Latest News

Off the Board, Opinion

The allegory of Trump in Canada

by Domenic Casciato on

More in Off the Board:

As an American student at McGill, many of the things I’ve heard some Canadians say about the United States—particularly its politics—have been false, absurd, and, on occasion, hypocritical. More concerning, however, is the apparent failure of many Canadians to understand American politics and learn from our mistakes. In my experience, Canadians distance themselves from the wave of populism that swept the U.S. during the 2016 election, but this isn’t indicative of Canada’s moral superiority—it's suggestive of unpreparedness. To understand the challenges they might face in this era of post-truth politics, Canadians need to step outside of their ivory tower and treat Trump as a lesson, not a punchline.

I first noticed the trend of condescension toward Americans during my orientation week in 2014. A girl I had met at Frosh complained to me about how she wanted to visit Vermont, but was seriously concerned about the risk of being shot in the United States. She was worried about Vermont, the state that has consistently scored the lowest per capita violent crime rate in the entire country.

It only became worse as classes began. As an aspiring political science major, I enrolled in a number of introductory courses, excited to learn about Canadian government and politics. Yet it seemed not a day went by without my professors disparaging, satirizing, or criticizing the United States. Quips about climate change denial, American jingoism, and worsening race relations in the United States became regular. It wasn’t that I hadn’t heard these criticisms before, nor that I disagreed with most of them. But, they were recycled and uninsightful, and hearing them from Canadians forced me into a defensive position.

Then, along came Trump.

 

I was asked on numerous occasions by Canadian peers to “explain Trump,” as if Canada were a stranger to populism and xenophobia.

It felt as if my political science courses had been moved into an actual echo chamber. I heard the same stale remarks about Trump’s spray tan, hair, unusual cadence and speaking style, and Twitter infatuation on a daily basis. The aspiring comedians of the department were everywhere. Sometimes they were funny. More often, they were aggravating and condescending. I was asked on numerous occasions by Canadian peers to “explain Trump,” as if Canada were a stranger to populism and xenophobia.

It’s easy to mock something, but it’s much harder to actually explain it. It’s important to note that only approximately 27 per cent of eligible American voters voted for Trump. If you include the entire U.S. population, that number drops to less than 20 per cent. Although talking heads and political columnists alike have offered their theories, none have stuck. Several months later, the majority of Americans are still grasping at straws to explain Trump’s election.

This isn’t a #NotAllAmericanVoters plea, nor is this a call to stop criticizing Trump. Trump is beyond worthy of criticism. But, while Canada’s politics haven’t become quite as vitriolic, symptoms of the same kind of populism that elected Trump are present north of the border.

A June 2017 poll of 5,568 Canadians by The Canadian Press found that 71 per cent believed that populist ideology was on the rise in Canada. The nationalist, anti-immigration tones of Kellie Leitch’s short-lived Conservative leadership candidacy are a case in point. Moreover, 20 per cent of the poll respondents saw this trend as a good thing; that’s the same portion as the fraction of Americans who voted for Donald Trump.

The smug condescension I’ve experienced while discussing U.S. politics with many of my McGill peers is reminiscent of the tone journalists took in the early days of Trump’s bid for president. Trump was almost welcomed with open arms to the race by liberals, if for no other reason than the comic fodder he provided. Envisioning a Trump presidency, many Americans thought, “That could never happen here.” Then he started moving closer to the centre of the platform in the Republican debates. Then he won the nomination. Then he won the election.

I’ve found that many Canadians view U.S. politics as a similar kind of comic fodder: Alarming, but distant and absurd. The only difference is that Americans are no longer laughing. Canadians ought to take note.

 

 

 

Domenic is a U3 Political Science Major and a News Editor at the Tribune. He is very excited as he can now drive.

