My Response to Margaret Wente’s “Quebec’s tuition protesters are the Greeks of Canada”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/quebecs-tuition-protesters-are-the-greeks-of-canada/article2437462/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Referrer%3A+Social+Network+%2F+Media&utm_content=2437462&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links

I would like to raise my opinions in regards to Ms. Wente’s column piece published in the Globe and Mail on Saturday, 19^th May, 2012. This article tries to simplify the Quebec protest movement in ways that are uncalled for, antagonising not only to student protestors, but also alienating to non-protesting students, bystanding professors, and other members of the general public who see a spark of sense in what the student protestors are doing. The result is that the article propounds a view that is wholly polarising and rather dismissive of prospects for an intelligent conversation beyond polemic.

I agree that the incident described at the University of Quebec in Montreal, where masked protestors broke into classes that were in session, intimidating students and professors from going, and insulting people with the words ‘scab, scab!’, is unacceptable, disrespectful, and an infringement not only upon each of these students’ and professors’ dignities, but also each of their rights to attend classes that they paid for, or are paid to teach. I don’t, however, think that this incident alone should be taken and used to delegitimise the motivations of the protesting students. I also know that the vast majority of the protesting students abstain from such tactics.

It is difficult to say a lot to Wente’s polarising anti-rhetoric that is not similarly based on rhetoric, but I will try anyway. The “the state owes us everything” mentality is often used by more right-wing people to describe those who demonstrate against attempts made by the state to cut services, re-allocate budgetary expenditure, or impose austerity measures during times of scarcity. By virtue of the fact that citizens stand in a fiscal relation to the state – meaning: citizens pay taxes for the state to exist and to provide the services that citizens need – politics will always see tugs of war between and amongst taxpayers and politicians, the latter of whom are elected to be responsible for the services provided to the public. To me, a stance against tuition hikes is but one instant of such a tug of war. It does not necessarily mean a stance of “the state owes us everything”.

Ms. Wente writes that she ‘feels sorrier’ for the Greeks than for the protesting students in Quebec. At the same time she describes Quebec’s protesters as the Greeks of Canada. In actual fact, she doesn’t really think that the protesters are the Greeks of Canada, for otherwise she would feel as sorry for them as she does for the Greeks. Her standpoint is rather paradoxical. Nevertheless, Ms. Wente uses her larger sympathy for the Greeks to build her polemic against the claim of Quebec’s protesters.

“The Quebec students are the children of affluence”, Ms. Wente writes. This is a normative claim. Yes, Quebec’s students live in a social democracy and a developed state, much like all Canadians. But there are inequalities amongst Quebec’s students much like there are inequalities amongst Ontario’s, Alberta’s, and Newfoundland’s students, something Ms. Wente surely will not deny.

Ms. Wente writes “I’d feel sorry for them if unemployment among young adults was 50%, as it is in Spain.” I would too. However, this argument misses the point. Much like Ms. Wente attempts to delegitimise the claims of Quebec’s protesters by writing of her overwhelming sympathy for the Greeks, she isn’t really saying anything in relation to what the movement is about in Quebec’s context.This is unsatisfying within the process of political discussion, and the exchange of ideas in an intellectual manner beyond ranting. But then again, it is an opinion piece, written to provoke such discussion.

Next, Ms. Wente writes: “[In Quebec] growth has stalled, and generous entitlements have far outrun the government’s ability to pay”.  Alright, Quebec’s economy is not growing particularly. This lack of growth means a lack of growing revenues. I am always willing to listen to someone who has good ideas to help bring about economic growth, ideas, innovation, and economic diversification. But I tire of those who blame a lack of growth solely on the generous welfare state, particularly when it concerns education, the tool to achieve such growth in the first place.

The Charest government intends to reduce debt, since this is hampering growth. I am not against this. This makes great sense. Much like a student with huge debt will have problems growing, an economy with huge debt will have problems growing. However, something is wrong in the books up there, or at the very least there is something wrong within the priorities the Charest government applies to the books' management. A lack of economic growth doesn’t mean shrinking. The economy has stayed exactly the same size (which is not really true, by the way, the Royal Bank of Canada reports a modest growth rate of 1.6% over 2011, something which is to continue this year). Overspending seems to be an issue, as it is for very single government, but then why don’t we open up a more detailed debate about that?

I am just not convinced that the best way to increase revenues (or cut spending) is by slashing funding to the postsecondary education system. The generation before us, whose members currently sit in parliament as well as in important media positions that shape public opinion, and who got to where they are thanks to the good prospects afforded to them by a good, accessible education, have a responsibility to help our generation get off its feet in an equal way so that it can face the world’s problems without a sky-high financial debt.

Ms. Wente addresses equalization payments of $7.3 billion to be received by Quebec this year. This is a separate issue, but one that is very worthy of discussion amongst those who are interested. I respect the opinion that an Albertan might hold in disapproval of equalization payments, of wealth generated in Alberta – on Canadian land, if I might put in – transferred to provinces like Quebec, where average post-secondary tuition is currently but a third of Alberta’s. Is Ms. Wente suggesting that because this money is coming (mainly) from resource-rich Alberta, Quebec students have less of a right to advocate against raising the costs of postsecondary education?

I concur that smoke bombs in the metro are extremely annoying. I was late to university myself on one occasion because of this. Protesters using such tactics should be reprimanded by the authorities just as metro users are reprimanded if they unnecessarily pull the emergency brake of the train. But then again, these are risks that certain protesters are evidently willing to take in order to further a cause I agree with, and this is courageous, even honorable, in some way.

Ms. Wente goes on: “To the protesters, tuition hikes are just a small part of the enormous oppression and injustice inflicted by the rapacious capitalist state.” To me, tuition hikes reflect an ideology that balances each and every student’s ability to attain a good education against the inability of the state to correctly prioritise its own budget, as well as an ideology that supports a very powerful banking system, one that stands in line to make huge profits from tuition increases and resulting increases in student debt.

It is true that Quebec students, even after the hike, will have the lowest tuition rates in North America. But it is to their credit that they are willing to stand up for low tuition, especially since this won’t even affect most of them. The average American or non-Quebecois Canadian student needs a proportionately larger degree of selflessness for such a political stance, given his comparatively larger tuition fee. In this sense, Quebec protesters have the ‘least to lose’ and the most to retain: an affordable tuition rate.

As a person who counts himself amongst “People in the rest of Canada”, I very much can understand efforts made by Quebec’s students to prevent political decisions that signal a move towards a society whose youngest members leave university with massive debts to pay off. As a German living in Canada, I am neither appalled by Quebec’s student protests - except for a few select tactics, nor do I find Ms. Wente’s sympathy with my government and its problems with Greece particularly called for in this case. Such a comparison does little justice to any of these issues, all of which are of a different nature. University tuition in Germany is a pittance, and that is thanks to the fact that most Germans see education as one of the most important publicly-subsidised goods, one that keeps innovation flourishing, and long-term sustainability a prime objective. Canada is a long way from any of that. However, with a little bit of luck, inter-Canadian discussion rather than polarisation, thoughtfulness, an ethical and responsible approach, and creative inclusive thinking rather than lazy nihilism, we can make this happen.

To this blog's readers

Nothing I write here I want to be accepted if it is not. I also use this blog as a practising philosopher, and arguments stimulate better definitions. Therefore: type your comments and arguments to your heart's content!