Anarcho-conservatives, the new weapon in the campus conservatives' arsenal. Branding themselves as progressive, they wage war on conservatives' targets from a position of perceived moral high ground.
Recently, in a letter written by Lex Gill, José Barrios and Yves Engler self-identifying as “the left”, they announced their solidarity with the unfolding campus Conservative campaign against student unions and their national umbrella organization, the Canadian Federation of Students, which we reported on back in April 2009. In their piece, Open Letter From the Left to the Canadian Federation of Students, they attack author James Clark for his story, Manufacturing Crisis, which looks critically at the student media and its role in the surging right-wing politic on campuses, something we have also reported on.
After reading An Open Letter and then Manufacturing Crisis, it’s almost impossible to deny that Gill, Barrios, Engler and company must be smoking the same thing as Stephen Harper. So we decided to review their piece, point-by-point, and rank their work as Conservative or Left. We follow this review with an insightful conclusion. We hope you enjoy…
An Open Letter From the Left to the Canadian Federation of Students
…
1-
“James Clark recently published an article in the Ryerson Free Press entitled “Manufacturing Crisis:” a clumsy attempt to refute the existence of an organized, national push to defederate from the Canadian Federation of Students…In fact, Clark goes on to assert that this highly-publicized “rumour” is part of a wild conspiratorial plot by the far-right.”
It’s not? We thought that was obvious.
Point Conservative – Their on-going campaign which they re-announced this year is getting cover despite their open work on it.
Conservative 1, Left 0
2-
“Four petitions (Trent, Guelph, Carleton and Western) have already been delivered to CFS-Ontario by bailiff. We’re quite sure more are on the way.”
Point Left – We wouldn’t expect the left would know what a bailiff is, hint it has nothing to do with Night Court. Actually, in Ontario a bailiff is a person “who acts…in the repossession or seizure of chattels or in any eviction” (Bailiffs Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER B.2, Government of Ontario). Unless CFS didn’t pay their rent on time, there appears to be no reason why a bailiff would pay them a visit.
Conservative 1, Left 1
3-
“We don’t agree with the right on much, but scandal is scandal, corruption is corruption, and bullshit is bullshit, no matter where you stand politically.”
Point Conservatives – Their campaign slogan is getting air time. Like most conservative initiatives, the name must be Orwellian and the more inflammatory the better. Our reading of Manufacturing Crisis is that the media is not presenting evidence of corruption, it’s just perpetuating un-attributed allegations and hearsay. The only thing that is mentioned in news articles on the corruption front is that Hamid Osman was “hired” (well we’re willing to bet he was elected) by the CFS after his time as president of York Federation of Students. So we dug up the dirt on Osman. In fact the biggest grievance against him was for his support for organized labour – wouldn’t it make sense for real campus lefties to get behind each other when campus conservatives are on the attack against labour and students?
Conservative 2, Left 1
4-
“The CFS has alienated real activists by highjacking our campaigns, stamping glossy brands on our hard work…”
We’re torn on this one…
Half point Conservatives – By assigning property rights to public issue campaigns you are propertizing the commons all over again. (PS are you alleging this was your campaign? Clever messaging.)
Half point Left – It’s true that lefties seem to prefer the single sheet printouts that inevitably get stuffed in pockets at rallies and trashed shortly thereafter. But, we’re not sure this is the right strategy to force the government to reduce tuition. Mostly, quality campaign materials are good, unless you are opposed to the campaign goals.
Conservative 2.5, Left 1.5
5-
“We’ll overlook the blatant ad hominem attacks (towards Brandon Wallingford, Dean Tester, Erin Hale…)”
Point Conservative – “Always right” Blogging Tory Dean Tester, et al. are getting backup. (PS you’re not using ad hominem properly, therefore your thesis must be wrong…)
Conservative 3.5, Left 1.5
6-
“So here’s the truth. The real student movement can’t be put on a pin or a sticker, can’t be sold to us in a bus ad, and can’t hide behind superficial and obsolete rhetoric.”
Point Conservative – Stickers and pins are definitely not Conservatives’ thing (OK, sometimes), but students seem to like them. Besides, you can’t fault CFS for outreaching to students, or you could, but then you’d really sound like a Conservative. Speaking of “obsolete rhetoric”, it runs pretty high in An Open Letter too.
Conservative 4.5, Left 1.5
7-
“The CFS has been a driving force behind the active and ongoing co-optation of legitimate social justice organizing for too long. We’re fed up.”
