Latest News

Opinion

Protecting McGill since 2010

by Johanu Botha on

More in Opinion:

McGill Tribune

As the self-proclaimed representative of the silent student majority, things have been tough here at Life Lines. There is no genuine statistical data on the political beliefs of this majority, so I am left writing heartwarming, greeting-card-line-drenched pieces that attempt only to make the average student smile. Although once described as “trite” by a snobby-nosed English major, Life Lines aims to protect the world from the likes of the McGill Daily and the Prince Arthur Herald. Without at least one smiling (and moderate) idiot waving a fun-loving, anecdotal column as a white flag, debate might become so polarized that 90 per cent of our student body loses interest. Oh wait: that’s already happened.

But let’s not just blame the student pundits; from the capital to the coastline, student societies have been caught supporting causes that students either don’t care about or really don’t care about. No wonder people are disillusioned and uninterested in campus political discussion. Our money goes to student councils and they spend it on facilities, cafeterias, information programs, and radical political parties with weird, confusing names like Canada’s Only Liberal Anti-Progressive Communist Green Party of Canada Party.

Zach Newburgh, president of our own Students’ Society, expressed similar sentiments in a recent chat. He too noted that “referenda and elections are faulty indicators, as only those who care most about an issue will vote, which often leads student governments to take positions that are unrepresentative of the majority of their constituents.” What is to be done? Student councils can’t be purely neutral and never take a stand. That would cripple effective organizations in situations when the large majority of students obviously need them. One example of a worthy issue is facilitating dialogue between students and the administration when there is a possibility of sharp tuition increases.

The answer is fairly simple. In matters directly related to the student’s university experience a student union should do its utmost to enhance said experience, incorporating and debating the many perspectives on what such an experience should be. Ultimately, in these cases, SSMU should take a stand. Otherwise it should sit down and shut up. Newburgh agrees: “I do believe that it is better for student governments to stay out of taking political stances that diverge from post-secondary education and administrative dealings, as it really is far too difficult to determine ‘what students want’ beyond these issues.”

This by no means suggests that we have an apathetic, anti-political student body. Student groups and clubs which have a fairly good idea of their members’ views should be free to fully support their respective causes. They should even be encouraged to do so. Newburgh says: “I do believe that it is important to fund students who wish to take part in political action.” And I agree. But until they have a much better idea of what their constituents’ views are, student unions themselves should be wary of explicitly rallying behind a specific cause. At the end of the day we’re all students: we prefer pastries over propaganda.

McGill, News

Mentor program to launch

by Maria Flores on

More in McGill:

As an attempt to enrich the university experience and increase direct contact between McGill students, faculty, and staff, a Staff-Student Mentoring program is scheduled begin this term. Students will be randomly assigned to a mentor from a faculty different from their own, in order to build a non-academic relationship and facilitate informal conversations.

The idea was initially proposed by chemistry professor David Harpp after the Principal’s Task Force on Student Life and Learning recommended that the university enhance advising and mentoring. A group of students interested in the project acted on Harpp’s proposal, and the program is set to be officially launched in March.

“[It is] a trusted relationship that could perhaps and hopefully benefit the students,” said Harpp, explaining that the program will “enable students to see that there is a wide net of stuff that goes on in this university.”

Students will typically have two mentors to choose from, which will be drawn from either the regular teaching staff or from the administrative staff. A mentor profile site will allow students to see the mentor’s interests, and if there are special preferences by either the mentor or the mentee, these can be specifically met.

“The program isn’t intended to replace anything that McGill already has,” said Arts Senator Amara Possian, who has been working on the project for eight months. “The idea is to build a sense of community from both sides.”  

While explaining that the aim of the program is non-academic and that the mentor is not intended to act on the student’s behalf, Dean of Students Jane Everett recognized that the program could also help students to better understand the overall functioning of the university.

“It doesn’t mean that the mentor could not help the student figure out how McGill works,” Everett said.

“But we also think it would be very valuable for mentors,” she added, “because unless you are in a job like mine you don’t get to meet people from across the university, and in some of the administrative units, you don’t see students at all.”