 

@mcgilltribop | [email protected]

 

 

 

 

 
Commentary, Opinion

Rethinking the “Harvard of Canada:” McGill must be appreciated on its own terms

by Anthony Kuan on

More in Commentary:

Amid the throngs of Frosh shirts and the oceans of newly-purchased McGill merchandise that mark Orientation Week, there is another sight that stands out on campus during the last week of August: A white T-shirt emblazoned with the Harvard University crest and captioned, “Harvard: America’s McGill.” Virtually every McGill student by now has heard its various nicknames, such as the “Harvard of Canada,” the “Harvard of the North,” and “Canada’s Ivy League.” Regardless of when these terms were born, they risk creating a gratifying air of prestige for McGill students and alumni. Equating McGill with Harvard, an elite American college, can hardly be substantiated in facts. This comparison is not merely misleading, but it bases McGill’s reputation on the fame of another university. Praising McGill in terms of anything but itself undermines its independent merits, and how they are appreciated.

Referring to McGill as the “Harvard of Canada” is fundamentally disingenuous for the simple reason that it is untrue. While a distinguished and reputable research university, McGill is simply not on par financially with private, elite American universities. McGill only received C$477.8 million in research funding in 2013-2014—the fourth highest among all Canadian universities. In contrast, Harvard had over US$800 million for research in the same year. Additionally, McGill does not possess the same admissions selectivity that identifies schools like Harvard. McGill’s undergraduate admissions acceptance rate was 46.3 per cent for Fall 2016, which is almost eight times the numbers estimated for Harvard, Stanford, and Columbia for the same year. Furthermore, McGill has fallen in international university rankings for three years consecutively to number 32, according to Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), whereas Harvard and similar schools have comfortably remained in the top 10 in virtually every notable ranking. What is more tragic, though, is that McGill does its own reputation a disservice by framing it solely in comparison to elite American schools.

Representing McGill’s strengths only by international rankings or comparing it to another elite school suggests that it is either not recognizable, or not capable of being appreciated on its own. Yale University has never claimed the seat of the “Oxford of America,” and I have never heard a Stanford student boast about attending the “Harvard of the West.” The prestige of such universities, in areas like recognition, wealth, and research, is so enormously self-evident that analogies are totally unnecessary; these schools exist and are renowned for themselves.

Students must realize that a university’s reputation is based on more than shallow analogies and pretenses of prestige.

McGill has extensive merits that qualify it for its own deserved reputation. To name a few achievements, McGill has produced the most Nobel laureates and Rhodes Scholars out of any Canadian school, it has hosted academics who have made seminal discoveries in the medical sciences, and it currently has the highest admissions grade averages out of any Canadian university. It has renowned researchers engaged in partnerships all over the world, and it is home to an exceedingly intelligent, driven, and diverse student body. McGill is an exceptionally accomplished university, and its students should acknowledge this in and of itself, rather than using Harvard’s name to prove this point.

Moreover, there are advantages in McGill’s not being a Harvard or Princeton. As Stephen Gordon wrote for the National Post, the absence of elite institutions in Canada allows universities like McGill to provide good, accessible education to many capable students, while avoiding the rigid sense of hierarchy prevalent among many American colleges. It also doesn’t hurt that McGill’s tuition is a 10th of Harvard’s.

The sincerest way to appreciate and promote McGill is to accept the university for what it really is—not as Harvard, but as McGill. Learning what makes McGill a great university in itself will not only allow McGill students to foster more pride for their own school, but it naturally leads them to appreciate their place in its community.

McGill University is a first-class research university with the faculty, students, connections, and accomplishments to strongly distinguish it in Canada and on the global stage. Students must realize that a university’s reputation is based on more than shallow analogies and pretenses of prestige. Evaluating McGill on its own terms, with all its strengths and shortcomings considered, is the most meaningful tribute that can be given to the university’s legacy and its unflagging dedication to greatness. So, forget Harvard.

 

 

Anthony is a U1 Political Science student. He only reads dead authors.