Point…and a half Conservative – The above complaint translates to: “oh no, social justice issues are going mainstream, that can’t happen. We only want social justice to be advocated by a small fringe element that doesn’t have the support to get anything done.” Sounds like sour grapes that rank-and-file students have a vehicle to grapple with social justice issues. What’s the next complaint, that because of the CFS, the ultra-left at McGill are no longer the only white kids to co-opt the wearing of keffiyehs? (They’re for sale at Simons).
Conservative 6, Left 1.5
8-
“While quick to pay lip service to marginalized and disenfranchised communities, evidence of actual progress is hardly forthcoming.”
Point Conservatives – generally speaking, people working on such issues appreciate support. Meanwhile, the hypocrisy runs deep: Yves Engler, you’ve been a Palestinian activist for many years…but oppression continues there. You fail. You fail on Haiti too.
Conservative 7, Left 1.5
9-
“The irony, of course, is that for all this talk of a united “Student Movement™” arguably the most open-source, multi-partisan and member-driven one we’ve seen has been against the Canadian Federation of Students.”
Really? Just because there are some grievance-mongers from all ends of the political spectrum doesn’t mean that CFS can’t represent the majority of students. Seems like a lot of people here for example. How’d you make that little TM by the way?
Oh, points, right. This is already turning into a slaughter for Conservative, let’s just move on and give Left a chance to catch up.
Conservative 7, Left 1.5
10-
“Moreover, we consider the adoption of progressive campaigns by the CFS deeply problematic regardless of whether or not we agree with their stance.”
Ah, now the truth surfaces… shouldn’t your thesis be moved up higher? Point Conservative.
Conservative 8, Left 1.5
11-
“The reason is simple: the CFS has a clear mandate to provide a voice for all students–on student issues–at the federal level, and no matter what we think about Palestine, copyright, gender, Cuba, abortion, or land claims it is unrepresentative to speak for all students on such divisive issues.”
Point Conservative – It’s all becoming clear now. You don’t want students working on these issues. Period. Besides that, since when was working on copyright issues divisive? And this mandate you speak of, is it just to speak on behalf of “regular” students, not that insignificant part of the student population who are women, or <gasp> Aboriginal? Wait, YOU’RE telling students what they can and can’t support, as opposed to recognizing their rights to decide for themselves. That makes you conservative and anti-democratic. Another point Conservative!
Conservative 10, Left 1.5
12-
“Some of us have dedicated our lives to these causes, but it’s inappropriate for a federal lobby organization to adopt these campaigns…”
Well we’re stumped here. No conservative would spend their life working on these issues (you must be very dedicated, how old are you again? (wow-did she really tweet about a “hobo fight”)). But then again, no one on the left would claim that it is inappropriate for federal lobby organizations to take on progressive issues. Seems to us you’re feigning an interest in social issues in order to claim moral superiority over other people. But if everyone else is concerned about these issues, well then, that kinda just makes you like a regular person. So it could be that your real fear of a progressive student federation that you have no influence over is that you loose your status. We diagnose you as elitists with a superiority complex – Point Conservative.
(We’re starting a pool on how many signatories to An Open Letter will be in law school within 2-5 years)
Conservative 11, Left 1.5
13-
And to our sisters, brothers and lovers on the left who are not yet convinced, we implore you to do some serious research and introspection. To quote Margaret Mead, “what people say, what people do, and what they say they do are entirely different things.”
Ah yes, the sweet sound of hypocrisy – Point Conservative.
Final Tally:
Conservative 12, Left 1.5
Too conclude, our analysis on this stuff is simple, any enemy of the Conservatives is a friend of ours. So we’re cheering for the Canadian Federation of Students. We’re also cheering for the PIRGs, organized labour, environmentalists, pro-choice organizers, public health care workers, stem-cell researchers, evolutionary biologists, open mindedness, decency, etc. As for the bohemian university students who wear their brand of elitist ultra-left politics on their sleeves while they do the Conservatives’ work of trashing the dwindling number of progressive institutions left Canada, not so much.
——
Read here for Canadian Dimension’s take on this issue:
“Unholy Alliance? Conservatives and Ultra-leftists unite against CFS?“
——
Email us if you have a story idea about campus conservatives or their allies: campusconservativewatch@gmail.com
Follow us on Twitter.
