The Mainstream Media

The CBC, CTV, The Globe and Mail, The National Post, et al. have failed miserably in their coverage of this event, and rest assured it is an event. The journalistic coverage has been if not lazy than perhaps complicit. Over the weekend “a” Molotov cocktail became pluralized very quickly in many reports. All entities continually refer to the “students” protesting and marching, while in reality the students are on strike but much of the rest of Quebec are on the streets. They quote tired facts about tuition costs, but are guilty in omitting from the discourse what non-residents and international students pay. The images and arguments have been ones of violence, and all too willing to ignore the moving and inspirational story of the rise of an important social movement. Their coverage has the appearance of writing from afar, written on desks in Toronto and Calgary.

(Admittedly, I have written most of my op-eds from Toronto, Ottawa, and Portland, Ontario. But, as before, I’m nothing if not transparent.)

The other fashion in which the mainstream media has failed is in their lack of understanding of the world as it exists in 2012. With the advent of social media, smartphones, and alternative media, the story can be told as it is, without being subjected to the filter of a biased media, whose interests are seen through a corporate lens. Fortunately, community-based media like OpenFile has picked up the slack and has been on the frontlines reporting without bias, but with passion and integrity. While like-minded alternative media has their own agenda, they are more aware of their requirement and duty to be transparent in the curious and informed light of technology.

I started writing politically motivated pieces because I felt the voices in this country’s op-eds did not represent me, or my generation, or the one that follows me, or the one that follows them. This country’s columnists have taken the occasion of the strike to beat up on students and Quebec alike, to scold youth as unknowing of the world they themselves entered with privilege and a lack of debt. Andrew Coyne, Graeme Hamilton, The Globe and Mail editorial board et al. have taken large steps in alienating their next generation of readers. And the construction of their arguments lack both transparency and integrity. Margaret Wente, I’m looking at you here, and I’ve addressed your boomer-centric simpleton rantings to the point where I now employ your name as an expletive. I fully expect “Wente you, man”, “you’re a piece of Wente”, and “motherwente” to catch on.

The New Democratic Party

I understand that federal parties and politicians are hesitant to involve themselves in provincial affairs, and this is why we haven’t heard from Steve at 24 Sussex, but where the hell is Thomas Mulcair and the NDP? How do they not realize that this is their base in the biggest fight of their lives? It was just a year ago that Quebec powered the NDP to its high water mark, a prominent role and responsibility as the official federal opposition party. How quickly they’ve forgotten, victims to their own self-indulgence. I hesitate to speak for the dead, but I can’t believe for a moment that Jack Layton wouldn’t be on the front lines of this fight, in his hometown, holding ground and offering counsel. The NDP seems more interested in using Layton’s name in their promotional materials than respecting and adhering to his legacy.

Quebec’s Schools

Quebec’s post-secondary institutions have been eerily quiet during this whole affair, like a child who knows it has done wrong and is afraid of its parents finding out the dog’s dead and mum’s purse is empty. CEGEPs and universities in Quebec have fostered this crisis through decades of over-spending and financial mismanagement. At some point, these institutions need to be asked to be accountable for the loose and irresponsible manner with which they waste both the students’ tuition and their provincial funding. An end to tenure? or to fat contracts for administration? or to incomplete research? In a province well-known for its organized crime, universities may be the biggest criminals of all.

The Rest of Canada

The ROC has always treated Quebec with kid gloves, like a heavy drinking uncle who is occasionally violent, but mostly benign. But this movement should have been embraced by Canadians from coast-to-coast. Part of the blame for that lies in a flaw in the framing of the argument (see below), but for a country that prides itself on being a strong social democracy, it has been very quick to nearly universally dismiss the very basic tenets of that democracy which the students are standing for. There should be marches in solidarity today in Vancouver, in Victoria, in Winnipeg, in Calgary, in every last corner of the country that still believes accessible education and democracy are important. Instead, demonstrations of solidarity are being planned in New York City and Paris. Paris, France, not Paris, Ontario.

