Who’s Right When Everyone is Wrong?

OpinionsKarina Licursi — Published March 31, 2015

In corner one we have students who are on strike, and in corner two students who are not only not on strike, but who strongly oppose it. In corner three there is the government, which insists on being the father figure that knows best. Lingering in corner four we have the police, who insist they are against austerity measures, all the while slapping the exact students they should be siding with.

Clearly this is not 2012, and to compare this strike to the previous one would be naive. Firstly, there are no Desjardins, Bureau-Blouins, Reynolds or Nadeau-Dubois—the speakers who were around back then—not to mention there is no Jean Charest making jokes in the National Assembly in front of a nervous Pauline Marois.

Secondly, the reason for the current strike is completely different, though in a way a follow-up to what wasn’t handled three years ago. Obviously money is still being mismanaged and wasted, making some austerity measures necessary, but where the cuts are being made is downright scary. However, there is an issue with this current movement that begs to be addressed, more than the strike itself and austerity measures combined.

No one wants to agree, to agree to disagree, to even look their opponents’ views in the eye. Seriously? You call this a democracy? I thought democracy was about representing the majority, not just the people who agree with you. It is insulting as someone who is a proud bilingual Quebecker to know that the Quebec Parliament, which once accepted everyone, is now making the six o’clock news where a student is interviewed swollen in the face after being hit in the face by gas canister projected through the air.

In the meantime, most citizens simply go about their daily lives, have no idea what austerity is and don’t even bother researching what really happens at these protests. Whether you agree with the strike or not is of little importance. The fact is you have the right to agree or disagree with austerity, but as it’s clear to see, people in Quebec officially do not have the right to speak.

It won’t be long before other rights begin to be taken away if you all keep turning against your much-needed allies. When a protest is ended after merely a few minutes, and when mass arrests are taken at hand, there is something to worry about. Writing blogs and posting rant videos expressing how angry one is at government policy doesn’t make for credible argument. Of course, even I might be a hypocrite here.

Many will say that those hit by gas canisters in recent protests asked for it, but as someone who knows personally, running makes no difference. If you run, the police will chase you anyhow. Standing is even more risky, since you will get hit, but there are those who see it as a way to assert themselves, and while I myself would rather be a runner, chapeau to anyone who does the opposite.

Our current political system is a narcissistic entity that feeds on people’s fears and insecurities. Not buying into this pattern reinforces what democracy really is: being able to debate, interact, and coexist with people who may or may not agree with you. But when only a small few are making decisions, it’s not a democracy; it’s another kind of system that begins with the same letter. And that’s something no one should stand for.

If we are to go forward, strikers, anti-strikers and the police must all open dialogue in order to work together. It’s high time. At the end of the day, we are all affected by the same decisions, regardless of our status. The police are just as affected by austerity as students, and the day both sides realize that is the day everyone moves forward.

Until then I will react, however little, whenever someone in my city is told they don’t have the right to walk in the very streets that their immigrant families built so many years ago. Being a member of society goes far beyond marking an X on a ballot every four years. It’s the same as the difference between a noun and a verb.