Why are you cutting these Anarcho-Conservatives (your term?) so much slack!? I barely started reading this article and realized that you’re already pulling your punches; the left, especially in Quebec, would not refer to a “national” campaign unless they meant it was coming from Quebec. These are posers! Another point for the Conservatives. Naw, seriously this is good and hilarious!
Exactly! This reminds me of the South Park episode I saw last night (episode 1302 Cartman vs. Mysterion). Cartman’s masked alter ego and self-identified saviour of SP (who’s in it just for the recognition) wages war on another unidentified SP superhero (Mysterion) because the lime light is being stolen. Dear Cartman’s of Montreal, stop your douchery!
I was feeling quite depressed today.
Thank you for reminding me that there are people out there who can see the big picture.
With the radiclique is so concerned with destroying everything around them, perhaps they should remember one of the fundamental principles of the left: solidarity.
Working together works.
This article is so poorly researched and written, I would think that someone is merely writing it for the lulz of trolling Conservatives. But on second thought, no, there are people out there as deranged as the author so I guess it must be serious.
And do you even know what an “Anarcho-conservative” is? Gosh, you people really epitomize whats wrong with the intellectual atmosphere of campuses today.
This is very funny stuff!
I’m starting to understand the CFS strategy more and more – just pretend everything is the opposite of what it actually is: the left is actually the right, the right is actually the left, the centre is the periphery, and the CFS is not filled with con artists.
I suppose the next people you CFS partisans will attack is Hillel: it must be the Jews!
As a side note, perhaps you would have preferred use of the term ‘process server’, a term most lawyers recognize as interchangeable with the term ‘bailiff’. In any case, what I suspect you are truly raging about all alone in the dark in at your computer is the fact that one of your best operatives, Dave Molenhuis (CFS Treasurer – why is a bean counter talking about this stuff anyway… aren’t there about 6,000,000 CFS fee beans to count and ferret away?), was caught in a bald face lie when he denied, on a radio show at Guelph no less, that no petition was received by CFS-Ontario… even though a BAILIF delivered the petitions to the office, and produced a sworn affidavit to that effect.
People with brains (us): many points
Crazies (you): 0 … again
Rock on you crazy kids! Keep dig dig digging yourselves deeper.
I looked up this Yves fellow on Wikipedia. He has a page. One commenter suggested that it fit the bill as a “vanity page” and should therefore be deleted. Ultimately it was left up.
It’s unfortunate, but there are some elements of this whole conflict that you cannot make sense of, unless you’ve seen the inside of the beast for quite a bit.
For what it’s worth, I would suggest that if you want to push actions that people find despicable in the name of principles they support, it will only take so much time before they decide that the means don’t justify the ends anymore, and that they start researching other means.
You may correctly diagnose this as a failure in solidarity, and in this case there are consequences for the movement, but I’m not sure if your prescription (label dissidents as conservatives) will address these consequences.
I work for a labour union on a campus and we got a message from people from Montreal, possibly the same group, who were spreading around some inflammatory motions package that was supposed to “reform the CFS”. Then the message went on to say something like “what ever happen we wish the best for the CFS”. B*llsh*t you do. First of all, why are you sending this to us? It’s none of our damned business. Second, if any local of my union decided to totally dominate our meeting with 60 some motions of pure venom, no one would stand for it.
Actually, while this blog is a little sarcastic for me, the authors are right on the money. These are little “ultra-left” sh*ts would are out to destroy unions. They are as good as conservatives in my books. Shame.
To answer your question Miriam, they sent it to just about any and everyone they could simply because the CFS cannot deny that they ever received it. As you can tell by what is happening in Ontario and the fact that the CFS-O says that they haven’t received any petitions despite the fact that they were delivered by a process -server, deny that things like this exist is a common tactic the CFS employs to resist change.
Richard you are using weasel words. Or better yet, I think you are LYING! This email was much more than a “heads up”. It was an attack, full of accusations and vile comments. Clearly you, or someone from your gang, is trying to drive a wedge between the CFS and its union allies. Believe me, boy-o, years of students and labour working in solidarity to support each other will not be severed by a bunch of accusatory/dirty laundry emails emails. Pukes like you make me so angry. Crawl back in your hole.
Hey, Sam…you talk a lot of shit for a climate change denier who thinks David Suzuki is a “dickhead”. No average Canadian thinks that, let alone anyone who wants to be taken seriously. It’s people like you and your conservative cronies who benefit the most from the veil of anonymity that the web provides, but you’re such a goof that you couldn’t even help yourself from exposing how moronic you are.