Canadian Students and their Associations

I am honestly shocked by the lack of solidarity being shown by student groups across the country. Over the weekend, the Canadian Federation of Students was petitioned by their membership to have Ontario students join the fight, but a vote won’t be held until the end of the summer, and the petition had only 211 names on it. I’ve had innocuous tweets get more attention. Not framing the argument to be about student debt (below) was part of the failing here, but it doesn’t take a University of Toronto PhD candidate to realize that this movement is bigger than Quebec, bigger than next fall’s tuition fees, and bigger than a lost semester. It’s about provincial and federal governments, not to mention banks, making money off of students. The Canadian Federation of Students claims to represent 500,000 students from more than 80 university and college student unions in Canada, but where are they? I would hope they wake up from their unpaid internships and $450/month loan payments and join the conversation. And soon.

The Charest Government

I feel for Jean Charest. I get the feeling that he never wanted to be the premier of Quebec, but after the fall of the Progressive Conservative party and with the lingering threat of separation, he answered a call to service and entered provincial politics (and indirectly paved the way for the amalgamation of the Reform and PC parties, and the reign of Steve, but that is an argument for another day). But Charest’s leadership, or lack thereof, has to accept most of the blame. The first mistake was underestimating the will and passion of youth. Charest seemingly hedged his bets on the strike petering out as the threat of a lost semester and the promise of Montreal summer approached, and instead he has infuriated a strike into a full-fledged movement. The passing of Bill 78, a legislation that burns against everything that this country stands for, did not quiet the storm, it did not quell the fire. Instead, it poured gasoline on it, invigorated an already committed base, and helped to galvanize the movement. And if this offensive and insulting lack of respect for the students and democracy leads us into a discussion of separation, then Charest’s once admirable sacrifice was all for not.

The Student Movement

The students have been less than flawless in their endeavour. I’ll be writing about this more later in the week, but their first mistake was the manner in which they framed their argument. It should have been about student debt, and not about free tuition for Quebec students. By making it about free or freezed tuition, they’ve provided their opponents and detractors with the simple and oft employed argument, “Quebec students pay the lowest tuition in Canada.” The problem is, that’s a good argument, and it’s true. And it incites a level of jealousy and bitterness in like-minded student groups across the country. Why should someone in Ontario paying $6640-a-year in tuition care about a Quebec student paying $2519 who wants to pay $0? It was a huge mistake, perhaps one born of being unable to see or believe that the strike would evolve as it has, and one that the students are just now emerging from. If the argument, from the outset, had been made about crippling student debt, the issue would have found immediate allies not just across Canada, but around the world. The Canadian Federation of Students estimates the current national student debt at $14.5 billion. The movement should been shouting out that number like a mantra. It should have been emblazoned on their red squares, tagged on monuments and buildings. Numbers are bilingual. And a number that large would have spoken to the masses, and a discourse framed in student debt would have robbed opponents of their only argument.

100 days. Just over three months. A semester. The life cycle of my failed relationships. The only way the students, the media, the province, the country, and my parents will ever be happy is if we all take the time for a peaceful moment of self-reflection. This is no longer about old promises or missed classes. It’s about creating the framework for an argument that will dictate the course of post-secondary education in Canada, and about providing future generations the opportunity to establish themselves while free of debt and committed to the ideals from which discourse began.

This was a calculated move on the part of the Charest government. It’s akin to the Canadiens firing their head coach during a slump. It’s a distraction. It gives the scribes and pundits (entities complicit in this discussion) something other than the issue at hand to feed the news cycle for a day or two while the franchise, in this case the Quebec government, regroups and plans their next course of action before the season (ahem, semester) is lost. Randy Cunneyworth was not considered for the position, Charest instead going with Treasury Board President Michelle Courchesne. I’m assuming she speaks French.