 

@mcgilltribop |

 

 
McGill, News

Higher Education Minister announces $23 million investment in “zero-tolerance” campus sexual assault policies

by Ryan Canon on

More in McGill:

At a press conference on Aug. 21, Higher Education Minister Helene David announced that Quebec will invest $23 million into a new five-year sexual assault prevention strategy for university campuses across the province. In the announcement, David also expressed her plans to draft provincial legislation  pushing universities that currently lack sexual violence policies to create them.

How this legislation will affect McGill, which passed its Policy against Sexual Violence less than one year ago, remains unclear. Dean of Students Christopher Buddle and Associate Provost Angela Campbell provided a joint statement on the announcement in an email to The McGill Tribune.

“Minister David’s announcement of a new Intervention Strategy for Preventing and Countering Sexual Violence in Higher Education is an important and welcome step forward for all universities in the province as we strive to address the significant challenge of campus sexual violence,” Buddle and Campbell wrote. “McGill’s Policy against Sexual Violence, as well as our Office for Sexual Violence Response, Support and Education, both established in 2016, have been critical to McGill’s own developments on this front.” 

Buddle and Campbell confirmed that the current McGill policy will be subject to further review by the Committee for the Implementation of the Policy against Sexual Violence. The Committee will hold an open panel to elicit feedback on the policy from the McGill community this fall. 

Buddle and Campbell also expressed their plans to review the Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures, the set of rules and punitive processes that apply to McGill students who commit academic offences, such as plagiarism and cheating, and non-academic offences, such as theft of university property and assault. The reviewal process could lead to amendments to the Code of Conduct that ensure that it best serves students’ needs.

SSMU President Muna Tojiboeva and SSMU VP External Connor Spencer also shared a joint statement with the Tribune about the Quebec government’s new initiative. While Tojiboeva and Spencer welcomed the action, they also made it clear that they take issue with the process that led to this investment. 

“Our reservations stem from the consultation process that lacked accountability, intersectionality, and the centralization of voices of persons who have experienced sexual assault (PWESA) within the consultation processes,” Tojiboeva and Spencer wrote. “We want to acknowledge that the policy is well-intentioned, but that until we see the promised bill, we are wary of the efficacy of the provincial strategy.”

The issue of sexual and gendered violence at McGill became prominent in Winter 2017 after the resignations of the then SSMU VP External David Aird and President Ben Ger in response to allegations of sexual and gendered violence. Additionally, the off-campus assault of former McGill student Kathryn Leci raised question about the limitations of existing McGill policies for handling cases of gendered violence within the student body.  

The Community Disclosure Network (CDN), an anonymous group of survivors and allies that provides a space for disclosures about acts of sexual violence, has been a vocal advocate for reform of McGill’s Sexual Violence Policy, and were the first to call for former SSMU VP external David Aird’s resignation. In an interview with the Tribune, an anonymous representative of the CDN echoed Tojiboeva’s and Spencer’s concerns about the lack of inclusivity in the consultation process.

 “Until we see what the actual bill is, we don’t actually know what they’re going to release, and until that time we remain very wary,” the CDN representative said. “[Included in consultation] was mostly mid-level educators and ministers deciding what to do about [the sexual violence policy]. The same thing happened with McGill’s policy, which was very well intentioned, but the voices who were making the decisions were not those who are affected by sexual violence on campus.”

Arts & Entertainment, Pop Rhetoric

Pop Rhetoric: Taylor Swift is her own hot take

by Virginia Shram on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

As soon as Taylor Swift deleted her Instagram account, her fans (known as “Swifties”) predictably anticipated a new album, which recently was revealed to be entitled Reputation, scheduled for release Nov. 10. Using social media stunts as teasers is commonplace among pop stars and cultural icons, but Swift’s release of clips featuring slithering snakes drew ire over its subtly hostile intentions. As Swifties begun gossiping over this new dark and vengeful Taylor, critics collectively sighed, wondering who spurned T-Swift this time around. The promise of a snake’s metaphorical venom may have tantalized gossip magazines, but the cultural consensus is that Swift is pop enough to create certified bangers, yet too bland to produce anything of real musical noteworthiness or critical attention.