This post is very funny…I’ve been following the blog for a while, and have been steadily more and more impressed.
Not withstanding what the other James Murphy says, I think Sam makes a good point: this is clearly troll-bait.
lex gill, beisan zubi, Yves Engler (and probably others on this letter) are disgraces to the conservative movement!!!!!
they reject market-economics, traditional western/christian values, and run around talking about “consumer culture”… yet i doubt they’ve ever taken an economics course in their life.
please don’t smear the conservative party by associating known communists with our party/movement.
this site is a joke, obviously a front for cfs.
why you ask? because they censor my posts…. something i would expect from cfs.
btw: these individuals are NOT conservative. why are you saying they are conservatives? because they don’t approve of bully tactics? suppression of dissent? they do not believe in market economics. they do not believe in traditional values.
and why use this bush-style “with us or against us” language? do you think this will help students?
CCW admin here. Thanks to our writing team on this piece, it’s generated quite a lot of discussion (and you should see our email inbox!). So we’ve decided to post a comment regarding some administrative stuff. Here goes:
1) Indeed there appears to be two James Murphy’s posting to the comments section. We’re not sure if that’s two different people or one with a highly internalized debate going on in his head, but that’s fine, we’ve just labelled the names to James Murphy 1 and James Murphy 2. In the future, we’d appreciate it if the two James’ could keep to the convention we’ve set. If not, well, what can you do?
2) Within 20 minutes a strange flurry of 8 emails and 2 comments claiming to be from Conservatives, but each asserting that the authors of An Open Letter were indeed communists, “known communists” actually. Even more strange, these posts/emails used anti-(GW)Bush-isms and spoke to the values of An Open Letter authors. Coincidentally, we’re sure, around the same time Lex Gill changed her Twitter update thanking CCW for the “smear campaign”. This prompted the following response from CCW writers that penned this original post.
–
Dear Ms Gill,
We’re sorry that you took offence to our critique of your words. Please pass our apology on to Dr. Engler and co. too. Honestly, we’re not interested in “smearing” you but your letter had that irritating combination of preachy over-tones supported by juvenile analysis; our piece pretty much just wrote itself. Frankly, we want move on to other issues. But that will be probably be dependant on how the research goes into the feedback we’re getting from this piece. Anyway, good news, we note that some people claiming to be staunch Conservatives have cleared your name, and that you are communists and haters of the free market after all. This should be more than enough evidence for your friends to hold you in high esteem again.
Hey James,
David Suzuki, Al Gore, and anyone who buys into the climate change hysteria is a dickhead. Average people are stupid sheep who follow demagogues.
Hugs and Kisses,
Sam
Hey CCW,
Can you please explain to me what a bailiff does again? Your original answer is hilarious, but I’d like to know if you stand by it.
Cheers.
This has to be one of the funniest things I have ever read.
Wait, this isn’t a joke? Wow… kill me now.
This is obviously a front for the CFS. What’s wrong with a democratic referendum, coupled with reasoned and logical debate about membership in the CFS? This is the right of any Canadian to ask and receive answers to their questions, and if unhappy with the answers, sever ties with the organization. This is the most democratic thing to do.
Is this what being under the “democratic framework” of the CFs is all about? Tyranny, lies, emotional opinion, and attacks on critics instead of arguing the ideas?
I do not support the CFS for this reason.
This is too funny. Not even quoting legislation is enough proof for you conservative lovers… Bailif in Quebec is different than that in Ontario. Sorry, if people are going to criticize clear facts, its solid proof that this blog is taking on some real bottom feeders.
Kudos from Vancouver island, this shit needs to be said.
Thanks guys. I’m not a Conservative. If you bothered to read the Daily’s statement of principles, you’d see we’re pretty far to what you considered to be the left. One of our major principles is to examine power relations as well as give a voice to otherwise marginalized communities. Just because in this case conservative students (OMG!) are protesting doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be reported on, and doesn’t mean I’m a conservative myself. As I have said before, they’re critical of a multi-million dollar lobby group, and trying to do something about it. That’s a news story.
I left this comment before, and it was deleted.