The intermediary should have provided a moment for reflection for both sides, and perhaps a more enlightened and calm discourse emerging on the other side. But no such luck. It has been fascinating to see how Canada’s op-ed columnists and political pundits have covered this story from afar, removed both from the university experience and Quebec itself. It’s difficult for me to understand why there isn’t more solidarity, why not just students but reasonable taxpayers aren’t more concerned with how the student strike has been reflected in the media, and furthermore how the mismanagement of subsidized tuition shares multiple parallels with other forms of social spending.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has asked his provincial brethren to join him in an effort to rein in doctor’s fees across Canada in an attempt to get a hold of a healthcare system in crisis. Wrote McGuinty in a plea for a united front:

“I recognize that each province and territory has its own plans to reform medicare and each of us has our own starting point for payment arrangements with doctors,” the letter states. [...] But I urge you to consider how we might work together through strong, forward-looking reforms such as those we are implementing in Ontario.”

A few columnists noted that asking doctors to be paid less, in some cases annual billings of $600000, “was dealing with the symptom, but not the disease.” And yet, from coast-to-coast, paper-to-paper, who is asking the patients to pay more? Who is asking pregnant mothers to double up on prenatal care bills? Who is in favour of asking the sick to pay more to maintain a healthy, accessible medicare system? Who is saying, but Ontario pays the some of the lowest healthcare in North America? And why isn’t the Harper government asking the provinces to come together to discuss the crisis of student loan debt. And it is a crisis.

Graeme Hamilton of The National Post has taken to attacking the extremist measures of some of the protesters, but in doing so lumps all the protesters together as one. Hamilton is concerned with how the protests have infringed upon the rights of others, apparently with no concept of what a protest is or how they are traditionally successful. He writes:

“Mr. Charest said the government remains ‘very determined’ and considers the proposed tuition hikes ‘important for the future of Quebec.’ Starting in September, fees would rise by $254 a year for seven years, which would still leave tuition below the Canadian average.

Ms. Beauchamp’s resignation should be the ultimate compromise — ultimate in the sense of final. It is bad enough that the masked thugs have been allowed to trample people’s rights this long, but to let them win would send a very dangerous message.”

The argument that Quebec has the lowest tuition rates is the mantra of the uninformed and lazy, and clouds the larger issue of accessible education and student debt. It’s inattentive writing, and it ignores the bigger picture. Another tired trope of this fight, is that $254-a-year is not a lot of money. It is. And though I’m hesitant to compare this protest to social movements of the past, there is a well-traveled history of difficult measures employed to bring an end to social injustice. Sometimes, it’s the only way to get attention. And rest assured, the student loan debt across this country is a social injustice.

Over at The Globe and Mail, Margaret Wente again belittled the students. In her op-ed piece for the Globe, whose move towards a pay-for-content model will thankfully take Wente from prominent annoyance to marginalized boomer, she again condemned those with degrees like her two in English, “I hate to say this, but if your degree is in sociology, psych, art history or much else on the soft side, you are a dime a dozen.” This notion, which is not unique to Wente, that arts and humanities degrees are useless is an exhausted argument, and one that lacks of effort or understanding of the purpose of universities. As I among many have argued, a BA and an MA are not about getting jobs, they are about developing critical thinking skills, which Wente gleefully mocks.

Interestingly, one point she attempts to make employing the device of satire (no doubt learned during her useless degrees) is entirely incorrect. Wente argues:

“If our universities are producing three sociology and psych graduates for every job that actually requires a working knowledge of those fields, well, that’s not their concern. Besides, look at it from the faculty’s perspective. The higher the demand for sociology (etc.) degrees, the higher the demand for sociology (etc.) professors!”

In reality, as her generation dies, or goes off to the Muskokas to live out the rest of their days belittling passion and youth, teaching jobs in those so-called “soft” fields are opening up. Is there one for every psych major? No, of course not. Some psychology majors become the Quebec Minister of Education, like Line Beauchamp (BA, Psychology, Université de Montréal, 1985).