According to Harpp, “cross-connectivity is more apt to happen” when mentors are matched with students from different faculties.

“It could become academic under certain circumstances, but it hopefully will become a trusting relationship,” Harpp said. “So if a student in the Faculty of Law got to know a Management faculty member, it is likely that they talk about business, but they may also likely to talk about a personal situation.”

Listervs, classroom announcements, Facebook groups, and bookmarks have been used to promote the program. But organizers are hoping that word of mouth will play a large role as well.

A checklist of guidelines is outlined on the website in order to make clear that the program officially exists within the university. Mentors have been asked to commit a minimum of two hours per term, which should happen during business hours at least initially, to ensure the program is run professionally.   

“We are going to have a launch in early March,” Possian said. “This is a pilot project so we are expecting a few problems. We are going to work to get feedback to find out what we can do to improve and then we’ll take it from there.”

Over time, the program’s goal is to develop the concept of getting to know somebody who can potentially assist students in some way during their stay at McGill. According to Everett, spending time with another person at McGill with whom one previously had little connection may give the sense that “someone’s got your back, in a way.”

Opinion, Science & Technology

Drop the laptop? Not so fast

by Iain Macdonald on

More in Opinion:

For my first three years at McGill, I hand-wrote my notes in class. Every semester, I would restock my supply of coloured notebooks, labeling each with the proper course code. It worked well—I would go to class, write down everything the professor scrawled on the board, and then review it later. Last semester, though, I started taking my laptop to some classes, a choice I don’t regret.

The use of laptops in the classroom has long been a topic of conversation for students and professors, and there are valid arguments on both sides. Laptops allow students to take notes more efficiently and keep track of slides, but they can be distracting for both users and nearby students. Ultimately, the benefits and costs of laptop use in the classroom depend on the situation.

The average person can write between 25 and 30 words per minutes, type 50-100 words per minute, and speak 100-200 words per minute. This would suggest that a typist can copy two to three times as much as a pen and paper note taker. However, much of note taking consists of filtering through information and identifying the important parts. The ability to do this is independent of the medium being used.

Laptops can be quite useful in upper level courses, in which the subject matter depends heavily on prerequisite courses. Due to changing professors, some of these prerequisites are inconsistent from year to year. Learning new material relies on the ability to recall information learned in semesters past, and a computer can make this information more accessible, allowing the student to follow the lecture more closely. While a pen-and-paper note-taker may be stuck wondering what a B+ tree is, a laptop user can look it up and get back on track in the middle of the lecture.

In addition to relying heavily on fundamental material, many science and engineering courses emphasize details. While in some English, philosophy, or history courses, lecture slides are used to guide discussions, they serve as an exhaustive reference guide in most science or engineering courses. In classes such as thermodynamics, organic chemistry, or computer engineering the ability to simultaneously write down critical information and follow the lecture is crucial to success. Clifford Nass, a psychology professor at Stanford, cites multitasking as the main problem with laptop use. However, all note-taking is multitasking; students must listen to the lecture while copying key points. The use of a computer allows the user to spend less time writing, and more time listening, resulting in better learning.

Despite the obvious benefits, many denounce laptops in the classroom, claiming they can be distracting for the student using the computer and those nearby. While this is certainly true, it would be ignorant to posit that those without computers are model students. Crossword puzzles, neighbourly conversations, and naps are commonplace in lectures. Someone quietly taking notes on a computer is no more distracting than those who whisper, eat, or pass notes in class.

In support of these criticisms, Professor W. Joseph Campbell at American University says, “Laptops can be a serious distraction, which is a principal reason I prefer not to see them open in the classroom.” While Campbell may be correct, there is no doubt that there are some students who can use laptops effectively. Should these students put away their laptops in order for their peers to perform better? Surely disallowing computers in a situation where they would be advantageous is unfair. The disciplined students who can use laptops to enhance their learning experience shouldn’t be penalized because their peers are distracted by notes taken on a computer.