I am not a conservative, and I don’t understand why reporting on a group of (allegedly) conservative students makes me one. One of the major tenets of the McGill Daily is to analyze power structures. These kids are critical (and vocal about it) of a multi-million dollar lobbying group. That’s a news story. Yes, there were some problems with how I wrote it, but please don’t put me in a box with these other student politicians.
While I found the off-hand “self-identifying as the left” hilarious, I’m not sure it quite drove the point home. The egomania of individual signatories to a letter referring to themselves as “the left” is astounding and distinctly individualistic (read: not left-wing). Me thinks these kids need to focus on their schooling and learn what left wing means before they go around self-identifying.
Dear Erin,
We’re not sure what you mean by your assertion that a comment of yours was deleted. We approved both comments at our earliest opportunity (it isn’t like MacLean’s paying bloggers to rake Muslims and left-leaners over the coals real-time for them. This is a purely volunteer-driven initiative; we have other commitments.)
To be honest with you, your protestations here are misplaced. First of all, while we understand that you are probably defensive, because the quality of your story has been called into question, the fact is we were not reviewing it. We think Clark’s piece sufficiently covered that already. Secondly, whether it was your intention to write an unbalanced story for political purposes or you just did it because you didn’t know any better is irrelevant to us and to those who are using it to fulfil the campus Conservatives’ attack campaign against the CFS. That is why conservatives like Dean Tester and Sam Reynolds cry “slander” in defence of your piece. And that is the yardstick we employed to judge where Lex Gill and co. fall on the political spectrum when they called “ad hominem” on Clark for his entirely legitimate critique. Surely you’re not so blinded by your crocodile tears that you can’t see this.
The RFP article, the reponse from “the Left” and now this article are frankly all distractions.
Anytime militant pro-CFSers and anti-CFSers spend time arguing with each other is time they could be spending to reach out to the vast majority of the actual CFS membership, that is, to the average un-committed student.
Although the fact that this Ontario-centric blog is taking a cheap shot at Montreal leftism raises the interesting question of whether the CFS should have stayed out of Quebec in the first place. (Though in all fairness the need for CFS-Q might have been a by-product of the difficulty of the FEUQ, which is quite close to the Parti québécois, of appealing to English-speaking students.)
Philippe, do you really think this blog was taking a swipe at Montreal leftism, in general? I didn’t read it that way. There’s no way these people are representative of all Montreal lefties, at least I hope not.
(as an aside, I just learned CFS dropped the whole Quebec wing)
Actually they’re not even all from Montreal. Barrios is at UVic if I’m not mistaken, and most of the endorsers last time I checked were outside Quebec.
Therefore, the emphasis that CCW puts on Montreal in the first place seems illogical and more the product of prejudices than anything else.
Cheap shots aside from you guys (re: “crocodile tears), I’m not the only person who reported on this story. If you talk to anyone at CUP you’d see there are other stories corroborating mine out there… can you please remove my name from your blog.
There are other comments that merit some response, but because of Erin Hale’s role in this whole saga (her McGill Daily article was the one that Clark critiqued in his piece Manufacturing Crisis and thus was where this whole chain of events started) and because we can hear her stamping her feet all the way from Montréal (her current place of residence should in no way reflect on anyone in Québec), we’ll address her last comment for now.
Erin,
To be honest, we’re having a hard time understanding why you are inserting yourself in this debate and what your demands are. This discussion is only focusing on you at your own insistence; you are not mentioned in the original piece other than by Gill, Engler and co.
At the time, it seemed obvious to us that you were purposefully touting some phantom victimization, knowing full-well it was trumped up. From this we deduced that your snivelling amounted to crocodile tears. We’re still not sure that you aren’t trying to convince us, or yourself, that your piece wasn’t tantamount to PR-work for the Conservatives. If on the off-chance you really think that any critique of your work (which, we’ll state again: we weren’t offering in our piece) or any insinuation that your article is fuelling the Conservatives’ agenda is unfair, then we’ll apologize for suggesting that your whining was strategic. Instead, we’ll just shake our heads and note that you appear to have the right combination of strong opinion, weak grip on reality and indignation toward anything approaching criticism, that you’ll fit in perfectly among the ranks of vapid journalists that currently plague that trade.
This is a great piece. A few of my favourite parts are:
“We consider the adoption of progressive campaigns by the CFS deeply problematic regardless of whether or not we agree with their stance.”
“Some of us have dedicated our lives to these causes, but it’s inappropriate for a federal lobby organization to adopt these campaigns”
-They want the campaigns all for themselves? Why?