I don’t know how much of her psych degree Ms. Beauchamp used during her employed days, just as I’m not entirely sure how much of her English MA Wente uses during her day. But I do know, and what is left out of arguments like Wente’s, is that university is not simply the skills acquired in the classroom, but also those acquired by being a part of the university community, locally, nationally, and internationally. While I was getting my MA I published two books, was the director of a successful international non-profit, curated a popular reading series, served as the managing editor of a magazine, edited two students’ creative theses, wrote a thesis, TAed a literature class, edited two books, and destroyed three promising relationships in just three years. While my MA proper may not have adequately prepared me for the job market, the peripheral accomplishments (and failings) of that time in my life certainly did. And I am not a unique case, in fact far from it. MA students do not simply bury themselves in Foucault and marking papers for underworked and overtired tenured profs. They are ambitious sorts, many preparing themselves for PhD programs, involved in more activities and initiatives than a Wente could possibly imagine. Oh, and this in addition to their part- and full-time jobs they manage in addition to the rest of it. It may not operate on the 10am to 3pm/3-day-a-week schedule that keeps Wente rich in poorly constructed satire, but the university life is a tireless construction of endless responsibilities and commitments.

Where Wente makes a valid point, and it pains me to no end to write that, is in her contention that universities don’t adequately prepare students for life after university. That’s why so many of us take so long to leave our institutions, why we stayed to do MAs and PhDs. Not just to better ourselves, which we did, but also because the job market within the university community is better than the one outside of it. The “real world”, the one Wente lives in, tends to be lacking in the types of relationships fostered during university, as well as the work and experiences available through university connected programs and projects. And, of course, you don’t have to pay off your student loan until you’ve left school.

Wente continues: “Degree inflation is good for universities, which desperately need bums in seats.” Yes, exactly, but Wente treats the notion of staying in university as a bad thing. As noted above, universities are a place of intuition and possibility, and are fueled not by the efforts of its administrations and faculties, but rather on the tireless ambition of its students. And if eager students are restricted access to these important institutions, whether by way of prohibitive tuition or the fear of crippling debt on the other side of a degree, then these institutions will fall.

In times of economic downturn, people return to school to upgrade their skills. Universities are recession proof. There will always be people eager to learn, and if not parents eager to get 18-year-olds out of their houses. So if any economic climate is good for universities and colleges, and their demographic is constantly replenishing, then why are the universities themselves being left out of the conversation? If the op-ed columnists are so willing to scold the children for wanting their personal spending under control, than why aren’t we scolding universities for their spending deficiencies? The government doesn’t strictly subsidize the students directly, they subsidize the universities who in turn skim a little (or a lot) off the top and then pass the buck. If we’re willing to ask for control of healthcare, why not control of post-secondary subsidies? And why is this argument not held nationally, where student debt is just as much of issue?

As with McGuinty’s plea for a united national front within the discussion of healthcare, the demands of Quebec’s students should be seen not as a Quebec conversation, but a national one. There’s an inherent, and some might argue criminal, flaw in the system that no one seems to be willing to acknowledge, and it’s a flaw that is not unique to Quebec. The rest of Canada should be more concerned with how that flaw affects them as opposed to how Quebec students are paying “tuition below the national average”, a line so tired and lazily employed throughout this argument in newspapers, social media feeds, and water cooler conversations it’s as if it is the only argument the pundits have. And it’s not good enough.

Ce qui suit est une traduction française de mon post d’hier, “Quebec is the Canada We Should Want” traduit aimablement et de façon experte par Murielle Cayouette. Mme. Cayouette est un candidat à la maîtrise d’un “maîtrise en littératures d’expression anglaise” à l’Université Laval et sa thèse sur la littérature amérindienne. Elle enseigne aussi à temps partiel au Cégep FX Garneau à Québec.

