With the creation of Balaclava Discourse, I sought to produce a column that would “challenge the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination within society.” In comparison to the themes of the other two columnists (atheism and black feminism), mine was suprisingly far broader. This sentiment is apparent if you examine the beginning of my column, which included articles on Troy Davis, religion, and capitalism in Cuba. While all of these articles dealt with authority, hierarchy, or domination in some way, they had little connection to each other.

The lack of connection between articles in my column changed with my awareness of the accessible education movement. In early January, I had little knowledge of how student strikes worked, or of the history behind them in Quebec. As I write this, I’ve come to support the accessible education movement entirely. While I can’t say I’ve been completely swept up in the tide, I can say that I’ve been able to write about things I’m actually involved in for the first time. With the theme of my column corresponding so heavily to the goals of the accessible education movement, I dedicated the last half of my column to it exclusively. This was not planned, but it didn’t need to be: my column is motivated by the spontaneity of day-to-day life.

One of the most interesting things about being a columnist, though, is seeing how the public reacts to your writing. My opinions this year have gone against the grain of certain “moderate” elements of the McGill community. I am completely content with this, and, in fact, am somewhat pleased. If the majority of McGill students agreed with my views after the way I described them in “Are McGill Students Really Progressive?”, I’d be quite worried. I realize most people won’t agree with my views, and so – beyond merely trying to convince people – my articles are designed to get people to think. And more importantly, to get people to talk.

Karl Marx has stated that “the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas.” As a columnist with an alternative voice, writing for a paper with an alternative purpose, it only makes sense, unfortunately, that ideas like mine, or fellow columnist Christiana Collision’s, aren’t widely disseminated in the mainstream media. Students complain that The Daily is too left wing. Yet they fail to remember that upon leaving the university bubble, the very important issues university writers cover will be largely absent from other media sources. This is why I found it extremely important for Balaclava Discourse to not only challenge the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society, but also the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination that determine what is “legitimate and acceptable discourse” in society. The voice of the masked is finally heard.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com. You can further access Davide Mastracci’s writing at http://about.me/DavideMastracci.

The post Balaclava Discourse unmasked appeared first on The McGill Daily.

1. I’m very impressed with the turnout at the AUS GA. Thanks to Mob  Squad’s ability to mobilize students for accessible education, and ModPAC’s ability to spread good old fashioned fear about the strike in the hearts of students, 1,120 voted on the strike resolution. This is approximately 15 per cent of Arts students. In comparison, just five per cent of Concordia voted to put their entire school on strike.

2. The turnout isn’t as big of a deal for me as I’m sure it will be for other commentators. I would have preferred a minimum quorum with a majority ‘yes’ vote, rather than the turnout and outcome we received. This is because I view accessible education throughout Quebec as far more important than McGill students being unusually politicized for six hours.

3. With that said, the ‘yes’ side managed to acquire 44 per cent of the votes. A supposed “radical minority” nearly steered the way for the whole faculty. Some may call that unfair; I call it impressive. 495 voters is nothing to scoff at. And it was made possible due to the efforts of the wonderful people who worked tirelessly and passionately on the ‘yes’ campaign.

4. If you voted against the strike but claim to also be against tuition increases, I look forward to seeinghow your opposition will manifest itself. McGill has never been part of an unlimited general student strike. Going on strike would have expressed solidarity with the Quebec students who have made the tuition at McGill what it is, despite the fact that McGill has historically leeched off of their efforts time and time again. McGill’s tarnished reputation amongst other Quebec universities will live on.

5. Another thing that will live on is Quebec’s anti-increase movement. History has shown that Quebec universities and CEGEP’s do not need McGill’s participation in order for strikes to be succesful, and with this strike shaping up to be one of the largest in history, there’s a good chance the government will buckle to  the student movement’s demands. This reality makes McGill’s current lack of participation less crushing than it could be.

6. Even though the chance of an AUS unlimited general student strike may be gone, the involvement of McGill students in the movement should not end. 495 Arts students indicated that they are willing to fight for accessible education, and, as such, I would encourage them to do so. How, you may ask?  Well first, by attending the province wide rally on March 22 against tuition increases. This call does not go out to just Arts students, but McGill students in general. This rally will be a show of force to the Quebec government, and more bodies equals more strength.

7. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, students within AUS can still go on symbolic or unlimited strikes. This can be done by holding GAs for departments within the Arts faculty. So, for example, Philosophy students are working toward a GA which will give them the opportunity to strike. While these organizations will not be able to harness the full power of the AUS, having certain departments on unlimited strikes is certainly better than having no departments on unlimited strikes.

So, to the 495, keep on keeping on. The GA definitely was a blow, but it’s not the end. Strikes at McGill are still possible, strikes throughout Quebec are still guaranteed, and a strong presence on March 22 is still required. The fight for accessible education does not end here.

This article states that Philosophy students are working towards another GA. This effort is being carried out by students outside of the Philosophy Students Association. 

The post Down but not out appeared first on The McGill Daily.

In order for this to occur, though, the many doubts McGill students have about the intentions of the movement to stop tuition increases will need to be quelled. While these doubts vary from person to person, they essentially boil down to the question of “where will the money come from?”

This question is a fair and healthy one, but it seems to indicate that the anti-increase movement is perceived as utopian, with vast ideals but no means of achieving them. This is partially due to the movement’s inability to communicate to a broad audience their alternative means of overcoming the “underfunding”. In hopes of helping to overcome this problem, an alternative option to raising tuition will now be presented, though I speak in no way for the accessible education movement as a whole

The question of “where will the money come from?” arises in response to the claim that Quebec’s universities are currently underfunded. This initial claim is actually false, as it would be more accurate to state that Quebec’s universities are improperly funded. Despite the fact that Quebec has the lowest tuition rates in Canada, it spends the largest amount of money per student in the country, and internationally is only trumped by the United States and South Korea. It only appears as if the universities are underfunded because a large portion of funds are directed towards research, rather than operating costs such as professors’ and non-academic employees’ salaries.

Regardless, if you accept the claim that universities in Quebec are underfunded, this should not lead you to automatically assume that students need to carry the burden to make sure that universities receive the funding they need. The Quebec government is capable of carrying this burden – although, with the relatively small amount required to do so, it seems disingenuous to call it a burden for the government. For example, the Quebec government could generate the revenue needed to provide free education by raising the top-bracket income tax by 1.4 per cent and creating a corporate capital gains tax of 2.4 per cent. If the government can raise the funds for free education this easily, preventing the proposed tuition hikes is certainly plausible.

Moreover, in order to fight the tuition increases, you don’t need to believe that education is a right, and you don’t need to be one of the so feared “radicals” at McGill. The effects of raising tuition will be numerous, and they will be harmful. If the proposed tuition increase goes through, students will be excluded from education based solely upon their available means of income. Some claim the financial aid system will prevent this, but in reality, the same 17 per cent of students who are eligible for aid now will be eligible in the future, leaving 83 per cent with the full burden of the increases.

Beyond keeping certain students out of the system, the increases will punish those who choose to go to university with debts in the future. As it currently stands, the average debt for students in Quebec who take out student loans is just over $15 000, while the Canadian average is just over $26 000. Increased student debt will certainly come along with tuition increases that seek to bring Quebec tuition to the Canadian average.

Essentially, there is nothing “radical”  about opposing policies that will inflict this type of damage upon students and their families. And despite what some would like you to believe, realistic alternatives to these policies do exist. The matter of tuition increases is not one of idealists versus realists, but rather one of access versus exclusion and debt versus financial security. The next couple months will decide which side prospers, but a large part of the result rests on you, the student.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Accessible education is not a pipe dream appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. It appears every other Monday in commentary. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Is McGill really progressive? appeared first on The McGill Daily.

On November 10,  new legislation was enacted that  threatens the foundation upon which Fidel’s government was built. This law allows Cuban citizens and permanent residents to buy and sell real estate; a major break from the socialist housing prevalent since the early days of the revolution. A previous Cuban director of urbanism and agriculture, Mario Coyula, claimed that “wide-scale buying and selling would lead to a “huge rearrangement” in Havana and other cities, as the wealthy move to better areas.” Coyula claims that this rearrangement will “exacerbate class conflict,” while other critics state it will increase homelessness. Despite these concerns,  figures in the Western world, such as Diane Ablonczy, the Canadian minister for Latin America, have applauded the implementation of this new law as a start, or another step, down the road to capitalism.

If travelling down this road is congratulated because it is perceived to be in the interests of the Cuban people, than the applause of the Western world is misled. Cuba’s trek down the capitalist road will be accompanied by social regression and American dominance; as such, a prompt u-turn needs to take place. While Cuba has never been a perfect state, some of the achievements under Fidel’s leadership should act as incentives for a more socialist economic system. For example, Cuba was ranked as the world’s greatest overachiever in a Human Development Report published by the United Nations Development Programme in 2008. This implies that Cuba has achieved tremendously high levels of social development in relation to its income ratings, spurred by its socialist policies. “Social development” in this case refers to such things as health care, life expectancy, and education.

In terms of healthcare, Cuba has the best doctor-patient ratio in the world, with one doctor for every 156 patients. In comparison, the United States has one doctor to serve every 370 patients. Also, the efficiency of the healthcare in Cuba has allowed it to maintain a life expectancy at birth of 79 years, the same level as the US.

In terms of education, the literacy rate within Cuba is 99.9 per cent, and the student teacher ratio is approximately 12 to 1. All education in Cuba is also free. While all of these facts are impressive, they become even more remarkable when one considers that they were achieved despite the US embargo upon Cuba that has been in place since 1962. The embargo is essentially economic warfare against Cuba, as it has cost Cuba an estimated 89 billion in American since its implementation. The injustice of the embargo has been recognized internationally: the UN has overwhelmingly condemned it for the last 20 years, with the most recent vote seeing 186 nations condemning the embargo, and only the US and Israel supporting it.

As such, those who have recognized the failures of the capitalist system should not abandon Cuba as an alternative. The left has a tendency of criticizing everything outside of the ivory tower it safely nests in, and while Cuba does deserve criticism, in this case, the good should not be an enemy to the perfect. Cuba has been a strong check against US imperialism, and its role in providing a framework for the pink tide, a wave of progressive governments coming to power in Latin America which has begun to sweep over Latin America is vital. Though specific aspects of the Cuban government certainly do require liberalization, these flaws can be worked out while moving towards a pure socialist state, and do not require Cuba to regress into becoming the puppet the Western world has always wanted it to be.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. It appears every other Monday in commentary. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Viva la Revolución? appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. It appears every other Monday in commentary. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post A criticism of the unsympathetic students appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Climate change was once appropriately perceived, like cancer, as a genuine threat against humanity. It has now become a partisan issue; a mere litmus test for how Right or Left one is. Despite Perry’s claim, this shift has not occurred due to scientists doubting climate change. The consensus on climate change amongst scientists has only grown in recent years, now standing at 98 per cent according to the National Academy of Sciences. Contrastingly, belief in climate change amongst Republicans has declined from 50 per cent in 2008, to 30 per cent in 2010.

There is also no elaborate history of climate change denial in the Republican Party. Republicans like John McCain, Newt Gingrich, and even George W. Bush have recognized and sought to fight against climate change.  Currently, however, GOP candidates like Perry have routinely denied that climate change exists, while others, like Romney, argued against the regulation of greenhouse gases by the EPA, which was ironically created by Richard Nixon. Republicans taking a different approach than Democrats to solving climate change is to be expected. The utter denial of climate change amongst much of the Republican Party should not be.  Unfortunately, with the rise of the Tea Party movement and their characterization of climate change as an invention of the liberal elite, it looks like this disturbing trend will only continue.

The trend of evolution denial and religious extremism within the Republican Party is already dangerous enough. The addition of the blatant disbelief of environmental facts should be a death blow to the credibility of the party. While I would regard the decimation of the Republican Party as a cause for celebration, what if the Republican’s don’t lose? We have begun to see evidence of what this would entail with the Republicans blocking regulations in September that “force industry to reduce unhealthy air emissions, such as mercury from coal-fired power plants,” claiming that these regulations “would kill jobs and burden businesses with billions of dollars in additional costs.”  Essentially, the safety of Americans will be put at stake for the sake of corporations under a congress which has been labelled as “the most anti-environmental Congress in history.”  With this explicit anti-intellectualism, it seems that many Republicans are no longer concerned with conserving structures, but, instead, with conserving ignorance.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures , authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. It appears every other Monday in commentary. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Anti-intellectualism amongst the political right appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Every year, millions of children are pushed down a conveyer belt of conversion and shaped into products of faith. The process starts early, with parents often branding their child with the poker of faith upon birth. Yet, as Dawkins has stated, there is no such thing as a Catholic, Muslim, or Jewish child – and labelling them as such is disingenuous.
Young children are not mature enough to properly formulate and express their own views on god, or how humanity came to be.  This inability is akin to a toddler’s inability to express their own views on normative moral or economic issues. Yet it is entirely common for a child to be religiously branded as if religion was a hereditary trait, while the lunacy of labelling a child as a ‘capitalist child’ is apparent.

Beyond simply assigning children a religion, the long term process of converting children is problematic, and, in many ways, draws comparisons to the conversion of Native Americans by European settlers, although is obviously far less violent. In both cases, the dominant group abuses its power by asserting a subjective belief it holds true over those it controls. Children are put through the ringer of forced festivals, such as baptisms, which they do not consent to, much in the same way that Native Americans were forced through these procedures as adults to appease their oppressors.

The effects of this abusive procedure are evident in the world, with young Muslim children on Hamas television preaching hate, and minions of the Westborough Baptist Church picketing with their troubled parents. While these cases are regularly condemned by more moderate religious followers for their extremity, the procedure in all cases of religious indoctrination is fundamentally unjust, regardless of the teaching it injects. Parents can educate their children on various religious beliefs, but should not punish nor praise their children for whatever view they choose to adopt.

As logic increasingly continues to trump blind belief, the percentage of religious followers on the earth has declined. Yet, for real progress to be made, parents must end the unjust brainwashing of children. This should mean no forced prayers or church and no fear mongering through in depth descriptions of hell.

Ending this indoctrination will give children the opportunity to discover their own views, unpolluted by the beliefs of their elders. If this means that children will continue to overwhelmingly believe in their parent’s religion, so be it. Yet it is likely that indoctrination will continue, as parents wishing for their children to follow their religion know that, without biasing the process, children will likely emerge as non believers.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. It appears every other Monday in commentary. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Religion and children appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The other man was named Lawrence Brewer. Brewer was one of three white supremacists who, in 1998, picked up the black man James Byrd Jr, as he was hitchhiking. After picking him up, the three men savagely beat him, urinated on him, and tied him to the back of their pickup truck. They then proceeded to drag him to his death, leading his body to become so mutilated that officials believed the headless corpse was road kill. Since the day of that hate crime, which gained national attention, Brewer has shown no sign of repentance. A few days before being executed, Brewer was even reported as stating “As far as any regrets, no, I have no regrets. No, I’d do it all over again, to tell you the truth.”

Despite their differences, both men became the victims of state sanctioned murder. It is easy to forget the evil of the death penalty when heinous crimes such as Brewer’s are brought up. Yet, regardless of how heinous one’s crimes may be, the state should never have the right to put an end to one’s life. As such, if one is to fight against the death penalty, one must do so in all cases, not just the clearly unjust. Beyond the death penalty’s inherent immorality, Davis’ death draws attention to other issues that plague the state’s right to murder.

For example, Davis was sentenced to death based solely on eyewitness testimony. No DNA evidence connecting Davis to the crime was presented. This alone is proof of injustice, as a death sentence should not be allowed to be handed out solely on the basis of eyewitness accounts – especially when these accounts were later withdrawn.

Seven of the nine witnesses who submitted affidavits went on to deny their allegations. One of them being Darrell Collins, sixteen at the time of the conviction, who claimed that “I told them it was…not Troy who was messing with that man, but they didn’t want to hear that. The detectives told me, ‘Fine, have it your way. Kiss your life goodbye because you’re going to jail.’ After a couple of hours of the detectives yelling at me and threatening me, I finally broke down and told them what they wanted to hear”, according to a 2007 Washington Post article.

Davis’ death is a reminder of the inequality African Americans face at the cruel hands of the law in America. Despite making up only 12 per cent of the American population, 41 per cent of the inmates on death row are black. In addition, in the last 34 years, an almost equal number of black and white people were murdered in the United States. However, 80 per cent of the people executed over this span of time were those that had murdered white individuals. Black people are still ultimately sentenced to death in greater numbers, yet those who murder black individuals are often let free. While people of all races have been subjected to state sanctioned murder, the death penalty increases the severity of inherant in the system.

So, while it is easy to feel disgusted at the explicit acts of hate committed by men like Brewer, consider the more systemic evils committed by the state itself. In 2011, after having his life ruined and being confined to prisons for twenty years, a black man was strapped down and put to death. Sure, there was no tree or noose , and the angry mob was replaced by journalists and family, but, 149 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, black men are still susceptible to state enforced oppression.

Regardless of its brutality, the death penalty is only one of many structures of authority and domination that exist within our world today. This column will take up the task of examining these structures, and determining whether or not they deserve to exist. For, if authority figures cannot entirely justify their removal of freedoms they have no right to do.

Balaclava Discourse is a column written by Davide Mastracci on the structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in society. It appears every other Monday in commentary. You can email him at balaclavadiscourse@mcgilldaily.com.

The post The death penalty exacerbates racial inequity appeared first on The McGill Daily.