Commentary - Conservative McGill doth protest too much - The McGill Daily

Commentary

Conservative McGill doth protest too much

QPIRG opt-out campaign is hypocritical

By Sebastian Ronderos-Morgan
Published: Feb 8

The QPIRG opt-out campaign led by Conservative McGill and other campus organizations premises itself on a load of BS. It’s motivated by a disingenuous and vindictive logic and lacks the self-awareness to realize its own contradiction.

If only the pro-opt-outers weren’t too thick to realize that QPIRG is in fact a lot like SSMU. (Full disclosure: I am a SSMU executive.) QPIRG levies a fee from students, much like SSMU does, and then QPIRG allocates the money, in line with its policies, to different groups according to their needs and in the interest of diversifying student expression. SSMU does exactly the same thing.

Many people argue that QPIRG funds a number of fringe groups that people don’t know about and that are too radical for their moderate or right-wing tastes. Again, through the Club Fund, the Campus Life Fund, and other means, SSMU (read: student money) funds a wide variety of groups, many of which are also seen, by some, as fringe and radical. The fact is that SSMU and QPIRG fund both uncontentious groups (although Campus Crops has always raised my ire) and groups that are both contentious and don’t appeal to everyone. What more do you want out of student life? A university is a venue for diverse expression, as long as it is safe.

Brendan Steven’s ignorant column (“Opting out of QPIRG,” McGill Tribune, January 26) suggested that student groups should only receive money from students if they fundraise it themselves in hallways and on the streets. Now let’s apply that argument to his own Conservative McGill. This holier-than-thou club has been granted $750 of student money this academic year alone. They should give themselves a dose of their own medicine: they should spend days running around campus canvassing disinterested McGillians to give them a buck here and there. In order for Steven to avoid contradiction, I’d like to see cadres of blue-in-the face Harperites scampering around campus with buckets asking for money. What about bake sales with blue cookies that say “tax cuts” on them? How much time would their club members waste trying to raise money instead of engaging in activities that actually accentuate student life? Too bad all they seem to do with their time and their money is undermine groups like the Global AIDS Coalition’s access to funding.

If Conservative McGill and their allies are so damn incensed by the fact that students pay relatively small amounts of money to organizations that, later, redistribute smaller fractions of that sum to some groups that may not appeal to all students, then maybe they should put more effort into an “Opt-out of SSMU” campaign. Too bad you can’t opt-out of SSMU. After all, full-time students pay approximately $40 per semester to SSMU, money that is spread out to a diversity of groups. Or maybe Conservative McGill has enjoyed the $750 SSMU (read: your student fees) granted it to finance its campaign against student life, among other activities. (By the way, they’ve also flagrantly violated SSMU Council’s supermajority decision to suspend Choose Life’s club privileges by providing a table for the group at the Y intersection.)

I wish none of my money went to Conservative McGill, but it just so happens that in the interest of student life, pluralism, and their club’s budget, I pay my fees. Shame on you, Conservative McGill!

Sebastian Ronderos-Morgan is SSMU VP (External), but the views expressed here are his own. Bash Conservatives with him at external@ssmu.mcgill.ca.



I don’t see Conservative McGill begging for funds.
Tags: This article has no tags

Adam wrote:

These two guys are not trustworthy people on this issue, and on many others. They are members of the semi-Maoist Rodt pary in Norway, which gets 1% of the vote and never a representative in Parliament -- when it was the Workers Party, it supported Pol Pot, who massacred a million people. Wikipedia/google/whatever these two guys for their record.

It's interesting that besides being a member of the Rodt party, Mads Gilbert memorably justified the 9/11 attacks, yet the SPHR press release for this event said "Dr. Gilbert emerged as the mainstream face in keeping the world informed of the ongoing [Gaza] atrocities." Wow.

It makes you think that by "mainstream" they meant "white," because there could not be a person farther from mainstream than Mads Gilbert. Of course, it's also possible that SPHR was just trying to lie to students.

The notable thing about this interview is Mads' statement: "Nobody is neutral, really. While we have chosen sides with the Palestinian people, that does not mean that we won’t treat an Israeli soldier coming to al-Shifa. At the individual level we will always be neutral.

It's notable because Mads famously criticized Doctors Without Boarders for being willing to treat all people on all sides of a conflict, pissing off many, many people, not just those in Norway.


Feb 8, 2010 at 12:10 AM

Adam wrote:

Oh, shit. Ha! I posted that comment for the wrong article. Damn Firefox!

Let me take this opportunity to recommend Humera Jubir's interview with Mads Gilbert and Erik Fosse.

...

But as long as I'm on this page, I could say that Conservative McGill may want things I think are bad for Canada but that doesn't make them "fringe and radical," unless you want to squelch Conservative McGill's right to be part of the general public discourse.

Obviously, some of the groups QPIRG funds, like ISM and Tademon have a much greater claim on being "fringe or radical," given Tademon's stand on Hezbollah, ISM on Hamas, and both groups on supporting the merging of a state with another territory against the wishes of its people.

So Sebastian Ronderos-Morgan's argument is not so hot, but it looks great compared to the politics of the guys Humera Jabir interviews for this issue.

Love you, Sebastian.


Feb 8, 2010 at 12:17 AM

Bob wrote:

Dude... seriously? Start your own blog. The comments really aren't an appropriate place for your rants.

Maybe even grow a pair and write a real article.


Feb 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM

eli wrote:

To help readers get a more informed perspective, note that QPIRG receives about $100,000 in student fees every year. How convenient that you forgot to mention that minor fact...


Feb 9, 2010 at 04:11 AM

Adam wrote:

Bob, You don't seem very confident in your ability to argue a position, at least next to an article or opinion piece.

... But for this piece, I only wanted to say that comparing ISM and Tademon to Conservative McGill along the lines of "fringe and racial" is ridiculous. That is apparent to non-Conservatives such as myself, and if you can argue with that point, go for it.


Feb 9, 2010 at 02:05 PM

We've switched commenting systems. Please scroll to the bottom of the article, where you can now log in and respond to this story.