Quand j’étais petit, j’adorais les cartes géographiques.  J’aimais rêvasser devant ces représentations tangibles d’endroits mystérieux que je ne pouvais qu’imaginer.  Quand j’avais huit ou neuf ans, mes parents m’ont acheté une mappemonde pour afficher sur mon mur de chambre.  Chaque pays sur la carte était coloré selon la langue officielle de chaque nation.  J’ai un souvenir très tendre de l’affection que je portais au Canada sur cette carte, avec ses vives rayures bleues et rouges représentant l’anglais et le français.  En fait, je crois qu’il s’agit de mon premier souvenir de fierté, en particulier en comparaison avec la grosse masse juste au sud, les États-Unis, qui eux n’étaient que rouges.  Ce n’était pas seulement une question linguistique : c’était une question d’unité, de diversité, et de ce que c’est d’être un Canadien.

Lorsque j’eus grandi et que j’eus visité une bonne partie du pays, habitant durant plusieurs années dans divers coins du Canada, ces sentiments furent renforcés.  Mais au cours des derniers mois, après avoir quitté le Québec au bout de sept ans pour m’installer à Toronto, et après avoir été témoin des manifestations des étudiants québécois et de la façon agressive avec laquelle les médias de masse les ont traités comme des enfants gâtés, ce souvenir d’enfance du Canada fut quelque peu ébranlé.  J’en suis venu à réaliser que le Québec, une province si souvent préoccupée par ce qui la rend différente du reste du pays, est en fait le dernier bastion de ce que je crois être le Canada, celui avec lequel j’ai grandi et que je voyais dans les rêveries de mon enfance en regardant au cœur de ma mappemonde.

Le mouvement de contestation étudiante est seulement un élement caractéristique du Canada que je vois dans le Québec actuel.  La section éditoriale du Globe and Mail a écrit ce matin que le compromis du premier ministre Jean Charest avec les étudiants « envoyait un message que les acquis sociaux (entitlements en anglais) du Québec ne dureraient pas éternellement ».  L’article poursuivait en décrivant les acquis en question : garderies à 7$, les frais de scolarité les plus bas au Canada, l’hydro-électricité subventionnée et des médicaments abordables.  L’utilisation du mot entitlements était un mauvais choix, un choix que le Globe a fait comme une pointe à ceux qui croient que ces entitlements sont une composante essentielle de notre nation.  Ici, le ton emprunté donne au terme une connotation négative qui suggère que le Québec est l’enfant irascible et gâté du Canada.  De mon côté, je les perçois comme des nécessités sociales qui ne sont pas seulement fondamentales à la condition humaine, mais aussi au succès d’une social-démocratie.

Malgré le fait que cette question soit ouverte au débat, on peut concevoir que l’unicité du Québec a grandi et s’est épanouie dans le dernier quart de décennie, ce qui est ironique si l’on considère que le mouvement séparatiste craint par-dessus tout un Québec assimilé et abâtardi.  Le fait est que la province est une société distincte, et qu’aucun accord du Lac Meech ou référendum n’est nécessaire pour en venir à cette conclusion.  Y a-t-il un autre endroit au Canada qui possède une cuisine aussi distinctive?  Je sais, je sais, les Maritimes ont leurs fruits de mer et Terre-Neuve regorge de fous imbibés de Screech qui mangent une dizaine de variétés de morue différentes.  Mais, soyons réalistes, leur population compte 6 personnes tout au plus… et ils n’ont même pas d’équipe de la LNH… que dire de plus?  Le Québec pour sa part peut se vanter de ses tourtières, de ses cretons, de ses fèves au lard, de sa soupe aux pois, de ses plats à base de sirop d’érable, de son poulet rôti, de ses cabanes à sucre et de ses bagels… ah, les bagels!  Cela fait 6 mois que j’habite à Toronto, et je m’ennuie des bagels montréalais comme un noyé s’ennuie de l’oxygène.  Et nul besoin de parler de la poutine… Oh, la Banquise, je t’aime, et tu me manques atrocement!!!