While laptops can certainly be useful in class, there are many who abuse the privilege. The debate is not one with a right and wrong answer, but rather depends on the context. The onus is on each student to make the right decision.

Opinion

Give discourse a chance!

by Alex Hamilton & Daniel Sorger on

More in Opinion:

Last weekend, the McGill Daily and Le Délit hosted the Canadian University Press’s annual conference at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in downtown Montreal. The conference was a huge success, providing a unique opportunity for student journalists from across the country to  meet one another and engage with professionals in the field. It’s ironic that the rich atmosphere of discourse fostered by the conference is often absent within McGill itself.

You’re probably sick of the circular arguments and fruitless back-and-forth that surrounds issues like Israel-Palestine, Choose Life, and increased fees for the Daily. Political discourse at McGill has come to resemble a schoolyard shouting match, particularly over the issue of QPIRG opt-out; it can barely even be called discourse any longer.

Discourse is an exchange of opinions between parties on equal footing. It involves an honest attempt to reconcile two opposing points of view; the goal is always increased understanding. What’s happening at McGill is not discourse. Two groups are yelling at each other so loudly that the other side can’t even hear what’s being said anymore. Anyone standing nearby who might want to listen has already been scared off by all the noise. Can these people even hear themselves?

The new Prince Arthur Herald was recently described in the Montreal Mirror as a news portal that “singles out the McGill Daily and thebubble.ca as bastions of the unreasonable campus left.” Such descriptions are even more disheartening for their utter predictability. The extremes on both ends of the political spectrum at McGill are a testament to our school’s diversity. However, they can also be “poisonous,” as Brendan Steven pointed out in his final Trib column last week.

A students, we’re expected to think critically about our own beliefs and opinions—to question assumptions we have never thought to question before. Just because representatives on both sides of the political debate at McGill are able to produce articulate and nuanced arguments for their own positions doesn’t mean they’re able to listen to the arguments expressed by their opponents. If we want to give genuine discourse a chance, we need to be able to listen to what other people are saying. We need to open our ears and our eyes.

But being open-minded about an issue is not simply a matter of saying that you’re willing to listen. Open-mindedness has to be demonstrated, over and over again, through gestures. In the many exchanges between the left and right at McGill, how often have you actually heard someone admit that they’re wrong?

Whether you’re a student or not, whether you read the Daily, the PAH, the Tribune, Le Délit, the Reporter, or the walls of the bathroom stalls in McLennan, it is always important to take a step back and gain some perspective. Remember that McGill gives us an once-in-a-lifetime chance to engage with a variety of viewpoints expressed by a variety of people. It gives us a chance to have our opinions challenged. The refusal to engage in discourse doesn’t just affect you—it affects everyone.

McGill, News

Consultation forum held to enhance communication

by Todd Chan on

More in McGill:

Holly Stewart

Last Friday, the Student Consultation and Communication Work Group held an open forum to encourage students to suggest ways of improving communication, and consultation between the McGill administration and student body.

The Work Group was created in October 2010 in response to controversies over such administrative decisions as the closing of the Architecture Café and the conversion of the campus into a pedestrian-only zone. Both issues frequently came up at Friday’s meeting, along with tuition fees and grading policies. Members include faculty, administrators, and student representatives from McGill Assocation of Continuing Education Students, the Post-Graduate Students’ Society, the MacDonald Campus Students’ Society, and the Students’ Society of McGill University. They work together to fulfill the mandate to consider and make “recommendations about the methods used to consult and communicate with students,” and to improve trust and transparency throughout the McGill community.

 “We can’t solve wrongs that have gone on in the past … ideas about solutions, alternatives [for the future], that’s what we’re looking for,” said co-moderator Finn Upham, of the PGSS.

While the turnout was low, those in attendance confidently voiced suggestions to improve administrative transparency. A common idea was the creation of a central website for the minutes of various university meetings, allowing students to follow their progress. However, others disagreed, saying that, “we need to communicate the narratives, not the bureaucratic trappings.” Committee Chairman Paul Weisman noted that this was under consideration.

Another student said “the problem really lies in [that] many do not know where to begin. You would need a Service Point[-type] structure, to pass on your concern.”