The kind of campaign that “The Left” is working on against the CFS promotes conservatives goals and gets right-wing students elected to student unions, regardless of what “The Left” hopes will happen.
At SFU, the student union executive is now dominated by BC-Liberal supporters, but before the anti-CFS campaign it was largely filled with progressive students. Conservative students were attracted by the individualistic, right-wing anti-CFS campaign that was run at SFU by conservative students and students who identified as New Democrats.
I’m worried that the divisive anti-CFS campaigns that are going on right now are going to have the same effect as the one at SFU did. When the student unions are spending so much time on CFS campaigns (in favour or against membership) there is less time for reduce tuition fees campaigns and other useful campaigns that will attract progressive students to the Student Union.
Very well said Cara — it’s so disturbing to see those who trumpet themselves as the voice of the left hijack the student movement and distract from the work that needs to get done.
It’s sad to see these individuals who share similar convictions to other progressive individuals focus their energy on destruction and cannibalism rather then coalition-building and true-activism.
What is even sadder is that we are seeing the same issues on a macro-level.
Conservatives advance their agenda as the left beats itself up.
There appears to be so many parallels between everything that went down at SFU and what is currently happening at Concordia.
The student union there seems to be the most conservative its been in the last decade — but those who have spent years screaming and yelling about how ‘conservative’ the union was have for some strange reason found peace with the new crop of executives and have chosen to focus their negativity on the federation.
It’s all a power struggle. And it’s very. very. very. sad.
Wow, Cara. The CFS has had almost 30 years to lobby to lower tuition and you’re worried that a few students exercising their democratic rights will detract from their failed policies and lobbying campaigns? Tuition has TRIPLED since 1990 according to Statistics Canada. TRIPLED. I’ll say it again, TRIPLED across the country for all undergraduates, not to mention the astronomical increases in grad school tuition. The CFS has FAILED, repeatedly. And this was during boon times for the CFS with no real discussion about leaving this group. Now, they are under attack for their failures and saying “but we could be lobbying for you right now and achieving nothing.” Cry me some more crocodile tears CFS.
Why devote our time and efforts on a failed lobbyist group?
This is what democracy is all about whether you like it or not. Freedom of association is an inalienable fundamental freedom that fundamentalists (of either political affiliation or ideology) frequently forget. Luckily the moderates far outnumber the fundamentalists so hopefully students will be allowed to exercise their democratic freedoms without the CFS and their hacks stifling this under their “democratic framework.”
And whether you or Francis get it or not, the student unions were ELECTED by their students. If you are seeing a phantom “conservative” around every corner, it’s because the students voted them in DEMOCRATICALLY (assuming your phantoms are real, of course). I’m so sorry that your brands of tyranny and dictatorship don’t fly in this country. Welcome to civics 101.
Re: “The CFS has FAILED to reduce tuition fees.”
I think it’s the government’s failing and you are focusing on a lobby organization. Our demands, as students are to the government. We shouldn’t be blaming the lobby group that is advocating ON OUR BEHALF while the government takes our tax dollars and uses it for God knows what, because it’s definitely not going toward education.
I think you’re forgetting the bigger picture here.
“Why devote our time and efforts on a failed lobbyist group?”
And sorry, the alternatives are….? The CFS HAS been successful at plenty of things. Here are just a few since you can’t seem to back up your ‘failure’ comment:
-International students right to work off campus
-National student grant program
-Tuition freezes and/or reductions all across Canada (25% reduction (!) in Newfoundland)
-No Means No Campaign – Bluenotes boycott
-Sustainable Bulk Purchasing – Single Mother’s Cooperative in El Salvador
etc…
Not EVERYTHING – but this group tries and definitely has the best interest of students at heart.
Congratulations! You have passed civics 101. Now onto the advanced level
—YES there are campuses who elect conservative student union executives. It’s kind of hard to choose a progressive team on some campuses when there are none running. It’s kind of like you have choice between one conservative team or another conservative team.
—OVER 80% of students believe in lower fees and more affordable education… don’t student unions (conservative or not) have a responsibility to act on behalf of students in this regard?
—Tuition fees HAVE tripled. Good for you for doing the math! But, unfortunately, you failed the research part. Your statistics do not exist in a vacuum my friend – there are social facts that go with it – like a series of SHITTY provincial leaders who EFFED up a lot and CUT funding to social services including PSE. Now, how that’s the fault of the CFS? I have no idea. And let’s not forget, the biggest increases happened in the mid 90′s when the biggest cuts were made BY THE GOVERNMENT.
