alcohol. Additionally, we must pressure our elected officials to develop and fund housing initiatives that directly help the homeless population, and to be aware of the many factors that lead to homelessness, as well as the stigmatization of drug users and the criminalization of homeless people through targeted policing and racial profiling.

To hear the Daily’s full interview with John Tessier, visit the Unfit to Print section of mcgilldaily.com

The post Sensitive Coverage, Accessible Support appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post HECKin HOROSCOPES appeared first on The McGill Daily.

This individual act of violence occurred within a society that has normalized the oppression and hatred of Muslims. The Christchurch massacre took place within a larger system of state-sanctioned white supremacy that manifests itself daily and perpetuates Islamophobia worldwide. Fascist leaders, such as Trump, fuel white supremacy through their constant demonization of Muslim people, both within their countries and abroad. When the US decides to drop a bomb on civilians in Syria, and when Trudeau praises this decision, they both reinforce white supremacy and create a culture in which the Christchurch terrorist attack is horrifically unsurprising.

Andrew Sandock, representing the World Islamic and Middle East Studies Student Association, said at the vigil for the Christchurch victims: “What is the difference between a white man who attacks a mosque in New Zealand with a gun, and a leader of a Western country who drops bombs on mosques in Afghanistan? Why is one called a terrorist attack on ‘peaceful’ Muslims, and the other an unfortunate but necessary event in the ‘fight for our freedom?’” Ensuring that a massacre like this never takes place again means that we must recognize the ways in which Western governments engage in white supremacist terrorism on a daily basis. The state regularly contributes to the mass dehumanization of brown people, to the point that their deaths overseas seem banal.

The Quebec City mosque shooting that occurred in 2016 is also inseparable from the policies that cultivate this hatred. Anti-immigrant sentiment and policies have been increasing across Canada, as have Islamophobic and xenophobic rhetoric within the government. The CAQ recently proposed banning the hijab for all public sector workers, which was treated as a matter of secularism, rather than being denounced for the racist, Islamophobic policy that it is. The fact that blatant Islamophobia is now considered a matter up for debate is indicative of the widespread suppression and marginalization of Muslim voices.

Moreover, the white supremacist ideology that motivated the Christchurch shooter cannot be separated from the spread of online fascism. From the violent manifesto the shooter published on 8chan prior to the attacks to the livestreaming of the massacre on Facebook, the Christchurch attack was made by and for the internet. White supremacist ideology is spread through Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, and fascist memes on platforms such as 4chan, 8chan, and private Facebook groups. This new form of fascist recruiting hides behind the facade of irony. It infiltrates online spaces, specifically gaming communities, to spread racial panic using fascist ideology and racist rhetoric.

Further, the attacks were live-streamed, mimicking the frame of first-person shooter video games. The popularity of these violent and graphic video games, in which the massacre of brown people is not only normalized but also encouraged, cannot be separated from the global white supremacist movement. The shooter specifically referred to Pewdiepie in his livestream, a YouTuber who has a worldwide following of over 91 million. Pewdiepie regularly normalizes anti-Semitism, anti-Black racism, Islamophobia and Nazi ideology in his videos. This behaviour is then dismissed as humour. Subscribers’ refusal to condemn online content producers who mask their intent, and excuse their deadly language as “jokes,” directly contributes to the spread of white supremacist ideology. While personal responsibility in the way we consume online content is fundamental, tech and social media companies complicit in the Christchurch shooting also need to be held accountable for passively condoning this rhetoric. As demonstrated by their purge of ISIS propaganda in recent years, platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Discord have the technological and financial means to ban terrorist propaganda. However, under the guise of free speech, most of these companies allow white supremacist rhetoric to thrive and organize on their platforms. This is evidenced by the publication of the horrifying livestream on Facebook and Twitter, which is still circulating long after the shooting. Fighting white supremacy also means fighting these insidious, normalized online fascist spaces.