The discussion ended with a joke about the forming of “Complaint Point.”

Another student argued that students’ feeling that they are underrepresented can be traced to a lack of trust between the administration and students: “There is a patronizing parent-child culture and lack of accountability. We never elected these people … we don’t trust them because we don’t know who they are, and they don’t trust us because we are so ephemeral.”

Another noted that the administration seemed to be making decisions in the summer when students were not on campus.

But the focus shifted later on in the talks as one student noted that student representatives need to “do better at consulting our own student body.”

Michael Porritt, director of residences, noted that the student body was often equally split, using the issue of quiet hours in residences as an example.

Several members of the Work Group were absent at the start, including representatives from the Students’ Society. Some students noted the absence of Deputy Provost  (Student Life and Learning) Morton Mendelson as a sign of disinterest.

Dean of Students Jane Everett was in attendance but declined to comment.

McGill is also conducting a survey on consulation and communication, which is available to take online through Friday.

McGill, News

Newburgh authors motion to abolish General Assembly

by Tori Crawford on

More in McGill:

Alice Walker

Councillors were notified at Thursday’s Students’ Society Council meeting of a proposed referendum question that could abolish SSMU’s General Assembly, the once-a-semester forum for undergraduates to vote on issues of concern to them.  

The referendum question, authored by SSMU President Zach Newburgh, and moved by Newburgh, Vice-President Internal Tom Fabian, VP Finance and Operations Nick Drew, and Athletics representative Emilie Leonard, would see the GA replaced with an annual General Meeting at which motions could be debated but not voted upon. Voting on the question would then take place online through the existing referendum system.  

According to Newburgh, the proposal would remedy many of the systemic problems in the current GA’s structure.

“A lot of the resolutions that come to bat … usually take the form of joke motions, which makes those who are not currently involved think that the Society is silly,” Newburgh said. “The second piece [of the problem with the GA] is that when there is importance lent to the GA, it’s normally due to highly contentious, politicized motions, whereby individuals, instead of debating, are racing to get the highest number of like-minded individuals to cast their votes and debate at each other rather than with each other.”

Despite arguments that the abolition of the GA would mean the end of direct democracy at SSMU, Newburgh argued that the current format of the GA is inherently undemocratic.

“The GA allows a small segment of the Society that is unelected and exclusive, due to space and time constraints, to circumvent democracy entirely,” he said. “In replacing the GA with a forum for debate and in keeping the referendum process alive, in fact we are making the Society all the more democratic.”

In order for the question to be placed on the spring referendum ballot, the motion must be passed by Council at their next meeting, on February 3.   

Some councillors, however, have argued that there was not enough student consultation in the drafting of the motion. Maggie Knight, Clubs and Services representative, said Newburgh’s attempt to recruit students to sit on a GA review committee, to which only one student applied, was not sufficient.

“The GA is significantly flawed,” Knight said. “If the suggested change is the best thing we can come up with, then sure, we should put that to referendum. But my feeling is very much that we have not done an exhaustive search for better solutions.”

Management representative Eli Freedman agreed.

“[Newburgh] sent out an email, and no one applied to be on the committee. I don’t really think that’s adequate,” he said. “I’m sure if he had asked people in person they would have been willing to at least go to some sort of brainstorming night or participate in some sort of problem solving exercise.”

Newburgh, however, argued that he had offered student voices sufficient opportunity to speak.  

“I hope that individuals recognize there was an opportunity for consultation, that they understand the word in the first place, and that it’s not tantamount to agreement,” he said. “Those who have thus far made calls for increased consultation and complained about the process are those individuals who either a) benefit from the status quo, or b) disagree with the motion but can’t substantiate their disagreement.”

In an effort to further include students, Knight, Freedman, and Arts Senator Amara Possian created a Facebook event encouraging members to submit their own suggestions for GA reform. In addition, Newburgh is hosting a Town Hall meeting with the same aim on Wednesday at 3 p.m. in the Lev Bukhman room.

“I hope in the next week and a half we can come up with a structure that would be much better, which we can then offer as an amendment and hopefully come to agreement on what the best different option would be,” Knight said.

Despite these disagreements, Knight emphasized that this is not fundamentally a confrontation between members of the SSMU executive and certain councillors.

“That’s why we’re there as councillors: to try to hold the execs to account, and to try to make sure that they’re consulting with students as much as possible,” she said. “I’m really happy we now have a Town Hall and I hope that everybody comes out to that and offers constructive feedback.”

The referendum question also includes a provision whereby any member of the society who collects 50 signatures can submit a resolution to SSMU Council. According to Newburgh, this will give the average student, “the opportunity to engage with an easier degree with the legislative process.”

Should Council decide to reject the referendum question, Newburgh would have the option of putting it on the ballot through the student-initiated referendum process—something former president Ivan Neilson did last year with a question regarding SSMU’s committee structure.

“We don’t have a lot of time, but I’m confident we’ll either come up some sort of solution that is mutually agreeable or we’ll just vote down the resolution, which in my opinion is the most ideal solution,” Freedman said.

“If Council chooses to get hung up in process, rather than in debating the merits of the question, I would be open to considering a student-initiated referendum question,” Newburgh said.

News

Tim Hortons’ CEO offers personal business history

by Eric Mauser on

More in News:

Alissa Fingold
Alissa Fingold

Though the average Canadian may not know who Don Schroeder is, most will purchase at least one of his company’s products during their lifetime. Schroeder, the CEO of Tim Hortons, gave a talk about his life in business on Friday in the Bronfman Building.

Describing how he became involved with the company, Schroeder said, “I’m not sure if I should really be telling you this story.”

As a law student in 1976, Schroeder was out drinking when it occurred to him that it would be an excellent idea to own a Tim Hortons franchise. At the time, Tim Hortons was only a small donut and coffee chain in Ontario.

“It still seemed like a good idea when I sobered up,” he said.

In 1978, he bought the 45th Tim Hortons. Schroeder continued to own his franchise while practicing law and eventually joined the company full-time in 1991. He became CEO in 2008.

Instead of making a speech, Schroeder opted to have a discussion with Alex Brzostowski, an MBA student, followed by a question-and-answer session with Management students. First, Schroeder and Brzostowski discussed Tim Hortons’ business model, which is a “partnership” between the corporate administration and franchise owners, unlike the traditional “top-down” style structure. Schroeder said this scheme is the source of the company’s success and that his top priority is, “to make Tim Hortons as attractive an investment for the next generation as it was for the last two.”

In the future, the company plans to continue expanding into the United States and possibly open franchises on other continents. Schroeder emphasized that this process would deeply involve Tim Hortons within the communities where it wants to sell its products. This should be done “not simply to sell more coffee and donuts,” he said, “but to genuinely give back.”

The question-and-answer period saw some students raise more specific concerns. Artem Luhovy, a MD/MBA student, asked about Tim Hortons’ refusal to buy fair trade coffee. Schroeder answered that it rejects fair trade because the company sees flaws in the fair trade industry. He cited the $1,000 fee a farmer must pay to become fair trade certified—money many coffee farmers do not have. Schroeder said Tim Hortons has instead focused on efforts to provide farmers with tools and information that will make them more productive, regardless of whether or not they ultimately decided to sell their coffee to Tim Hortons. He added that Tim Hortons also has invested money in education for the children of coffee farmers in rural areas.

“Tim Hortons has a history of trying to do the right thing without patting ourselves on the back,” he said.

At the talk, Schroeder tried to communicate his company’s principles on a personal level, patiently listening to each student, supplying free donuts and coffee prior to the session, and providing Tim Hortons gift cards to every student who asked a question as well as to the McGill cleanup staff.

On coming to McGill, Schroeder said it was an “honour to be here at a great school,” and advised students to “find a job that they loved.” He added that a professor once told him, “You haven’t lived until you’ve read a good book, seen a good play, and done something you loved.”

News

Ryerson program to help NHLers

by Kat Sieniuc on

More in News:

Ryerson University and the National Hockey League Alumni have teamed up to move coaching from the locker room to the classroom. The new “BreakAway Program” offers current and retired hockey players the opportunity to enhance their business education for success off the ice by covering topics of finance, leadership, privacy law, marketing, and personal branding.  

According to Pat Flatley, the program’s director, the Ted Rogers School of Business Management at Ryerson and the NHL Alumni’s unique partnership is what makes the program so effective.  

“The BreakAway Program offers all current and former players the opportunity to work with one of the top schools in North America that truly understands the unique circumstances of professional athletes,” Flatley said.

Wendy McCreary of the NHL Alumni Association said that BreakAway’s main objective is to help players find a career in the world beyond hockey.  

“Their love is the game; that’s all they know,” McCreary said. She added that the program hopes to provide players with enough confidence to successfully transition into a post-hockey career.  

“We hope to give them the ability to pursue a different identity when they come out of the game,” she said.  

Program liaison and Ryerson marketing professor Marla Spergel believes the BreakAway Program is something from which all NHLers can benefit.  

“When players leave hockey, they are at a void,” Spergel said.  

The program will customize its courses to supply players with the specific tools they might need to fill the void created by a lack of formal business training.

The BreakAway Program consists of 15 hours of material and has a completion deadline of six months. Its online format is player-accessible and designed to accommodate their busy schedules and fast-paced work environment.  

“We wanted to produce a program that gives them the ability to educate themselves online at their own convenience,” McCreary said. Although the players do not receive a degree, Spergel provides guidance counselling to those players who wish to continue further studies with other university or college programs.  

“As an outsider I am pretty impressed that there is such a commitment from the alumni to want to really get them prepared for when they leave,” Spergel said. Although there are currently only a handful of students enrolled in the program, she notes that BreakAway is in the process of developing an extensive marketing plan to reach more NHLers.  

“Since it is all very new, a lot of players have no clue this thing exists yet,” she said.

McCreary declares that part of the program’s mandate is to also reach other universities. “A good portion of our constituency is based in Montreal,” she said. BreakAway will be asking McGill if it would like to start its own branch of the program some time in the future.

Montreal, News

Nurse-in draws crowd to support public breastfeeding

by Kyla Mandel on

More in Montreal:

Alice Walker
Alice Walker

On January 5, Shannon Smith, mother of three, was told she was not allowed to breastfeed in Orchestra, a children’s store in the Complexe Les-Ailes on St. Catherine Street. In response, Genevieve Coulombe organized a “nurse-in” in front of the store on January 19th.

Smith was given no explanation as to why she was not allowed to breastfeed in Orchestra; she was simply told repeatedly in French that it was not allowed by a store clerk. Smith replied: “that’s incorrect. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives me the right to breastfeed where I like.”

“I left in tears. I was very upset. I think that was really humiliating and I should not have been treated that way and in front of everyone in the store, in front of my children,” Smith said. “I have three kids and I’ve breastfed them all and I’ve never had an issue like this. It’s shocking to me in this day and age that we still have this ridiculous behaviour.”

The first thing Smith did was to share her experience online through Twitter and Facebook. “But you only have 140 characters on Twitter, so you don’t really get to tell the whole story and everybody had lots of questions,” Smith said. She then decided to create a blog  called “breastfortheweary.com” to share the entire experience.

“I only really expected like 30 people, people I mostly knew, to care enough to read my blog … but it spread like wildfire,” Smith said.     In reaction to this event, Genevieve Coulombe—a complete stranger at the time to Smith—created a Facebook event entitled Allaite-In (or “Nurse-In,” in English) for January 19, to which 173 people clicked “attending.” The idea was to breastfeed to raise awareness of a mother’s right to breastfeed anywhere, at anytime.

In a speech given to introduce the event on January 19, Coulombe said that the path to awareness “starts with the education of the general public and especially with the education of the new moms who don’t know all their rights.”

Myriam Baril-Boisclair, whose son is eight and a half months old, attended the event after hearing about it on Radio-Canada. She believes it’s important to have the right to nurse her child everywhere.

“It’s not because I like to do it, it’s because I have to do it. When he’s hungry I have to do something,” Baril-Boisclair said.

Well over 50 mothers showed up to breastfeed. Not only mothers attended the nurse-in. Fathers came along as well to support their wives.

On January 10, Smith recieved an apology from Orchestra and on the Facebook event Coulombe wrote that “the water ran under the bridge. The store apologized to the mother. We are at peace with this store!” In a gesture of good will, Orchestra handed out goody-bags to the mothers attending the event, and the Complexe designated an area for strollers to be kept safely.

Smith hopes that raising awareness about this issue informs people that “breastfeeding is normal behaviour, protected by law,” she said, and that “if you break the law there are consequences.” More importantly Smith hopes that the nurse-in will show mothers and mothers-to-be, “that they don’t have to ask permission to breastfeed … that they don’t have to be ‘discrete.'”

In response to the nurse-in, the Canadian Breastfeeding Protection Petition has been created by Infant Feeding Action Coalition Canada and INFACT Quebec. This petition aims to get 100,000 signatures to deliver directly to Prime Minister Stephen Harper asking “for action on improving breastfeeding support for mothers and babies across Canada.”

News

Andrew Cohen says U.S.-Canada cultures converging

by Jimmy Lou on

More in News:

Anna Katycheva

Last Tuesday, Andrew Cohen­—one of Canada’s preeminent non-fiction writers and a McGill alum—delivered the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada’s 18th annual J.R. Mallory Lecture in Canadian Studies, discussing Canada’s cultural convergences with the United States.

Although things have changed over the years, Cohen said that many Canadians today still want to distinguish themselves from “belligerent, pompous” Americans. According to Cohen, medical care, poutine, and a fervent love for hockey have been badges of a distinctly Canadian identity. “But,” he said, “take away health care and other cherished identities, and what’s left for us, and between us?”

Cohen pointed to four subjects on which Canada and the U.S. have become indistinguishable: obesity, frugality, criminality, and multiculturalism. Although Canada once considered itself more fit than its southern neighbour, statistics show increasing obesity rates for both adults and children. In 2005, Canada was the fifth-most overweight nation in the world, while the U.S. was number one. But in a more recent poll, the U.S. has a 66 per cent obesity rate, compared to 60 per cent in Canada.

In terms of spending habits, Cohen said that “although [the idea that Americans spend more than Canadians] is true to a certain degree, [as Canadians] we are no longer frugal.” National debt continues to rise in Canada. Canada’s national household debt was a record $1.41 trillion in 2009 and has continued to climb. In addition, Canada’s income distribution gap is expanding, with the richest one per cent holding 34 per cent of the wealth.

Traditionally, Canadians have thought their country safer than the U.S., Cohen said. Granted, this is still true. But the American crime rate has dropped to levels that haven’t been seen since the 1960s. Also, capital punishment in the U.S. has become more moderate in the last 10 years. Not only have many states abolished capital punishment, but the states that still use it are issuing increasingly low numbers of death sentences. California, for instance, has not ordered one in five years, and Texas—notorious for executing criminals—only issued 17 in 2010, compared to 400 in 2000.

Chris Espamer, a U1 politcal science student from the U.S., said he sees a clear distinction between the two neighbouring nations.

“I think that Canada has some good traits from both American and European culture. They seem to be less obsessed about military strength, and are less corrupt politically in general.”

People often believe that Canada is more tolerant towards immigrants than the U.S.. Cohen suggested, however, that “the pot is no longer melting” and that the U.S. has become much more accomodating to its minorities.

Cohen also mentioned the cooperative relationship that has persisted over time between U.S. and Canada. Despite some disagreements, the two nations have generally worked in political, economic, and social harmony.

 “It was a very informative [lecture], and I was surprised at some of the differences,” said Kateryna Sherysheva, a U1 political science and international development student.

“This lecture has made me think deeper about the issue and reconsider different sides,” said Sherysheva.

1 … 1,243 1,244 1,245 1,246 1,247 … 1,367

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue