This issue had two interesting articles for me: the one about Mitt Romney's universal health insurance success in Massachusetts, and the one about the value of college. Both helped me to gain a greater understanding of current events. In the case of Mitt Romney, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that he was progressive and sensible enough to pass into law the concept of universal health coverage in Massachusetts when he was governor. It's easy to understand why this would serve as a model for Obama's health-care initiative. What is more disappointing, though not as surprising, is the pathetic and twisted efforts of the Republican party to demonize what is clearly Romney's greatest political achievement - and that he has to distance himself from it, even deny it, in order to keep the GOP happy.
I used to wish that some other (unelectable) candidate would be chosen to represent the Republicans in November, but now I'm glad it's Romney. Maybe once he is officially the candidate he can devise a platform that will put a stop to all this ridiculous condemnation of policies that are actually good for society, simply because they convey more authority to a central federal government. At some point, the government has to actually do its job, which, unfortunately for those who would like it to be otherwise, is to govern. To make society and democracy work. At any rate, it will make for a much more exciting contest this fall than if it had been Obama vs. some (right-)wingnut. The pathetic part is watching Romney try to twist himself into something he is not just to please the Party's extremists.
The thoughtful article by Louis Menand on colleges was timely for me as I live in Quebec, and at the moment, students have been protesting almost nightly, and sometimes violently, for more than three months. They also declared themselves "on strike" -- though I guess they don't understand that you actually need to have a job before you can be on strike from it, and avoiding attending classes that you have already paid for is actually referred to as a boycott. At first the protest was about proposed tuition hikes that would increase fees by $325/year over the next 5 years -- with the final result still far below what any other university or college student elsewhere in North America would pay (students currently pay about 10% of the actual cost of their education; the government foots the bill for the rest).
Then, this protest morphed into a campaign to make all post-secondary education universally free to all. When the government offered to negotiate, and proposed spreading the increase out over 7 years instead of 5, the students conceded nothing, stomping their feet like bratty children and refusing to accept anything less than a freeze on tuition. They put the proposal to a perfunctory vote of students even as they recommended that they vote against it, and when they did, they took to the streets again. Did I mention Quebec taxpayers are the most heavily taxed citizens in North America and, oh yeah, the province is close to bankrupt?
Never mind, the protesters continued, and got more and more violent. The many students who did not agree with the protests and who wanted to complete their year obtained court injunctions clearing the way for them to attend classes -- only to be threatened and harassed by fellow students in masks flashing the lights on and off and calling them "scabs," until the "poor teachers were so stressed" they had to call the classes off anyway. The boiling point was a couple of weeks ago when four students set off smokebombs in the subway during morning rush hour, shutting down the system and making thousands of terrified commuters late on their way to work (where they pay some of their salary in taxes to send the ungrateful little boors to university). The calls for the government to act were deafening, and finally act it did, passing a strongly-worded temporary law that requires peaceful protesters to provide their planned protest location and route at least 8 hours beforehand, or face heavy fines.
So now the protest is about our "totalitarian" government's efforts to take away democratic freedoms such as the freedom of assembly and freedom of speech. Of course, the Bill says nothing of the sort. I was horrified to see that Avaaz.org is circulating a petition agains this "dictatorial" government. Makes me question the legitimacy of all the other righteous-seeming causes I have signed my name to with Avaaz. Never again.
Louis Menand argues that the value of a university education is on its way to meaningless when you let everyone in, and that the value of the education they actually receive is lessened. I would think that would be even more true if it costs nothing and everyone can go if they choose to. Perhaps today's students will realize this, but likely not. All I know is, if the government caves to them, I will take to the streets. Maybe a general strike on having to pay taxes so that students can go to university free is in order.
No comments:
Post a Comment