Tag: opinions

Categories
Opinions

The forgotten genocide of the 20th century

The bitter smell of Armenian coffee—otherwise known as soorj—fills the house as I stare at an old photograph of my late grandfather whilst sipping on this cultural delight. The black and white picture is brittle and cracked, and it continuously endures the test of time, serving as a critical reminder that my grandfather worked tirelessly to bring his family to Canada.

He lived in a very different world compared to mine. His world was filled with instability, violence and bloodshed, as his family members were survivors of the 1915 Armenian genocide. It was a dark moment in history, and an even darker fissure in Turkish society.

Yet Turkey still denies the genocide ever took place, with the government in Ankara insisting the systematic annihilation of 1.5 million Armenian ethnics was simply a casualty of war, according to The New York Times. As a descendant of these survivors, I find this policy extremely offensive; it highlights Turkey’s backwardness and refusal to come to terms with its bloody past.

My connection to the genocide begins with my grandfather’s family, who hailed from a Turkish city called Iskenderun, situated by the Mediterranean. This city once housed a large and vibrant Armenian community, as did many others within the Ottoman Empire.

This all changed rapidly in 1915 when a radical political party called The Young Turks obtained power. The Young Turks saw the Armenian minority as a threat and also as a scapegoat, since the Ottomans had allied with Germany in WWI, and were losing the war at this point—especially on the Russian front. This led to a campaign of mass murders, arrests and deportation of ethnic Armenians, according to the United Nations.

This meant that my grandfather’s family was deported out of Iskenderun in 1915—before my grandfather was born—forced to march through the Syrian Desert in the harshest of conditions with barely any water, food or shelter. Hundreds of thousands would eventually die from exhaustion, starvation, dehydration and exposure, with marauding bandits also allowed to raid, rape and pillage Armenians as they marched onwards.

Two of my great-grandmother’s daughters were kidnapped during this period, never to be seen again. My ancestor’s house and possessions were confiscated and looted by locals and those in power.

A few family members survived this death march and made it to Deir al-Zour in the heart of the Syrian Desert. My grandfather was born sometime later without a birth certificate or any official papers. They were refugees, trying to find stability in a world that sought to murder them.

In 1985, the United Nations officially recognized the events of 1915-1917 against the Armenians, stating in the UN report on genocide that “evidence of that massacre has been provided in numerous diplomatic documents of the various countries, including Germany, which had been Turkey’s ally during the First World War.”

More than 25 countries including France, Canada and Russia recognize the events of 1915-1917 as genocide against the Armenian people, according to the CBC.

However, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan still adamantly denies a genocide took place. In a 2010 interview with CNN, Erdogan said, “no nation, no people has the right to impose the way it remembers history [onto] another nation of people.” He said in the same interview “no one should expect this of Turkey,” when questioned about labeling the violence as ‘genocide.’

This statement from the Turkish leader is a slap in the face to all Armenians around the world, and demonstrates the sheer lack of respect Erdogan has towards the living descendants of genocide survivors.

It’s bad enough that the perpetrators of the genocide were never tried for their crimes against humanity in an international court, or even in a Turkish court for that matter. In fact many of the collaborators went on to serve in the next government led by Kemal Ataturk, according to professor Frank Chalk, cofounder of the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies. But to have a government policy that denies the systematic murder of more than a million people seems downright blasphemous.

Even prominent members of Turkish society have spoken out, admitting that there was indeed a genocide, only to be silenced by the government.

Orhan Pamuk, a famous novelist from Istanbul spoke out in 2005 to a Swiss newspaper, saying the murder of the Armenians was undeniable, according to BBC News. Following his comments, Pamuk was branded a traitor by the government and he was charged in Istanbul with ‘public denigration of Turkish identity’ according to The Guardian, with a prison sentence of up to three years. The charges were eventually dropped, but serves as a reminder that freedom of speech is hard to come by in the Turkish Republic.

“There is a debate in Turkish society today about which policy to follow in the future,” said Chalk, before adding that “the number of Turkish academics, intellectuals, and lawyers arguing in favor of acknowledging the Armenian Genocide is growing every year.”

Although the path to justice is far from over, the most important aspect here is to remember the genocide. To remember the people who did not get to live in a peaceful country, attend university, or live full lives. To pay homage to the 1.5 million people who were systematically targeted and murdered for belonging to a group, which included my ancestors, my family, and countless other families.

Categories
Opinions

The flavourless flavour of business school

Photos by Marie-Pierre Savard.

Why you should think twice before attending JMSB

I pass through the heavy glass doors and feel the immediate urge to shed my identity and kowtow to the corporate overlords. I start speaking in a strange vernacular where I use the words ‘cash flow,’ and ‘capital,’ as dark visions of materialism and greed fill my mind.

Photos by Marie-Pierre Savard.