—Lastly, I’d like to say, as a lesson in civics, know this: stop f**king whining if you don’t have any solutions. All you do is complain and complain and COMPLAIN with no solutions yourself.
L O L
Look everyone, this is quite simple. If student support for the CFS is so strong, if the “movement” for leaving is really just a conservative fringe, then (1) the CFS shouldn’t worry about it and (2) it shouldn’t impact the success of their lobbying efforts.
There will never be a lack of external factors to blame one’s failures on. But blaming others doesn’t do anything but perpetuate your own mediocrity.
Anne, don’t mistake Frank’s comments as complaining that fees are going up. Actually, I’ll bet he (or she…whoever is actually writing it–Erin Hale, is that you?) wants them to go up. Some people are truly messed up.
Dan, please. The only one failing here is you…failing to make a credible case that this is just some normal democratic exercise for the CFS. Actually, it seems more like an orchestrated smear campaign. I for one, don’t take your suggestion that we should all just sit back and not worry about it, while people like you set the terms of the debate which are based on total absurd BS, lies and partisan rhetoric.
Pingback: Conservative campus media, we’re watching you too. « Campusconservativewatch's Blog
As one of the signatories of this letter, I do not believe that I need to further elaborate on my views of the CFS. Rather, I would like to comment on what I perceive to be a personal attack on the agency of the young woman, Lex Gill, who authored this letter and any other voice of dissent in the ongoing CFS debate.
There is a disturbing trend that is emerging this in this CFS dialogue which states that anyone who suggests a reformatory or contradictory opinion of the CFS is instantly revealed for their true Capital-C Conservative, evil selves. That one can not possibly think that there are systematic and institutional problems with the CFS without wanting to bring about its destruction.
So to the CFS kool-aiders, let me ask: Is the student movement strong enough in order to shift a critical eye unto itself? Or should the issues that are being brought up nationwide about the CFS be put on hold until the day that tuition is free and universities across Canada are all NSHN customers– ie: CFS’s wet daydream.
There is a growing group of people who question this forced acceptance of a lazy, un-critical participation in a democratically- and morally- flawed national student movement, and what do we do to them? We use right-wing branding techniques in order to insult and marginalize them- as the right wing! What a joke.
Instead of holding ourselves to true leftist principles of justice, transparency and participation, hatemongering techniques of dismissal and marginalization are the norm. And when the agency and free-thought of a woman I call a friend are attacked in such a spineless manner I have no choice to interject: YOU, “CAMPUS CONSERVATIVE WATCH” ARE THE CONSERVATIVES.
Actually, by definition; you are resistant to change, to opening the political process and to allowing voices of dissent to be heard. In reality, WE ‘out-left’ YOU.
We are critical. We are curious. We are educated and want to make our worlds better.
You are lazy. You are mean. You do not use real arguments but personal and semantic attacks meant to belittle and frustrate your opponents.
Dear Beisan,
Thanks for your poem, but we’re not sure you’ve hit the mark with it. First of all, given your field of study, we’re surprised that you don’t value or recognize political satire, which most of us here are very committed to. Second, we’re not interested in playing some childish game of “out-lefting” each other. But we will call you out for being reactionary and supporting a larger right-wing agenda. Progressive politics is, from our perspective, about building movements that take on right-wing and reactionary forces in society. Your movement of individualists does not appear to be interested in building, but instead on destruction, as you say. That is lazy and short-sighted. That is reactionary and thoughtless. That is juvenile.
Your accusation that it is somehow unfair to criticize Lex, because she is a woman is strange to say the least. Just like men, women are perfectly capable of making their own arguments and taking their lumps when they put their opinions out in the pubic. This is an equal opportunity site.
Lastly, why do you assume that anyone who supports the CFS is the CFS? The fact that you cannot possibly imagine anyone disagreeing with you on this issue unless they are either the CFS or as “corrupt, lazy, bureaucratic, [insert hyperbole here]” as the CFS speaks to an over inflated sense of righteousness. It seems to us, that this inability to contemplate another side to the story causes people like you to harbour a deep seeded paranoia that flares up whenever differing views are encountered. So instead of owning up to your collusion with the likes of Andrew Haig you assume any critique of your venom-laden attack on the CFS (http://www.thelinknewspaper.ca/articles/1531) must mean: ‘The CFS behind this!’ This zealotry does not move the discussion forward.
I am a grad student at Guelph. The CFS is the only mainstream organization that consistently cuts against the power structures that exist in government and academia. They also do work on social issues that affect students, like racism and the environment. I thank them for this. I don’t appreciate “lefter than though” people who crap on people who are trying to make a difference. In my experience, such people are often rich kids who are oblivious to their own privilege.
First of all, you’re welcome for my freestyle poem. I’m glad you appreciate my skills.
As a creative writing major I do in fact understand both the nature of political satire and the power of words. Unfortunately, I believe that the negative effects of your words do undermine the potential transformatory power of political satire; note this is my personal belief and not a ground for you to pick apart a random sentence in my response as a summary of the whole of the comment (something I have observed in this blog done by ccw and other commenters).
That said, your entire response to mine is frivolous and obfuscatory. You continue to refuse to deal with the content of arguments brought forth against you, instead focusing on choices of words and specific sentences.
But I guess I’ll have to deal with you as you’ve dealt with others, since it seems to follow your superficial line of reasoning:
1) “we’re not interested in playing some childish game of “out-lefting” each other”… um, did you read your post, because I thought its entire purpose was to show some sort of hierarchy of leftist principles. Or maybe it came as an out-of-body experience (channeled through you by a CFS-loving deity (I hear Vishnu thinks the CFS is da bomb))…
2) I did not say that ‘destruction’ of the CFS is my goal. Actually, if you had read my comments, I asked whether or not a critical lens of the CFS is tantamount to its destruction. You seem to think so. I do not.
3) My criticism was actually that you were attacking Lex in a lazy and mean way. If you had entered into the fray with some reasoned points that showed a thoughtful interaction with the letter, I would have been overjoyed. My description of Lex as an intelligent young woman stands. Other descriptors of Lex would be cute, small and funny. I apologize if it seemed as though I was saying her arguments are off-limits to criticism because of her gender; what I should have said was I find the condescending nature of your attacks on this young woman troubling for their tone and content, alleging that she must be under some sort of right-wing trance in order for her to POSSIBLY hold such CONTROVERSIAL opinions. I stand behind my original point.
4) When did I say that anyone who supports the CFS is the CFS (although to quote the CFS’s branding techniques, we are all the CFS- even me)?? This allegation was pulled out of your ass.
I believe I did make reference to the CFS kool-aiders (bone up on your 90s Heaven’s Gate trivia to get the reference) but that was as you yourself noted, political satire.
5) Again with the personal attacks. |My opinions and I, in your response, are described as the following: childish, reactionary, supportive of the right-wing (fuck that shit. seriously, talk about the left eating itself alive), blablabla… Again, an unhelpful and lazy perspective which completely ignores the content of my comment.
And talk about my venomous attack on the CFS in my little letter to The Link is quite selective, because you must have done a google search to find it. Coincidentally you missed my dozens of other published pieces ranging from critiques of the corporatization of university campuses, the need for anti-militaristic campuses, the deep humiliation felt as a Palestinian travelling in Israel, the need for transparent government and the like. That’s fine, it seems pretty status quo for this blog so far.
I’d like to note that my questions, which were not rhetorical, were never answered. I would like to know what you think. To reiterate:
Is the student movement strong enough in order
to shift a critical eye unto itself?
Is any criticism of the CFS’s structure, patronage systems, conflicts of interest, rejection of an entire province’s right to representation, etc etc, which is CRITICAL to any functioning, participatory democratic system automatically going to be dismissed as ____________ (options include: individualistic, right wing, anti-progress, rabble rousing, shit disturbing, etc) forever? Will CFS supporters own up to, and pledge to mend, the clear flaws in its structure?
I want to fix the CFS. I want to not feel like I’m getting fucked over by this organization who holds the power to improve so much but cannot because it is not taken seriously by the students that form its membership.
Who will work to change the dialogue of this issue from one of suspicion and dismissal to one of thoughtful reform?
I’m trying, but I’m just one person.
Meh, I don’t buy all this back-tracking from the letter’s authors above. They want blood. Anyway, I just noticed that Concordia Students’ Union supports a campaign for copyright (http://campaigns.csu.qc.ca/). Do the “left” in Montreal also this think this is inappropriate or is it simply that it becomes a problem when the CFS works on this stuff?