Il y a une progression au Québec, tant au niveau social que culturel, que l’on ne retrouve pas dans le reste du Canada.  Ne pensez pas que je n’aime pas le reste de ce pays, au contraire, mais dans la dernière décennie, il me semble que nous nous sommes assimilés, embourgeoisés, et je ne parle pas seulement de l’ajout de Starbucks et de Tim Hortons à la grandeur du territoire.  Je crois que ce phénomène est étroitement lié à une mouvance idéologique vers la droite, à une préférence du capitalisme au lieu du socialisme.  Il est possible que ce soit simplement le mélange entre le français et l’anglais qui donne au Québec cette fausse impression de progrès.  Mais dans tous les cas, le Canada s’est bâti sur de solides programmes sociaux et sur une notion de nationalisme, et il me semble étrange que de toutes les provinces, seul le Québec continue à poursuivre ces idéaux.

À Toronto, j’ai toujours l’impression que nous sommes en opération séduction, que nous devrions sortir dans les bars avec nos talons de paye et nos hypothèques imprimées sur nos t-shirts Gap, et que le reste du Canada n’a aucune importance.  Et nous avons réélu Rob Ford.  Êtes-vous déjà allé à Calgary?  C’est horrible… un peu comme Houston, mais sans bonne bouffe mexicaine.  Calgary suinte le pétrole, l’argent, et les idées de droite.  C’est aussi unilatéralement caucasien qu’un spectacle accoustique de John Mayer.  Tout le monde est parent avec la famille Sutters.  C’est l’environnement où Stephen Harper se sent chez lui.  Le reste de l’Alberta, quant à lui, a sérieusement considéré élire le Wildrose, ce qui dit tout.  Vancouver ne compte pas vraiment étant donné qu’ils n’ont pas de neige, qu’ils sont incapables de faire une émeute de hockey décente et que la ville donne l’impression d’être dans un centre commercial à ciel ouvert.  Au Manitoba il y a trop de mouches noires, et je ne sais même pas où est la Saskatchewan.  La population des TNO et du Yukon combinés est de 12 personnes, et je dois encore vérifier quel territoire a Yellowknife pour capitale…

Je fais ces commentaires à la blague, évidemment.  Mais dans une période où les journaux et le reste du pays condamnent les étudiants qui veulent défendre leurs entitlements, ne devrait-on pas se joindre à leur mouvement de contestation?  Dire que les acquis sociaux du Québec « sont basés sur un modèle européen que même l’Europe ne peut plus se permettre et qu’ils ont débalancé sérieusement les finances publiques de la province » est une porte de sortie facile, tout comme ignorer le succès des nombreux pays (l’Allemagne, le Danemark, la Suède) où les valeurs sociales s’épanouissent au sein du système.

Il y a une richesse, une profondeur dans la culture du Québec qui n’est pas la preuve d’une trop grande outrecuidance, mais plutôt d’une grande clarté d’esprit.  L’âge légal de consommation d’alcool plus bas, les dépanneurs, le culte des stars francophones, l’industrie du film et de la télévision locale en santé, le fromage en grains dans les stations-service, les resto-pubs topless, l’amour unificateur pour les Canadiens et, oui, une longue histoire de contestation sociale… toutes ces caractéristiques définissent un peuple qui n’as pas peur d’exiger des choses de son gouvernement.  Et leurs demandes au nom du Québec qu’ils pensent qu’ils méritent nous mènent aussi au Canada dont nous avons besoin.

Au lieu de condamner les étudiants parce qu’ils veulent que leurs frais de scolarité demeurent raisonnables, pourquoi est-ce que le reste du pays ne se lève pas pour joindre sa voix à la leur?  Au lieu de contester la validité d’un programme de garderies à 7$, pourquoi ne pas en demander autant à Toronto, à Edmonton, à Victoria ou à Dawson City?  La réponse simpliste à cette question, celle qui manque d’ambition et d’ingéniosité, c’est de conclure que de tels programmes sont impossibles.  Que nous vivons dans un monde où les programmes sociaux sont les premiers à être coupés car ils sont considérés comme les moins essentiels.  Parce que dans notre société, un individu qui gagne 150 000$ par année à Calgary n’en a rien à foutre d’une personne qui fait 30 00$ par année à Montréal.  Et selon moi, cette réponse, c’est vraiment de la merde, et ce n’est qu’une manifestation de paresse collective.  Le Canada a été construit sur des principes ambitieux, sur la foi en nos capacités de faire ce que nous voulions de notre pays.  Envoyer paître les étudiants québécois et leur peuple, c’est leur dire qu’ils ne peuvent profiter de leurs acquis sociaux tout simplement parce que nous n’avons pas les couilles de les demander aussi… et ça, ça fait de NOUS l’enfant gâté.

J’ai toujours perçu le Canada  comme un point de rencontre des cultures où elles peuvent trouver un terrain commun à travers les choses mondaines comme le hockey comme à travers les valeurs de justice sociale qu’ils partagent.  J’ai toujours cru que l’une des caractéristiques de base des Canadiens était notre capacité à prendre soin les uns des autres et à donner de la valeur aux contributions de partout à notre culture collective, peu importe le prix pour la société.  Ces valeurs ont donné naissance à notre système de santé universel, à notre système d’éducation subventionné, à nos programmes de crédits d’impôt pour la culture, à notre assurance-emploi publique.  Ce sont ces initiatives qui nous séparés des animaux, ou du moins qui nous séparent des Américains et de leurs choix de société.  Et pendant que la lutte des étudiants se poursuit, j’espère que le reste du pays comprendra cette réalité.  Tout comme les étudiants, nous ne devrions pas avoir peur d’exiger ce en quoi nous croyons.  En faisant cela, ils nous rappellent à tous comment nous en sommes venus à être le Canada dont nous sommes si fiers.

Une traduction française de ce poste peut être trouvé ici.

When I was a kid I loved maps. I loved the element of the unknown, physical and tangible representations of places I could only imagine. When I was about 8 or 9 my parents bought me a map of the world for my wall. Each country on the map was coloured to represent the official language of each nation. I have this fond recollection of an affection I had for the Canada of that map, bold in its red and blue stripes representing French and English. It might be my first memory of pride, especially as the big red blotch below us, the USA, was simply red. It wasn’t just about language, it was about unity, and diversity, and being Canadian.

As I grew up, and visited much of the country, living for many years in a few of its corners, those feelings reconciled. But in the past few months, having left Quebec after seven years and relocating to Toronto, and after being witness to the protests of Quebec students and the offensive manner in which the mainstream media has treated them as spoiled children, that notion I had of Canada as a child has dwindled a bit. And it has led me to think that Quebec, a province so often concerned with what makes it distinct from Canada, is in fact the last bastion of what I believe Canada to be, what I was raised understanding it to be, and what I saw in my reverie as I stared into the heart of those maps as a child.

The student protest is just one element of the Canada I see in Quebec. The Globe and Mail’s editorial board wrote this morning that Quebec Premier Jean Charest’s compromise with the students was “sending a message that Quebec’s social entitlements will not last forever.” They went on to describe these entitlements: $7-a-day daycare, lowest tuition in Canada, subsidized hydro-electricity, and reasonably priced pharmaceuticals. The use of the word “entitlements” was a poor choice, but one the Globe obviously choose as a slight of those who believe that such “entitlements” are an essential part of the fabric of this nation. Here, it has a negative connotation that suggests that Quebec is Canada’s petulant child. Instead, I see these as the social necessities that are fundamental to not only the human condition, but also the success of a social democracy.

The unique quality of Quebec is something that arguably grown and evolved in the past quarter decade, ironic in that the separatist movement’s greatest fear is a bastardized and assimilated Quebec. But it is a distinct society, and no Meech Lake agreement or referendum is needed to affirm that notion. Is there another part of Canada with such a distinct cuisine (I know, I know, Atlantic Canada has its seafood, and Newfoundland is full of screech soaked crazies eating ten kinds of cod. But, like, six people live down there. And they don’t have an NHL team) as Quebec’s? Tortiere, cretons, baked beans, pea soup, maple dishes, rotisserie chicken, cabanes à sucre, and bagels. Bagels! I’ve lived in Toronto for six months, and I miss bagels like the drowning miss oxygen. And don’t even get me started on poutine. Oh, La Banquise, je t’aime. Et tu me manques.

There is progression in Quebec, both socially and culturally, that is noticeably absent in the rest of Canada. Not that I don’t love the rest of this country, but in the past decade it seems to have assimilated, gentrified, and not just in adding Starbucks and Timmy’s everywhere. I believe a lot of it has to do with the ideological shift to the right, an affection for capitalism over socialism. Perhaps it’s simply the mix of French and English that give Quebec a false notion of progress. Either way, Canada was built on a foundation of social programs and nationalism, and it’s odd to me that Quebec is the one province that continues to aspire to those ideals.

In Toronto, it always seems like we’re all schmoozing, like we should go to the pub wearing our mortgages and T4s printed on our Gap tees, and that the rest of Canada is simply details. And they elected Rob Ford. Have you ever been to Calgary? It’s horrible. It’s like Houston but without good Mexican food. It’s dripping in oil and money and right-wing sensibilities. It’s whiter than a John Mayer Unplugged concert. Everybody is related to the Sutters. It’s where Stephen Harper is most comfortable. The rest of Alberta actually considered the Wildrose party, so they’re a write-off. Vancouver doesn’t count, because there’s no snow, they hockey-riot wrong, and it kind of feels like a giant outdoor mall. Manitoba has too many black flies. I don’t even know where Saskatchewan is. Twelve people live in the Northwest and Yukon, and I still have to consult a map to remind myself of which territory Whitehorse is in and which one Yellowknife is in.

I make these claims about the rest of Canada with my bilingual tongue firmly implanted in my left cheek, but in a time when newspapers and much of the rest of the country are condemning students for standing up for their “entitlements,” shouldn’t the rest of us be doing the same? And by simply stating these entitlements “are on a European model that Europe can no longer afford, and that have tipped Quebec’s finances dangerously out of balance” is taking the easy way out, as well as ignoring the many countries (Germany, Denmark, Sweden) where social values thrive within their system.

There is a richness, a depth to Quebec that is evidence of not a culture of entitlement, but rather enlightenment. A lower drinking age, dépanneurs, a Francophone celebrity culture, successful indigenous film and television industries, cheese curds in gas stations, topless lunch buffets, a uniting affection for Les Canadiens, and, yes, a long history of social protest. All of these entities are elements of a people who make demands of their government and state, not for the Quebec they believe they deserve, but rather for the Canada we need.

Instead of condemning the students for wanting their tuition to remain reasonable, why doesn’t the rest of the country stand up and demand the same thing? Instead of questioning the validity of $7-a-day daycare, why not ask why daycare in Toronto, in Edmonton, in Victoria, and in Dawson City isn’t equally affordable? The simple answer, the answer that lacks ambition or ingenuity, is that it’s an impossibility. That we live in a world where social programs are the first to be cut, because they’re the least essential. Because someone making $150K-a-year in Calgary, doesn’t give a damn about someone making $30K in Montreal. And frankly, that’s straight up bullshit. And it’s lazy. Canada was built on ambitious notions, on the steadfast belief that a country could be all things. Waving our collective finger in the nose of the Quebec students, the Quebec people, and telling them they can’t have their “entitlements” because the rest of Canada is afraid to ask for them, makes Canada the petulant child.

I always pictured Canada as this great meeting of cultures, brought together by hockey and a belief in simple social values, that a basic tenet of being Canadian was in that we believed in taking care of one another, and how we valued contributions to our culture from all corners of our society, no matter the collective expense. This is why we have universal healthcare, why tuition is subsidized, why arts funding exists, why EI exists. It’s what separates us from the animals, or at least separates us from the Americans. And as the students battle on in Quebec, I hope that the rest of the country takes notice. Like the students, we shouldn’t be afraid of asking for what we believe in, and in doing so reminding the rest of the country of how we got here in the first place.