I observe my surroundings and see that everyone looks the same, adhering to a certain aesthetic. Their business uniform seems to be bought from Zara, as they reek of expensive perfumes and Gillette razors. Their phones constantly illuminate with LinkedIn notifications, while each student is constantly trying to think of something witty to write on the CASA-JMSB Facebook group (it’s essentially filled with memes).

This is my perception of John Molson School of Business, and after spending nearly two years at the prestigious institution, I can definitely say the environment was sterile, conformist and vapid.

I’ll never forget the day I received my acceptance letter to JMSB; it was comparable to when Harry discovered he was going to Hogwarts. Excitement filled my hollow soul as I naively imagined my new life as a business student.

Photos by Marie-Pierre Savard.

I should admit that I never truly wanted to study business, and I agonized to choose between the arts and business for months leading up to my acceptance. I knew that I always wanted to study history, but my parents kept telling me I’d be a poor arts student with no prospects after graduation.

One of my first memories in JMSB was in a class called business communications (the course was a complete sham). I remember the professor was giving the class advice on how to make your peers look stupid in a group interview setting. Initially shocked at this apparent ruthlessness, I turned to the girl next to me and shared my disbelief, to which she harshly replied, “business is not some fairytale, David.”

I also remember all of my professors telling me that I had to wear formal business wear for all presentations—which proved to be extremely uncomfortable. As someone who’s used to wearing muted all-black ensembles with bedhead hair, I felt like I was constantly being told to relinquish my identity and conform to the standards of the school. I even showed up to one presentation dressed in my everyday clothes and lost marks because I didn’t “obey.”

Photos by Marie-Pierre Savard.

To make matters worse, I despised all of my courses because they were so bland, and there was absolutely no opportunity to express any creativity whatsoever. Even when it came down to PowerPoint presentations, we weren’t allowed to push the boundaries without fearing academic consequences. My creativity suffered immensely during this period, as I suddenly felt like I wasn’t able to express myself properly. I began to experience a lot of anxiety due to this constant repression.

I’ll never forget the countless hours I spent memorizing volumes of statistics, accounting tables and business theories, just to regurgitate them on exams like a mindless robot. I was in pure hell.

I cannot deny that my grades suffered during this period, simply because I was stuck in an insipid environment that I grew to despise. I finally took the plunge after 18 months and switched to my true passion—the arts. Although I felt like I was giving up an opportunity to make money in the future, I knew I was better suited going down this path.

 

Business is not for everyone and it certainly wasn’t for me. I know I’m not alone in sharing these sentiments, so The Concordian conducted interviews with JMSB students to see what they thought. Check out the video below.

Categories
Opinions

Concordia: the cash cow

Photo courtesy of Creative Commons Finance Images

Dealing with a deceitful and dishonest university

As I scurry through the winding stairwell in the Hall building, I try to understand the actions of my university. How could someone be paid a six-figure salary for less than three months of work?

Anger, disbelief and sheer mistrust soon fill my mind; I begin to fume while slowly sipping a stale black coffee.

Photo courtesy of Creative Commons Finance Images

This all stems from an article released last week by La Presse that detailed the payout of the former CFO of Concordia. The publication revealed that the university paid Sonia Trudel a grand sum of $235,000 for working less than 70 days.

Trudel was first hired at the end of August 2015 as an advisor, and soon became the CFO a month later according to The Gazette.

She parted ways ‘mutually’ with the university in late November according to a university press release.

The bureaucrats are clearly bathing in gold, while we peasants can barely pay our tuition. Why was this woman paid so much money, especially during tough financial times?

Last year, many students took to the streets to denounce the Couillard regime and the budget cuts to the education sector—myself included.

These austerity cuts were to drastically impact the quality of education at Concordia and the services we receive.

Documents from the CSU’s website say that the university is expected to run an $8.2 million budget this year alone. The symptoms of austerity have already taken effect, and include larger class sizes, fewer resources available to students and fewer courses offered.

Many professors no longer have any teaching assistants simply because the university can no longer afford to pay them, yet we somehow paid Madame Trudel a small fortune.

I have lost all hope for this school.

The lack of transparency at the hands of these senior bureaucrats makes me absolutely sick. The ivory towers has failed us and it is time we take matters into our own hands.

Considering we students pay these corporate overlords in the form of our tuition, I demand we see their salaries and begin an era of open honesty. If the school is suffering and facing cuts, why should the oligarchs receive a six-figure salary?

 

Categories
Opinions

Money, Money, Money (and maybe some football)

Photo courtesy of Creative Commons Finance Images

The Super Bowl is just a lame excuse for capitalism to flourish

The air reeks of fried foods, cheap cologne and fermented ale.

The room is filled with muscled bros zealously watching the television, as if their lives depend on the outcome of this game. Their few female companions at the bar look utterly bored and disenchanted with their surroundings.

Meanwhile I am quietly perched in the back of the bar, quietly observing this very bizarre phenomenon.