The recent shooting in New Zealand, as well as in Quebec City, is a violent manifestation of white supremacy. White supremacy and xenophobia do not occur in a vacuum – they are systems upheld not only by those who commit acts of violence, but also by those who remain silent about them. White people need to recognize the ways in which they are complicit in white supremacy, and use their platforms and voices to call it out when they see it occurring. Tangible ways of doing this include: reporting white supremacist content when you see it online; boycotting creators who normalize it; pushing social media companies to de-platform and demonetize these creators; calling out family members and professors when they use racist rhetoric; actively opposing racist domestic and foreign policies; and being aware of your own positionality if you are a white person. We also urge you to donate to the fund for the victims’ families and the New Zealand Council of Victim Support Groups fund.

The post White Supremacy Caused the Christchurch Massacre appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post HECK’in HOROSCOPES! appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Classified Valentines! appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post HECK’in DUMB HOROSCOPES appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Crossword Answers appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The past few decades have displayed a pattern of escalating police violence reported in North American media, and although this could be attributed to poor police-community relationships, it is part of a “larger crime-and-punishment system, that for the past two decades has featured the mass incarceration of poor and minority people.” Addressing the issue of police violence means taking into account the social factors which generate violent behaviour. This is a complicated and controversial task but it is not impossible, so long as we help each other get past our taboos preventing us from understanding that a broken system lies at the base of this violence, and not some malevolent enemy.

Addressing the issue of police violence in Montreal means acknowledging the blatant misuses of power on behalf of the police in crisis situations, propose alternatives to the police, questioning its inherent and continued monopoly on violence, and taking into account the relationships between minority groups and police officers which make them more susceptible to experiencing violence. This analysis must stem from a formal questioning of the ancient systems of crime-and-punishment, monopolies of violence, and the Social Contract, while taking into account these realities under the North American capitalist system.

The Code of Ethics of Quebec police officers clearly states that a police officer must not “(4)  commit acts or use injurious language based on race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, religion, political convictions, language, age, social condition, civil status, pregnancy, ethnic or national origin, a handicap or a means to compensate for a handicap; (5) be disrespectful or impolite towards any person.” The way the distribution of power stands today gives the police force full monopoly on violence as well as the power to judge whether the situation calls for uses of force. There is an inherent trust put into the subjective experience of individual police officers, leaving officers to use their best judgement for each individual situation. Having the monopoly on violence means that despite the restrictions stated above in the Code of Ethics, any prejudices existing within individual officers are left to govern their decisions, decisions which could mark the difference between someone being shot and killed, or not.

The existence of this space between the Code of Ethics and the individual acts of police officers assumes that officers do what is just and forces them to be objective in their actions, separate themselves from any and all prejudices, discriminations, personal vendettas or power trips. Montreal is yet another example where people of colour and disabled folks are disproportionately affected by police violence and killings. Nicholas Gibbs, Pierre Coriolan, Farshad Mohammadi, Joséphine Papatie, Joyce Thomas, and countless more. Questioning the legitimacy of police use of violence in Canada must come from an acknowledgement of the countless incidents where marginalized people have been abused or killed by police officers, and refusing to see them as isolated incidents, but rather representations of a wider epidemic.

Acts of violence enacted by police unto racial minorities seem to us important reflections of a racist and classist system. The fact that social minorities and economically disadvantaged folks are most often the targets of this violence seems to us anything but coincidence. It is important to us to draw the connection between acts of dissent and the oppressive social norms upheld by the state against specific identities and economic realities. Doing so, we see in what ways police repression is shaped along lines of race, class, and other social markers. The police’s violent repression of student protesting as seen during the 2012 “Maple Spring” as well as “deviant” practices such as cruising (“This is No Longer a Safe Place,” The McGill Daily), exemplify this phenomenon.

We need to move away from a vision of police as protective and be critical about the use and legitimacy of its force. As journalists, we must hold police forces accountable for the ways in which it arbitrarily uses violence against civilians, and for the ways this violence reinforces systems of domination. As citizens, we need to fight for police accountability and physically and materially stand by marginalized folks bearing the brunt of and fighting that violence the most. We need and have to develop alternatives to the police to end this cycle of violence. End police brutality! Fight the power!

[special_issue slug=”police2018″ element=”footer”]

The post Less Police, More Accountability appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Forced Sterilization of Indigenous Women is Genocide appeared first on The McGill Daily.