Vanity Fair’s Yohana Desta recently sarcastically wrote that this new shade of Swift “will be just a few shades light of Hot Topic.” Vulture wrote in turn that her new single “Look What You Made Me Do” sounded less like a bold anthem and more like “Disney-villain karaoke.” Amid all these accusations of inauthenticity, one has to wonder if Swift ever deliberately changed her image, or if she has merely been constantly manipulating the persona that has grown out of her most iconic moment—Kanye West awkwardly interrupting her at the VMAs in 2009.

In reality, Swift’s new release is not indicative of a significant turning point at all. Unlike figures such as Miley Cyrus, her artistic progression isn’t an angst-driven burst of individualist resistance. Rather, Taylor’s intangibility is itself the dominating feature of her fame. She has elbowed out her niche until it grew from country-pop American sweetheart to iconic superstar spouting hollow bursts of feminism. While it is true that she markets her own white victimhood, it is also true that her feminism is evolving at a slow yet admirable pace, most recently with her successful court case against a groping DJ, where she decried victim-blaming and tackled the shameful stigma around sexual assault.

Certainly, in that moment at the VMAs, Swift swore to herself that she would never be caught unaware again—at least, not without a suitably infamous “surprised face” for the occasion. If anything, the “new” Taylor Swift is an even more relentless curator of her own image, calculating each outfit, remark, and public appearance. Taylor Swift is her own hot take—she hyperbolizes the awkward aspects of her public image, anticipating our hyperactive scrutiny and adapting her persona to preemptively respond. Her songs’ revenge fantasies are just a mass of generalized angst against that omnipresent, ultimately relatable evil: Other people’s opinions.

Her 2014 single “Bad Blood” boasted the same outward-flying blame when she sang: “Take a look at what you’ve done/ Did you have to do this?/ You know it used to be mad love.” The intent is identical in “Look What You Made Me Do”: Responding in vague ways to particular insults that both address the conflict in order to sustain it, and avoiding details that would make one appear too invested. It’s brilliant doublespeak.

Even when she is not overtly mentioning her West-inflicted victimhood, her discography centres ideas of self-approbation in response to jilted lovers,  invasive paparazzi, or even the cloying public that unfairly interrupts Swift’s life to demand more-yet, in doing so, funds the relevance and success of Swift herself. Taylor Swift is untouchable because she has already heard your criticisms and adopted them as her next “edgy” persona—complete with uniform backup dancers and a pseudo-rap chorus for that “effortless” cool-girl vibe. She will oscillate between “Shak[ing] It Off” and being out for blood so fast that the two extremes coexist, rendering any outside “hot takes” useless, unable to cling to new ground.

Too many critics are distracted by the exactness of her lyrics, trying to tie them to the Kanye-Kim feud, or the Katy Perry feud, or some new theory involving Tom Hiddleston wearing that “I <3 Taylor” T-shirt back in the summer. Swift has spread the shade beyond the traditional scope of the spurned lover to cover everyone: from jerk ex-boyfriends and ungrateful colleagues, to the judgmental public and the journalists that keep analyzing her every move and claiming things as “honest” or “feminist” or “milquetoast”—or often a perpetual rotation of all three.

For all the bland inauthenticity Swift is accused of creating, she’s doing a pretty great job of making profit into its own revenge. The fact that it’s an unsatisfying conclusion to the pettiness of her many feuds is exactly the point: She can draw the conflicts out for all they’re worth, and then some. And the Swifties will keep on buying it, because revenge can sound so goddamn catchy.