Yes my dearest friends, I am referring to the Super Bowl. The one day each year when North Americans can justify a massive junk food binge whilst watching giant brutes running to and fro chasing a small rubbery brown ball.

Crass comments aside, it is my belief that the Super Bowl is merely an embodiment of consumerism and corporate greed. A dark and hollow characteristic that seemingly runs rampant throughout the Western world today.

It’s a known fact that the game generates a ton of money every year, but upon closer research I discovered the numbers were astronomical.

The Advertising

Nielsen records reveal that the televised broadcast is viewed by more than 100 million people across the globe every year, with advertisers eager to purchase airtime to plug their products.

To air a 30-second ad during the prestigious game, the cost starts at a cool $5 million according to superbowl-ads.com. And these ads have helped fill the coffers of multinational corporations that receive an immense boost from the lucrative event.

Photo courtesy of Creative Commons Finance Images

The Globe and Mail article revealed just how beneficial these marketing attempts can be, especially for the company GoDaddy. The web hosting company experienced an increase in market share ever since it started to air commercials at the prestigious sporting event. Although the ads cannot account completely for the entire increase in market share, GoDaddy’s presence has definitely seen a significant surge.  

To add fuel to the fire, data from statista.com reveals Super Bowl 50 will generate US$15.53 billion in terms of consumer related spending. This amount is more than three times greater than the amount of foreign aid Canada gave to states in 2014 according to the Canadian International Development Platform .

So essentially the focus is not even on the game itself, with the businessmen foaming at the mouth like rabid animals at the potential money to be made.

The Music

Let’s not forget about the halftime show, for capitalism trickles down into every facet of the Super Bowl. Whoever performs at the halftime is guaranteed to have success in terms of record sales and touring revenue.

After Bruno Mars’ performance in 2014, his album shifted 81,000 units in the week after his halftime show, according to Billboard. Madonna even marketed an entire album around her halftime routine, with her music video “Give Me All Your Luvin,’” featuring many football references in the lead up to the big show.

The best case though is Beyoncé’s show three years ago.

Yes we love queen Bey and she might very well be a deity, but her 2013 show had the dollars signs written all over it.

Contrary to past performers, Beyoncé at the time didn’t have a new album to promote but instead used the halftime slot to promote a new tour, which began two months after the Super Bowl in 2013. The Mrs. Carter World Tour went on to gross more than US$200 million and was one of the most successful tours of the decade according to idolator.com.

No doubt this year’s performers Coldplay will see the same trend for their upcoming tour.

In the end, few people really care about the actual football game. The Super Bowl merely highlights consumer exploitation and the fact that we live in a world that focuses on profits before people.

Capitalism is deeply rooted within our society and it’s a shame that we can no longer see that this event is just another excuse to extort money.

Categories
Opinions

Yet another Fantasia festival ruined by fans

Do the antics of the audience hold the festival back?

I will preface this by saying that Fantasia is an amazing festival. For many of us, pouring over the programming at the start of July has become somewhat of a tradition. Fantasia gives everyone the chance to see foreign and independent films for only ten dollars a seat –and in the heart of Downtown, no less. It is inexpensive and convenient, and you can actually get tickets, unlike a certain other film festival (I’m looking at you, TIFF). Frankly, Fantasia has everything going for it.

 So why can’t I recommend it?

 I’ve often heard people say that the problem with public transit was that the public was on it. Unfortunately, in this case, Fantasia seems to suffer the same affliction. The absolute worst thing about Fantasia — and the reason why I cannot recommend it and may not return next year — is wholeheartedly, 100 percent, the audience.

 I swear, everything is going fine until you sit down in the theatre. I would even venture that it’s going great up to the moment the lights go down. Then, it begins: first one person, then a chorus. The meowing.

 Who started this? And for what purpose? It is something I would expect from my 6-year-old niece at playtime, not a bunch of adults sitting down at an international film festival. It is the most juvenile thing I have ever seen. First of all, it is annoying — and no, it is not funny. Where is the humour in it? What is the punchline? Please, illuminate me. My feeble, comedically-challenged mind cannot find the genius in your incessant meowing.

 Oh, and I wish it ended when the movie started, but no. Dark screen? Meowing. Credits roll? Meowing. Lights are still off when the film is over? You guessed it: meowing.

 And how I wished it stopped there. Why do you many Fantasia fans feel the need to talk the whole time? I’m talking about you, person who laughs during an emotional death scene. Or you, the one who yells “OWNED” when a punch is landed in an action flick. Or the gaggle of teenagers who sit down to watch an anime film only to practice their Japanese out loud the entire time.

 I could forgive these things in a normal movie theatre. Sure, the ticket would have been more expensive, but at least I would have the chance to see the movie again. But at Fantasia, that’s it. That’s likely the one time I will ever get a chance to see this film, and it was ruined by you. So, thanks a lot for that.

