Two of this week’s assigned readings/videos that I really enjoyed were “What is Canada?” and the Paris demonstrations of 1968. On the one hand you have a very strong anti-capitalist perspective offered by “What is Canada?” and on the other hand you have more of a student led movement that is challenging the educational system and the issue of unemployment. However, in a sense both are critiques against the government, and more in the text than the video, they are both anti-capitalist. I would first like to begin with this particular case in Paris and then lead it to the more general discussion of capitalism found in “What is Canada?” The student led movement began after major strikes happened throughout Paris in subways, factories, newspaper delivery, etc. After coming out of university students became disenchanted with the fact that it was difficult to find a job. They felt that it was the governments and universities’ responsibility to help them. This is an important issue, and something which I think we see today. Actually, I’ve heard some of my professors also say that in front of class, that “we students have it harder”. But if you think about it, this issue is so important. Students have been taught by their families, friends, and teachers that going to school is important as it helps them get a job. This is the case everywhere. Education = work. So when students nowadays graduate from university and they cannot find a job they are left helpless. This becomes a greater issue considering the fact that the cost of living in most places throughout the world is increasing. Therefore, students need to get a job in order to maintain themselves. Understanding this, it is therefore reasonable and justifiable that students back in 1968 revolted and advocated for a revolution. To see so many get injured and hospitalized was therefore really tragic. However, we’ve also been talking about revolutions as more of a nation problem, and more from an adult perspective. These new types of revolts created by students, are becoming more popular and intense, and show how times are changing. But even thinking about students, who represent this youthfulness, energy, strength, and freshness in ideas, it helps these revolts even more.
I wish I could say more but I’ll leave it for class. Lastly, I would like to briefly end with a discussion on the reading “What is Canada?” First thing to mention is the title of the article is great. It challenges us by making us think as if we don’t know Canada, “our home and native land, true patriot love..” Also, a lot of times we take pride (because we think) that Canada is a very peaceful and accepting country. Yet this article shows just how oppressive Canada is, but we just don’t know it. The article addresses this oppressiveness by stating that Canada is a very capitalist, bourgeoisie country where money is all that matters. There is income inequality, unemployment, discrimination, and a highly centralized government that does not listen to its people. And they blame it all on Canada’s capitalist stance, that because of capitalism all these problems existed. I do believe we need to take these issues into account, but as I argued it the beginning of the term, and still remain the same, capitalism is not bad. Okay, let’s be clear. It is that people have made it bad. If we can change that (which I know is very difficult) then maybe things can work out. But if you think about it carefully, what capitalism is really all about or intended to do, is bring growth and development to countries through this system of trade both in resources, but also in innovation and ideas. Was this not the same back in ancient civilizations? I argue so. And it worked (better) than the system we have today. That however is not to say it wasn’t oppressive. But at least it was better because the notion of wealth and selfishness (which is product of today’s generation) did not exist back then. Therefore one has to be very critical when saying that capitalism is bad. As a student studying Latin American studies for example, I know the many problems associated with capitalism or as it is now more commonly referred to as globalization. However, I think it is just too easy to say “capitalism is bad”.
Yes, I agree with your point about student protests. Watching made me think about the Printemps érable protests in montreal and how much power they garnered. There is something about that mix of young people, education and rage that makes for very effective movements.
I was actually interested by the fact that the documentary *didn’t* stress student (or post-graduate) unemployment as a major motivation for the protests. It portrays the movement as being driven by the authoritarian structures of the university itself, rather than its failure or otherwise to ensure that those it teaches are subsequently able to enter the labour market successfully.
Whether this is true or not is another matter, I suppose. But to the extent that it is, I think that it is a sign of a different set of priorities compared to today. I feel that students today are more likely to protest that the university fails to prepare them adequately for life outside; students then were more likely to protest that the university prepared them *too well* for it.
Capitalism, in your own words, is based on “growth and development”. The problem is that this kind of growth and development is all in the name of capital and profit. This signifies that the means of production will simply prioritize profit over things such as fair worker conditions or limiting pollution. So i guess I am agreeing with you in that people have made it bad. However, we created this system. I’m not advocating for communism, far from it, I don’t think any political or economic system works. I think we need to find an alternative system. However, until we find an alternative we will be stuck with killing the planet and oppressing people from lower classes all in the name of money. And i think that oppressing people in the name of money is bad.
Also i think greed and the notion of wealth has existed in past civilizations. For example, to keep the Latin American context, if you search for the Codex Mendoza you will see a tribute system for conquerors in Aztec culture. Once a village was conquered the “winning” side would send a tribute system asking for gold and ceremonial garment. I think this shows greed for wealth and power on the part of the Aztecs. The notion of wealth has existed for some time.
Capitalism can only persist because it is based off the notions of wealth and selfishness. The end goal of all capitalists is to accumulate capital. This is it. The capitalist only cares about the exploited worker up to the point that they can survive, nothing more, nothing less. Sure capitalism can promote “growth” and “development” but these are empty signifiers no? Growth does not account for wages, it does not account for the surplus value extracted from the worker, or the material conditions of which the proletariat lives.