 

McGill, News

SUS Council recaps Frosh, plans semester events

by Koji Shiromoto on

More in McGill:

The General Council of the Science Undergraduate Society (SUS) held its first meeting of the semester on Sept. 6. During the meeting, SUS executives reported on their initiatives for first-year students and announced upcoming events, including an Executive Orientation, Grad Fair, and SUS Charity Month. Representatives from science departmental associations were also present; members of the Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Arts and Science, and Biochemistry associations made brief statements reporting beginning-of-year updates.

Initiatives for first-years

SUS executive members began the meeting with presentations on several initiatives and resources for first-year Science students, including the First-Year Handbook designed by the SUS. The sixty-page booklet is a comprehensive guide to all parts of life for science students at McGill, with sections on resources and student services at McGill, picking U0 courses, and Montreal. The Handbook is now available for students to pick up for free in the SUS office, located in the basement of Burnside Hall.

“If you have first-year constituents, you can direct them to [the Handbook],” SUS Vice-President (VP) Communications Reem Mandil said. “It has a lot of good information about SUS, the councils, Montreal, and courses.”

Council members also remarked on the success of Science Frosh, which had concluded just two days prior to the meeting.

“The city, the police, and the Dean of Students were really pleased with us, and they emailed us to thank us on our work,” SUS VP Internal Soud Kharusi said. “[It was the] first year that we sold out Science Frosh, so that was really big for us.”

The surplus from Frosh will be added back to the Society’s budget, so it will be capable of organizing more events than expected over the course of this year. ECOuture, a sustainable fashion show run by the Society’s Environment Committee (SUSEC) that was held annually as part of Green Week until its discontinuation after 2016, will be restored.

“We’re projected to make a significant surplus, which we’re planning on investing back into SUS infrastructure, resources, as well as bringing back old events, such as ECOuture,” SUS VP Finance Susan Ding said. 

Grad school initiatives

Other initiatives on the agenda were intended to help graduating students prepare for applying to graduate school. For example, Ellie Joung, SUS VP Academic, announced the completion and release of Redbooks, a website that compiles application requirements for science graduate programs within and outside of Canada.

“Redbooks is a website that has information about grad schools, so you can search grad schools by area or location, or topics and departments,” Joung said.

In addition, Joung announced that school registration for the upcoming Grad Fair has hit its cap of 65 universities. The event, to be held on Nov 2nd in the SSMU Ballroom, is now in the process of recruiting student coordinators.

 

Upcoming events

SUS President Jasmine Leung announced that the SUS Fall General Assembly (GA) will be incorporated into the Society’s first annual Executive Orientation on Sept. 16. All Science undergraduates are eligible to attend the GA to propose and vote on motions. However, the results of these votes are only binding if the quorum of 100 members present is met.

“Hopefully the GA […] hits quorum, and we can bring to the fore exciting things, and also make it a precedent that GAs hit quorum, because we’ve never had one hit quorum in the past,” Leung said.

In addition, the SUS will hold its annual SUS Charity Month in November, with proceeds going to the Children’s Wish Foundation. VP External Michelle Guo announced that the month will include bi-weekly samosa sales, a Halloween party, an apartment crawl, and a concert. Medals will be awarded to the departments that raise the most money.

SUS Council next meets on Sept. 20.

 

 

McGill, News

McGill University stays at 42nd in World University Ranking

by Julia Métraux on

More in McGill:

On Sept. 5, the Times Higher Education (THE) released its 2018 World University Ranking, with McGill University ranked 42nd of 1000 universities globally, the same as its THE 2017 ranking.

THE World University Ranking, like Maclean’s and QS’, uses multiple variables in its methodology to determine its annual ranking. Quality of teaching, research, and citations account for 90 per cent of the ranking’s weight, while international outlook and industry income are worth ten per cent combined. THE collects this information through an independent audit administered by PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Provost and Vice-President (Academic) Christopher Manfredi expressed his satisfaction with the ranking but pointed out that it has little real impact on McGill’s priorities like improving the university’s financial situation. In the released budget book for the Fiscal Year 2018, the report states that McGill University has a long term debt of $985.2 million.