 And if you won’t do it for me, then do it for the directors. So many of them come to Fantasia to give a talk before or after the screening. They are sitting there, right in the audience. What do you think they feel? For many of them, this is the premiere of their film. They poured their sweat and blood into making something great. And you just meowed at it.

 But my last message is for the Fantasia organizers. You guys are doing good work. But no one will ever, ever take your festival seriously with this kind of crowd. At a real festival — or even an ordinary cinema — there are consequences for acting like a child. Why aren’t there ushers to kick out rowdy movie-goers? Why aren’t there rules in place to discourage this kind of behaviour? You have the chance to make something great — but first, something needs to change.

And until it does, this is likely the last Fantasia Fest for me.

 

Categories
Arts

ARTiculate: On virginity and “vaginal knitting’”

Graphic by Jenny Kwan
Graphic by Jenny Kwan

Like it or not, there is no getting away from sexual and graphic images these days. They are present in films, television programs, and have been increasingly prominent lately in magazines and music videos.

But, why?

Yes, sex alone is sexy. But surely this is not enough reason for graphic portrayals of it to be found in the media. So, unless HBO gives me a good reason for its ubiquitous presence in all of its shows — like say, adding value or meaning to the scene or moving forward a story — I am not convinced of its need to be there.

Peppering an otherwise fantastic narrative with highly-stylized graphic shots of sex and merkin-adorned genitals is much like adding whipped cream atop a venti double caramel macchiato — it’s gratuitous.

Let’s look at infamous photographer and Hollywood sleaze-bag du jour, Terry Richardson. His “art” nowadays mainly consists of photographing underage models in risqué poses — even joining in the photograph, conducting various acrobatic sexual acts with models and actresses.

But what is the message here? That Richardson is an agile lover? It’s okay if you want to take pornographic pictures, but let’s not pretend they are art. These photographs are intended to cause more shock to the public than awe.

I’m not a prude, however, I can appreciate sex and explicit imagery if they, like any other element of the art production process (dialogue, colour choice, set design, etc.), contribute to the message being delivered.

Australian artist, Casey Jenkins, made headlines last year when her video performance entitled “Casting Off My Womb” made its way to YouTube. The 28-day performance is of Jenkins, as headlines called it, “vaginal knitting” — she inserted a skein of wool into her vagina everyday, knitting continuously until a menstrual cycle was complete.

While shocking, the message here is simple: it’s about being comfortable in your own skin, and dispelling negative assumptions about the vulva and needless fears about a woman’s period.

If you watch the video, be warned that it’s not-safe-for-work, as Jenkins is understandably naked from the waist down, and there is footage of the final product hung proudly and smeared with blood. Though explicit, this is the kind of graphic art I can get behind.

Another shocking and unique performance that was scheduled to take place earlier this year, is Clayton Pettet’s “Art School Stole My Virginity.” The 19-year-old was aware that he was among the last of his peers to have sex, and became preoccupied with the notion of virginity. The performance would take place in a studio gallery, with an audience of about 100, and would consist of Pettet having protected sex for the first time. Pettet’s goal is to address the pressures one feels about virginity head on, and demystify the experience for others.

Due to an arrest for using graffiti to advertise for his show, Pettet’s performance has been put on hold for now, but the artist remains undeterred about completing his work.

“I want them to take away the complete fucking destruction of virginity. Like all of my art, I want to change people’s perceptions,” said Pettet in an interview with The Daily Beast.

Though their unconventional performances have, and will continue to, outrage many people, Jenkins’ and Pettet’s messages are pretty clear — and thought-provoking at that. What are yours, HBO?

 

Categories
Opinions

The summer is ripe for change

This summer, two all-too familiar faces will be leaving Concordia. Both Peter Kruyt, who has held on to the chairmanship of the Board of Governors for far too long, and interim President Frederick Lowy, who already did a 10-year stint at this university in a previous life, will be relinquishing their posts. There has never been a better time for Concordia to usher in a new era of openness—it all depends on who gets selected to fill Kruyt’s and Lowy’s positions.

To be fair, Lowy is an all-around pleasant gentleman, who at least gives off the impression that he cares about students; he might even wave to them on the rare occasion he ventures down from his perch on the MB building’s 15th floor. One notable example of Lowy’s openness was his decision to speak to students who staged a sit-in outside his office on April 2. He even went as far as indicating his interest in scheduling a further, much longer meeting. What a guy.

That being said, Lowy’s successor will have many challenges to deal with upon assuming office this August—including not getting fired, a fate that befell Lowy’s two predecessors. The new Concordia president will need to use their term to rebuild students’ confidence in their educational institution. Students have had it with the severance packages and high salaries, and want—and deserve—better.

Should Lowy’s successor truly care about this university and all of its many merits (because despite its less-than-flattering reputation lately, Concordia still has some merits), then perhaps they would be interested in a pay cut? Because let’s face it, at a time when universities are asking students to pay more money for their education because schools say they’re broke, it really isn’t the best time for university presidents such as Concordia’s to be earning $350,000 a year, right?

The new titleholder will also need to be much more visible on campus than those who have held the post in the past. It would also help to know what exactly Concordia’s president does to earn such a massive salary. This closed door policy on the movement and responsibilities of Concordia’s top administrator has to change. Advice to an incoming president, whoever that might be: approachability is your best friend. Take a page from Provost and active tweeter David Graham’s book, and make an effort to be visible in the Concordia community. Show students you care, or risk proving that you don’t.

As for BoG Chair Peter Kruyt, is there really that much to say? The man has shown nothing but contempt for student representatives on the board this year as they tried to push for more transparency at Concordia’s highest governing body. Watching him in action at a BoG meeting, particularly when dealing with student reps, is like watching someone’s extremely cantankerous uncle work his magic at a family dinner party, the magic of course being unpleasantness and downright hostility.

If Concordia is actually serious about moving ahead with good governance and a new era of openness, then it needs someone on the BoG who treats all of its members equally—and who doesn’t address the student reps by their first names while politely addressing the rest of the BoG crew as “Mr.” or “Mrs.” It must be proven to students that they are legitimate stakeholders in this university’s best interests, and what better way to show that than by having a welcoming and respectful chair at the Board of Governors?

Finally, this summer will also see a report released by a team of external auditors who have been tasked with reviewing five severance packages totalling $2.4 million handed out to senior employees between 2009 and 2010. Who knows what the report will actually say, but in reality it’s difficult to imagine why auditors worth $25,000 are necessary in the first place. The administration should know by now that they messed up with the severance packages, and should avoid handing out golden parachutes in the future as if they were fresh cupcakes given to please a grumbling child.

Hopefully with the added hours of daylight, Concordia’s top administrators will make the right decisions that will place Concordia on the right track to once again becoming an institution that isn’t the butt of all mismanagement of public dollars jokes in Quebec.

Categories
Opinions

A look at some of the year’s most interesting stories

1) George Menexis
Assistant opinions editor

It was an extremely tough year for Greece. Bankruptcy has been looming on Greek society for quite some time now. As the rest of Europe struggles with Greece’s enormous debt, they’re also considering excluding the country from the eurozone, something that would be detrimental to Greek society. The population has greatly suffered from the austerity measures that are being put in place to keep the Greek economy at bay. Riots have shown the population’s discontent with their government and violence in the streets has made Athens a dangerous place. The lack of jobs and high taxes are making more and more people poor. Recently the country hit its highest unemployment rate yet: 21 per cent. It’s a mess.
“The kids didn’t even have new books at school this year because the school couldn’t afford them,” said Chris Politis, 42-year-old Greek citizen and friend who lives in Athens with his three children.
I am of Greek origin and most of my relatives currently live in Greece. Every day they wake up to a weakened economy, engulfed by the fear of possibly losing their jobs. They struggle with important decisions such as possibly leaving the only home and country they’ve ever known.
To see my second home fall apart like this, and to see my cousins, uncles, aunts and fellow Greeks riot and suffer, was saddening and frustrating.

2) Jacques Gallant
Editor-in-chief

It seems only fitting that one of my last contributions to The Concordian as its editor-in-chief would focus on the tuition debate, but more specifically the mismanagement of public funds in many Quebec universities. The news items that affected me the most this year were Concordia’s announcement that it was hiring external auditors to review the severance packages it handed out between 2009 and 2010, and Education Minister Line Beauchamp’s decision to fine Concordia $2 million for its mismanagement of public dollars, which include tuition fees. Maybe I’m just bitter because my plan to become the principal companion of a wealthy hedge fund manager will never actually happen, and I’ll have to find some other way to pay off my tens of thousands of dollars of student debt, but I became exceedingly outraged this year when it became clear how badly some Quebec universities handled money being given to them by students and the government. Former Concordia president Judith Woodsworth receiving a $703,500 severance package and current president Frederick Lowy scoring a $350,000 salary plus a $1.4 million interest-free loan for his condo are only some of the examples that I could throw out there. Someone please clear this up for me: What the hell do these people do that merits so much money? During my time at The Concordian it’s one of the rare Concordia-related mysteries that I never managed to solve. And don’t give me the usual drivel that their jobs are to “represent the university [at wealthy alumni parties] and be the face of the institution.” I want a little bit more than that. I might even accept Line Beauchamp’s argument that tuition increases are desperately needed to improve the quality of education and research, but I just can’t when I think of all the financial mishaps Concordia went through these past few years. Yes, they’re clearly trying to fix the problem (finally!), but I remain unconvinced. If I ever bank a few extra thousand dollars in my future career (as a journalist, so I suppose I should keep dreaming), I don’t see myself ever donating a penny (or a nickel I should say) to this university.

3) Audrey Folliot
Staff writer

On Feb. 20, 2009, cardiologist Guy Turcotte killed his two children. He stabbed both of them more than a dozen times in a blind rage, shortly after discovering that his ex-wife had been cheating on him with his best friend. This story was being discussed in Quebec even months after it had happened. During his trial last summer, Turcotte admitted that he had killed his children—Olivier, 5, and Anne-Sophie, 3—but said he had not intended to do so. After the trial, he was found not criminally responsible for the deaths of his children. I’m sorry, but what? A lot of people were in disbelief at the announcement of the verdict, and so was I. It totally shocked me. Turcotte was a reputable cardiologist, so I don’t buy the mental illness excuse. There are many signs indicating that he was aware of his actions and that they were premeditated. But what shocks me the most is that he might be released in society soon. He said he wants to start over, build a new family and start to practise cardiology again. How can someone go on after something like that? Unbelievable.

4) Shaimaa El-Ghazaly
Assistant life editor

I was most affected by the introduction in the U.S. House of Representatives of the Stop Online Piracy Act, better known as SOPA. I am an avid Internet user and this bill threatens many of the sites that I find useful. I’m all for protecting the entertainment industry from piracy, but the bill affects the Internet as a whole. The legislation would destroy innovation, threaten free speech and allow law enforcement to block access to entire domains just because of a single blog or post that contains copyright-infringing content. Popular sites such as YouTube, Wikipedia and Facebook would most likely be shut down or at least severely debilitated. I see freedom of speech as quite important in our lives and it is something that differentiates us from countries ruled by dictators. I find it frustrating that a bunch of old men and women implementing laws initially made to punish a small portion of Internet users will end up punishing everyone else in the process. While the main goal is to protect artists, shutting down user-generated sites will not make the artists any richer. The blackout of many sites including Wikipedia and Google in protest against SOPA worked, but the bill is not completely gone. Sure, it is an American law, but Canadian websites would also be affected. This legislation would move us backwards and threaten the progress we’ve made in terms of Internet accessibility.

5) Alyssa Tremblay
Staff writer

Many drivers’ worst fears were confirmed this fall when the Champlain Bridge, the busiest bridge in the country, was reported to be deteriorating and increasingly unsafe to drive on.
Used by thousands of motorists every day, the news about the bridge gave people something else to worry about other than infuriating rush hour traffic.
Now, the classic nightmare of being late for work got a terrifying new twist—sleeping through the alarm was replaced by the very real possibility that on your way into the office, the bridge will finally give out, sending you plummeting through a gaping hole in the middle lane and into the icy depths of the Saint Lawrence, trapped in the sinking metal coffin that is your Honda Accord.
In October, Ottawa announced that they would foot the $25 million bill to replace the bridge with a new structure – a nice gesture if you ignore the fact that they plan on taking 10 years to build it.
To add insult to (literal) injury, the federal government had to be cajoled last summer into releasing the 86-page safety report on the bridge to the general public. Transport Minister Denis Lebel’s comforting explanation: they didn’t want to scare people.
Meanwhile, living on the South Shore got a whole lot edgier and dangerous once we realized that our daily commute was like playing Russian roulette with a 50-year-old hot mess of concrete and metal.

6) A.J. Cordeiro
Staff writer

Joining over 20 other Canadian cities and some 900 jurisdictions worldwide, Occupy Montreal was one of most defining moments in news for our community.
Beginning on Oct. 15 with the Global Action Day, protesters took up residence in tents under the
watchful gaze of Queen Victoria’s statue and the SPVM. Just over a month later, on
Nov. 25, protesters were evicted from the square. Did the protesters actually accomplish anything?
Well, the protest was not about accomplishing a specific set of goals, but rather sending a message of frustration from the 99 per cent movement. As a result, they were heard and cited in every major media outlet across Canada. What began as an effort to make the institutions and authority-company relationships in governments fairer and more just for citizens was stalled by the lack of unity on a specific set of goals. Instead, the main element which characterized the movement was disorganization. Occupy Montreal had a myriad of spokespeople, yet had a complete lack of leadership. One person would spout off about the present government administration, while another condemned the education system and others criticized health and social services. How can you communicate a unified message when everyone is talking at once? In the end, the only images that remain are the ones of city workers restoring the Queen’s image and taking down tents, as police marked protester hands with UV paint.

7) Marilla Steuter-Martin
Co-news editor

Now more than ever, there is a strain on the relationship between university administrators and students. What better example of this could there be than the February 2012 “6party” occupation of McGill’s James administration building. Students felt their voices were not being heard and so in typical Montreal fashion, they made their discontent heard through protest. And how, you may ask, did the university respond? They tried everything to force students out. These young people, who spend thousands of dollars a year to attend this institution, were denied access to food, electricity and washroom facilities. In this day and age? I was appalled and frankly surprised that there wasn’t more of a public outcry. What many are apt to forget is that protesters are just as much human as those who abuse authority in their comfortable upper management offices, and they deserve to be treated with just as much respect. Furthermore, there is certainly no reason to set such a dangerous precedent as McGill security has this past year. The very thought of trained adult guards leaning out of windows trying to cut makeshift pulley systems set up by students in order to transport necessary supplies into their camp, is more pathetic than it is hilarious—if only by a fraction. I mean, is this truly the level we’re at? I say next time students decide to peacefully set up shop, McGill administrators would do well to remember that the world is watching them, and it certainly wouldn’t hurt the university’s image to send an olive branch, or a fruit basket, student protesters’ way.

8) Myles Dolphin
Opinions editor

According to a Verizon study, hacktivists are to blame for 58 per cent of all stolen data in 2011. They’re organized, extremely smart and angry. From the takedown of the FBI website (in protest of SOPA) to the 78 Syrian government email accounts that were hacked into, hacktivists have made serious headlines in the past year. Hacktivism is a movement with zero discrimination: anyone who possesses above-average IT skills and who wants to use digital tools in the pursuit of political goals against a particular government or corporation can participate. Hacktivists have leveled the playing field; governments are suddenly extremely vulnerable to attacks. When it comes to groups like Anonymous and LulzSec, no challenge is out of their reach. They know they have considerable support for their actions, and they’ll keep justifying their mischievousness. Last December, using stolen credit cards, Anonymous hacked servers belonging to security think tank Stratfor and planned on donating around $1 million to various charities. Theft, in most cases, is condemnable, but there’s something romantic and somewhat empowering to know that there are anonymous groups out there, the modern-day Robin Hoods, bringing about chaos and destruction in the name of causes that many of us support. They advocate freedom of speech, truth, transparency and the right to protest: Who can argue with that?

Categories
Opinions

First gay fraternity in Canada a model to follow

My gay friend has often complained about the lack of venues for young gay men to develop friendships beyond the politically-driven organizations.I realized that gay men at Concordia need a place where they can create bonds—a place where they can feel free to have fun and participate in charities. A fraternity would offer all these opportunities, yet one for gay males does not exist at Concordia. Screw tradition, times are changing and so should our social structures.This is where Delta Lambda Phi (DLP), an American fraternity, comes in.

Since its creation in 1986, DLP has “offered gay, bisexual, and progressive men across the nation the opportunity to grow in the true spirit of brotherhood — one that embraces diversity and respects the value of all,” according to their website.

Canada’s first colony (“chapter-in-training”) of DLP is located at McGill, and was launched last week.
“I wouldn’t say that we’re very different from the average fraternity. Our goals are social, service, and recreational activities and we work to fulfill those goals,” said Brian Keast, a member of DLP and also a member of Queer McGill.

Interestingly enough, DLP has been getting mixed reactions from the Greek system.
Marissa Caucci, a member of the Inter-Fraternity Council at Concordia (the organization that oversees all the fraternities and sororities), said that she is supportive of DLP joining the system.

“A gay fraternity would have the same underlying values and activities as other organizations and I feel as though they would enrich our community and add more diversity and awareness on issues that they [DLP] themselves value,” said Caussi.

In contrast, Ash Andre Fidelia, a member of the Concordia fraternity Tau Kappa Epsilon, said that he does not support DLP at all. “In my fraternity and in most [fraternities] we don’t discriminate and we accept anyone who is willing to join. Making a gay fraternity is just not right in my opinion because it’s just going to be a bunch of guys sleeping with each other,” he said.

Are these assumptions the only argument against the creation of a gay fraternity at Concordia? It is proven that even though straight fraternities may claim that they don’t discriminate, they are simply uninviting to gay men. According to Shane Windmeyer, the co-editor of the book Out on Fraternity Row, about ten per cent of men in traditional U.S fraternities are gay, and almost all of them remain in the closet out of fear of rejection from their fellow frat brothers.

“I would never join a normal fraternity, I would feel like I was pretending to be someone I am not and I would not feel comfortable always walking on eggshells,” said Concordia accounting student Jeremi Calderon. “A gay fraternity sounds like a great idea,” he added.

Another ridiculous argument against the idea of a gay fraternity is the stereotypical and outright ignorant belief that it would lead to sexual relationships between members and would therefore defeat the purpose of having a fraternity. This is why I believe that it would be important, then, to set rules for the members of DLP to prove to other skeptical schoolmates that gay men can indeed bond to promote service and camaraderie and not for sex. For example, members of the Florida International University fraternity, Gamma Lambda Mu, have their bylaws that state that members cannot date each other.

In the end, a fraternity offers a brotherhood and life-long friendships, and I think that this is what gay Concordia students, like my friend, are looking to find. Therefore, I believe that Concordia should follow in McGill’s footsteps and create their own gay fraternity.

For a link to the Facebook page of McGill’s Delta Lambda Phi colony, click here.

Categories
Opinions

Why science needs cheerleaders

(Illustration by Jeff Kent/The Manitoban)
(Illustration by Jeff Kent/The Manitoban)

WINNIPEG (CUP) — I graduated from the University of Manitoba’s computer science department in 2007. Despite what my degree says, I’m not a scientist. I think of myself more as a “science cheerleader.” Science needs cheerleaders, because science is so important.

We humans tend to pay much more attention to those things that confirm our preconceived notions than to those details that don’t fit our theories. We have a marked tendency to remember the hits and forget the misses — presumably why Sylvia Browne remains so popular.

We’re hardly unbiased observers of our surroundings. The way that we see the world is coloured by many things, our egos foremost amongst them. A study of Australian workers conducted in 1987 found that only one per cent of the workers rated their workplace performance as below average. Perhaps when it comes to evaluating our own skill at

Monopoly we can be forgiven if we see ourselves through rose-coloured glasses; when our callous assumption that we outperform our contemporaries affects the quality of our work, concern becomes warranted.

But what about when it really counts? If your child is sick, do you want your doctor to tell you, “Well, this medicine seems to work pretty well most of the time, in my experience.” Perhaps you would be more comfortable if she said,

“Well, this medicine has been shown to work in multiple large, randomized, controlled trials.”

Unfortunately, many people find the first statement just as reassuring as the second. We tend to find personal experiences and anecdotes convincing, despite how biased and unreliable personal experiences can be. But there are many cases where we simply cannot afford to let our petty biases influence the way we see the world. And that’s where science comes in.

Science is the quest to understand ourselves, our universe and our place in it. At its root, science is merely a systematic search for knowledge. As science has progressed, scientists have identified problems and biases in the way humans observe the universe around us, which has led scientific inquiry to become a self-correcting process. In medicine, for example, experiments are blinded, randomized and controlled in an attempt to prevent the biases of the examiner from affecting the result, whether unwitting or deliberate. Replication by independent researchers is one of the cornerstones of science, working to weed out simple mistakes or outright fraud.

Science is skeptical by nature. Scientific skepticism is a systematic process of doubt. Put simply: question everything. Don’t just take claims at face value. Skepticism tells us that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that we should proportion our belief in a proposition according to the evidence provided for it. While skeptics are frequently dismissed as arrogant and closed-minded, scientific skepticism is, at its core, an intellectually humble exercise. The success of the scientific endeavour requires us to admit our imperfections. If science is seen as ever-changing, it is only because scientists are willing to admit to their errors and to learn from them.

As the scientist and educator Carl Sagan said, “It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.”

Categories
Opinions

In Rhodes we should not trust

SACKVILLE, N.B. (CUP) — The Rhodes Trust recently announced that yet another Mount Allison University student has been awarded a prestigious Rhodes Scholarship. These scholarships were created in 1902 from the estate of British imperialist Cecil Rhodes. According to the Rhodes Trust website, Rhodes’ vision in founding the scholarship was to develop outstanding leaders who would be motivated to fight “the world’s fight,” to “esteem the performance of public duties as their highest aim” and to promote international understanding and peace.

These aims are well and fine, but Rhodes’ idea of international understanding and peace was contingent on the rule of the British Empire, which Rhodes envisioned ruling the African continent “from Cape to Cairo.” The Rhodes Trust uses words to distract applicants from reading deeper into what the scholarship is about; however, I have to wonder about those who accept the financial support of a man who made his money in the worst of ways.

Rhodes made his millions in the diamond mines of southern Africa founding De Beers, a diamond company that has been a target of numerous legal accusations of anti-trust. Rhodes was also prominently involved in the Jameson Raid, an event that led to the outbreak of the Second Boer War. This war pitted Great Britain against the Netherlands for imperial control over southern Africa and resulted in collateral deaths of tens of thousands of native Africans.

Ninety-four Oxford University fellows deplored the decision to allow Rhodes on campus to accept an honorary degree. The opposition stemmed primarily from Rhodes’ involvement in the Jameson Raid and his circumvention of law in southern Africa. After the raid, Rhodes’ brother was tried and convicted of murder. His execution was commuted to a 15-year sentence before Rhodes spent £30 million (approximately £2.7 billion in 2012) in order to have him released.

Rhodes was obsessed with personal gain and expanding the wealth of De Beers. Even at the outset of the Second Boer War, Rhodes attempted to persuade military officials to protect his mining interests, rather than Britain’s military interests. Accounts of Rhodes during the time of war expose his fleeting concern for the lives of others and shed light on his perception of others who were not as “civilized” as the British.

Are the achievements of Rhodes scholars overshadowed by the atrocities Rhodes committed during his lifetime? Are the students receiving scholarships concerned that the $100,000 they receive from the Rhodes Trust comes from the imperial exploitation and war-mongering Rhodes took part in?

I know I would be concerned. If I claimed to care about corporate social responsibility, I would not be able to bring myself to accept the money. Being nothing more that a “C” student, however, I don’t have to create an excuse to deal with the ethical dilemma of being awarded a Rhodes Scholarship. What excuse does the current class of Rhodes scholars have?

Exit mobile version