“We’re pleased to hold our position despite financial difficulties,” Manfredi said. “The ranking does not affect [grants and other forms of funding] directly. The province does not consider the rankings [when determining funding].”

McGill ranked behind two other major Canadian universities: University of British Columbia (UBC) and University of Toronto (UoT). UBC improved their ranking by six spots from 40th in 2017 to 34th in 2018, while UoT’s ranking moved up slightly from the 24th to the 22nd spot.

In an email to The McGill Tribune, THE reporter Ellie Bothwell wrote about how UBC was able to improve its position.

“[UBC had] an improved score for its industry income, [because UBC] received more industry income per academic staff, a higher proportion of doctorates awarded compared to bachelors awarded, a greater amount of research income and a stronger research influence, [and] more citations,” Bothwell wrote.

Though rankings may have little effect on McGill’s provincial funding, they do affect admissions. Prospective students and their families frequently consider rankings in deciding which universities to apply for, according to McGill Interim Executive Director of Enrolment Services Jocelyne Younan. In an email to theTribune, Younan explained how a higher ranking leads to more students applying, thus lowering the ratio of admitted students.

“When it comes to accepting an offer of admission, many other factors influence [students’] decisions and these will vary greatly,” Younan wrote. “Cost of education and cost of living, location, safety, internships, and exchange opportunities are common factors we hear from students.”

Younan said she finds McGill’s placement on the THE 2018 World University Ranking acceptable.

“Different rankings measure different things, and we are always happy to be ranked highly,” Younan wrote. “The data [is] probably as objective as [it] can be, so, from that standpoint, plus the fact that universities rarely make large moves up or down the scale suggest that the portraits of the different universities are reasonably accurate.”

Though a plethora of factors are calculated in any university ranking system, it’s difficult for any ranking to accurately measure the lived experiences of students. SSMU Vice-President University Affairs Isabelle Oke noted that rankings like THE's encompass solely an outsider’s perspective on the institution.

“I think there is a limit about what you can understand about any given campus, unless you spend a lot of time in the environment,” Oke said. “So when I see these rankings that are quantifiable, but I feel [that] there is a lot about McGill culture that isn’t necessarily represented in that way.”

ABCs of Science, Science & Technology

Everything you wanted to know about hurricanes

by Izze Siemann on

More in ABCs of Science:

Over the past few weeks, hurricane Harvey plummeted into Texas, and record-breaking hurricane Irma plowed through the Caribbean and into the west coast of Florida—with smaller hurricanes Jose and Katia.

Technically, a hurricane is a tropical cyclone. According to NASA, the name “hurricane” is regional, applying only to tropical cyclones that form over the Atlantic Ocean or Eastern Pacific ocean.

“Earlier in the week, Irma sustained 185 mph winds for more than 24 hours, a record length of time for a hurricane in the Atlantic.” Vox reports. “Irma was a Category 5 storm for around 3 days—which is also nearly a record.”

Hurricanes form in equatorial regions where the ocean is heated by the sun, providing energy for the storm; warm air rises from the ocean’s surface to form thunderstorms. Then, upper-level and surface winds blow these clouds into a circular motion, forming a “tropical depression”—a tropical cyclone with wind speeds below 62 kilometres per hour. Once winds inside the storm reach 119 k.p.h., the storm officially becomes a hurricane.

With hurricanes Irma, Jose, and Katia all brewing simultaneously, the storms have attracted global media coverage. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted this year would bring many hurricanes.

Two large-scale patterns dictate whether or not a given year will host hurricane-inducing conditions: The El Niño/La Niña cycle and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO).

During an El Niño, ocean temperatures tend to be warmer than usual, creating strong winds that usually prevent hurricane formation. The AMO also fluctuates between cool and warm seasons; the former phase is more suitable for hurricanes than the latter. The AMO changes every few decades, and the warm phase has been in play since 1995.

The NOAA notes that this year’s El Niño is “weak or non-existent,” which explains why these three back-to-back hurricanes were likely to occur. Coupled with a suite of other conditions, this hurricane season did not come as a shock to atmospheric scientists and weather specialists.

Furthermore, extensive discussion about the role of climate change on the intensity of these hurricanes has clouded the scientific community.

In a recent article, The Scientific American outlines how climate change has both clear and debatable impacts on these storms. For example, rising global temperatures triggered glacier melt and has lead to a rise in sea levels.

“The seemingly modest 1 foot of sea level rise off the New York City and New Jersey coast made a Sandy-like storm surge of 14 feet far more likely, and led to 25 additional square miles of flooding and several billion extra dollars of damage,” The Scientific American reports, based off the paper “Increased threat of tropical cyclones and coastal flooding to New York City during the anthropogenic era.”

A study published in Nature also emphasizes that hurricanes are getting stronger due to climate change. The most damaging storms ever recorded have all occurred within the past two years. In addition to warmer sea surface temperatures overall—which increases moisture level in the atmosphere and the flooding power of recent hurricanes—raised temperatures result in higher winds, with “roughly eight [metres] per second increase in wind speed per degree Celsius of warming.”

However, climate change cannot be shown to be the direct cause of these storms. The Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory maintains that it is premature to connect human activities or greenhouse gases in the atmosphere directly to hurricane strength and scope. Although climate change is not directly responsible for the hurricane count, it is augmenting the damage they cause.

Editorial, Opinion

The McGill community must confront the fentanyl crisis—or risk fatal consequences

by McGill Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

McGill Frosh week just ended. It’s September’s biggest party, and, for many students, a comprehensive introduction to the school’s drinking and drug culture. Healthy McGill, Floor Fellows, and other student leaders encourage first-years to have fun, but be safe—they acknowledge that some young people do drugs, and emphasize harm reduction over lecturing or guilt-tripping, in line with McGill’s programs on student drug use.

As they should. However, this approach needs an update, one that accounts for an increasingly critical source of harm. Fentanyl, a powerful and deadly synthetic opioid, is on the rise in Montreal’s drug scene. Whether a student is a regular drug user, or a just-this-once type, fentanyl is a real and prevalent danger. Even if they don’t use drugs at all, it’s likely they know someone who does.

These are the facts: Fatal opioid overdose linked to fentanyl is a public health crisis in Canada. Both those who struggle with addiction and casual drug-users are unknowingly overdosing on drugs laced with fentanyl, and, far too frequently, they are dying. While Alberta and British Columbia have been hit hardest by recent spikes in fatal overdoses, this is not a provincial epidemic—it is a national one, and it has reached Quebec. Since August 1, there have been 24 confirmed drug overdose cases in Montreal, and 12 deaths linked to overdose. Moreover, a Montreal Public Health surveillance initiative of drug users in the city revealed that many users unknowingly take drugs cut with fentanyl. The agency has declared the situation a public health emergency.

Yet, there has been virtually no conversation on campus about how to best educate and protect students using drugs in this new landscape. This needs to change. In this ongoing epidemic, students and young people are especially at risk, given the way university culture tends to normalize excessive drinking and drug use. The McGill administration, the Students Society of McGill University (SSMU), and students themselves must take proactive steps now—both educational and harm reduction-focused—to address the real threat that fentanyl and similar synthetic opioids present to students and their friends.

Someone overdosing minutes after doing a single line of cocaine used to be the stuff of exaggerated, war-on-drugs propaganda. Now, it’s not such an unlikely reality.

The rapid spread of fentanyl across Canada is in part due to the opioid’s infinitesimal size. Fentanyl is up to 100 times more powerful than morphine, so it only takes an amount equivalent to a single grain of salt to feel the drug’s effects. An amount roughly the size of two grains of salt can be enough to kill a person.

Those grains are mixed with fillers or other street drugs—including popular party drugs like cocaine and MDMA—and sold for spectacular profit, thanks to how little fentanyl is needed to produce a high. Often, that high comes at devastating cost. Between January and July of this year alone, fentanyl was found in 706 fatal overdose victims in British Columbia.

Someone overdosing minutes after doing a single line of cocaine used to be the stuff of exaggerated, war-on-drugs propaganda. Now, it’s not such an unlikely reality. That’s not to say McGill should start a campus-wide crackdown on drug use. Destigmatizing addiction, addressing the mental health challenges that so often correlate with substance abuse, and offering students support rather than judgment should remain utmost priorities, now more than ever. But, it is also imperative that the McGill community update its risk profile of drug use, and adapt harm reduction practices—both proactive and responsive––accordingly.

Other Canadian universities have already taken such steps. The University of British Columbia, the University of Alberta, the University of Calgary, and the University of Manitoba have all started distributing naloxone kits. Naloxone is an antidote drug that blocks the effects of an overdose long enough for a victim to reach a hospital. UBC has also trained campus medical aid teams on administration of the drug. It’s essential that the McGill administration moves to make naloxone freely accessible on campus.

In the meantime, preventative action must be taken through education and raising awareness. The University of Alberta, for example, has distributed informational posters on campus about the dangers of opioids. This is not only the administration’s responsibility. SSMU ought to follow suit, and update its programming on safe partying—particularly its informational resources directed at first-year students—to provide students with the information they need to keep themselves safe, such as where and how to get their own drug testing and naloxone kits.

All the safety precautions in the world won’t make much of a difference if the McGill community doesn’t take this new risk seriously, and start the conversation on campus on how its members can best respond and support each other—now, not later. On this issue, it’s unacceptable for McGill or SSMU to drag their feet. Hindsight isn’t good enough when students are at risk of dying.

Album Reviews, Arts & Entertainment

Album Review: LCD Soundsystem – american dream

by Maxime Scraire on

More in Album Reviews:

“We’re all going to die someday, so you change your mind,” James Murphy responded to a fan’s concerns regarding LCD Soundsystem’s (LCD) 2016 reunion. This type of casual wisdom has defined the frontman’s work ever since the group’s first single “Losing My Edge’s” tongue-in-cheek jabs at hipster culture: “I hear everybody that you know is more relevant than everybody that I know.” Still, despite the dance-punk icon’s transparency regarding LCD’s return, the quick change of heart understandably inspires some skepticism regarding the group’s motivations. Only five years after his band’s triumphant Madison Square Garden send-off, the man who had called it quits because “it ha[d] all just gotten bigger than I planned” was back, headlining Coachella on a several million-dollar deal.

From the first synth notes of american dream, the fourth LCD album—and first since their reunion—it is obvious that Murphy has lost neither his ear nor his edge. “oh baby” is a beaming melancholic croon that somehow finds room to breathe as it drowns in synth excess. This dynamic 80’s-post-punk production quickly reveals itself as the album’s sonic through-line, with arrangements ranging from the echoing drums of “how do you sleep?” to the barrage of delayed guitars on “emotional haircut.”

On the lyrical side, highlights including “american dream” and “tonite” are loaded with gems such as “Look what happened when you were dreaming/And then punch yourself in the face,” which Murphy sings with his trademark poignancy and off-the-cuff delivery.

What truly separates this new release from its predecessors, however, is its cohesion. Insistently self-reflexive and obsessed with endings of friendships, love affairs, or lives, american dream sticks to its universal theme and specific sound to create what just might be LCD Soundsystem’s magnum opus.

In some way, maybe Murphy did sell out. But when the music is this good, the truth is, it doesn’t matter. And if your head is still in turmoil two years after the breakup, just put your headphones on and let the man himself remind you how easy it is to “change your mind.” You’ll surrender.

1 … 648 649 650 651 652 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue