Latest News

Commentary, Opinion

Canada’s 150th: Reflecting on the past while celebrating the present

by Catherine Morrison on

More in Commentary:

As Canadians take 2017 to celebrate the 150th anniversary of Confederation, the year ahead should be a time for celebration. However, party preparations have recently been hindered by disagreement over the meaning of the anniversary. The Parti Québecois (PQ) recently announced that they have planned “L’autre 150ième,” a Quebec-focused celebration with the goal of promoting what they view as “a non-biased version of 150 years of relations between Quebec and Canada,” by highlighting events that might be left out of the federal narrative. The PQ’s announcement is a reminder of the perennial debate concerning whose history is celebrated by national commemorations. It is important to recognize that the rich history and culture of Quebec is unique and adds diversity to Canada. Yet it is most important for all Canadians to view the country’s many cultures as an asset rather than something to separate its people.

In fairness, the PQ isn’t alone in taking a skeptical view of Canada 150, and questioning the appropriateness of commemorating a Confederation that has not always treated all Canadians fairly. Throughout the past 150 years, there are many chapters of Canada’s history for which Canadians have no reason to feel proud: The treatment of First Nations, Inuit and Metis communities, the exploitation of Chinese railway workers, and the internment of Japanese and Ukrainians, to mention just a few. Although the PQ is right to remind us that Canada’s history is not always reason to celebrate, they are wrong in concluding that Canada 150 is all about the past. Geneviève Dubois-Richard, liaison and coordination officer at the Department of Canadian Heritage explained in an email to The McGill Tribune that beyond celebratory events, Canada 150 will include events such as “panel discussions on what Canadians desire for the future of the country; youth-led gatherings bringing indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in Canada together to help build relationships and move toward reconciliation; and, discussions around environmental stewardship.” As Canada 150 should certainly reflect on the country’s history, it should also be an occasion to celebrate who we are today, and inspire us to imagine how Canadians could improve it in the next 150 years.

 

 

 

At a time when the world is becoming more divisive and isolationist in the name of nationalism, Canada remains one of the most welcoming countries in the world.

As a country, Canada must move forward without denying or forgetting the past injustices that have been made or, for that matter, the ones that still must be addressed. At a time when the world is becoming more divisive and isolationist in the name of nationalism, Canada remains one of the most welcoming countries in the world. It remains a beacon for those who believe in creating more open, diverse, and inclusive societies—and that’s worth celebrating.

Although Canada’s successes in no way make up for its mistakes, landmarks such as the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2005, the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in 2008 and its report in 2015, and its high ranking in terms of the UN human development index’s standards of living, global school rankings and its response to the Syrian refugee crisis are certainly commendable. As Canada reflects on its past, it should not forget the present, and envision the country’s future in an increasingly globalized world.

This year, Canadians should take a moment to remember what it is exactly they are celebrating and what their contribution will be to the story that is told at Canada’s next major commemoration. Canada 150 is also something to be proud of. The anniversary is an opportunity to celebrate Canadian inclusiveness and diversity while giving us the occasion to share more of Canada’s stories with the world.

 

 

 

Arts & Entertainment, Film and TV, Pop Rhetoric

Hollywood awards itself

by Ariella Garmaise on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

When the Golden Globes kickstarted the awards show season on Jan. 8, the normally easy-going ceremony was set with an unusually tense energy. Award shows are a time for the entertainment industry to pat itself on the back for its accomplishments in film and television. This year, celebrities went even further to congratulate themselves on their liberal pseudo-activism in the face of the Trump presidency.

“I just think it can be gross sometimes, the way Hollywood congratulates itself all the time,” actor and comedian Zach Galifinakis  told The Hollywood Reporter in 2014. 

Since Trump’s election, Hollywood’s ‘liberal elite’ have been forced to face the limits of their power. The entertainment industry fancies itself the epicentre of American culture, but despite an almost unanimous outcry from Hollywood, Trump still won. Award shows now not only shed light on Hollywood’s successes, but also its failures—and Hollywood is unsure of how to move forward. 

In the first few moments of his opening monologue at the Globes, host Jimmy Fallon strode to centre stage, only to be met with a broken teleprompter. The broken monitor was a perfect metaphor for the entertainment industry’s difficulties in moving forward in the new Trump administration; quite literally, Hollywood is speechless.

The ensuing ceremony was filled with clumsy political messaging. The Hollywood Foreign Press and its guests are unsure of their role within America’s shifting landscape. On one hand, awards shows are making concerted efforts to avoid partisan debate. Fallon is infamously apolitical, and received widespread criticism for ruffling Trump’s hair in a bit on his show. Similarly, February’s Academy Awards host Jimmy Kimmel told Salon, “I do say whatever I want. I just try to keep in mind that mine is not a political show.” 

When receiving The Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award, Meryl Streep used her acceptance speech to steer the Golden Globes back into activist territory. Her speech, which condemned Trump’s racist, misogynistic, and ableist rhetoric, predictably ignited a media firestorm. It also begged the question: What is the role of the celebrity  in the Trump era? 

“[The Golden Globes is an] overrated collection of liberals gathered in a room to celebrate themselves,” said Tomi Lahren, host of the conservative talk show Tomi on TheBlaze. Lahren is notorious for inflammatory dialogue, yet this description is surprisingly apt; Hollywood’s insularity is often its biggest weakness. Yes, Streep’s speech was powerful, but it addressed  an audience of like-minded entertainers. The Golden Globes was quick to pride itself on the tremendous progress it has made, without recognizing gaping inequalities. 

Fallon’s monologue cheekily pointed out that at least this year, “not all the nominees are white;” however, Hidden Figures and Fences, two films with predominantly black casts, were continuously mistaken for one another throughout the night. Streep described how heartbreaking it was watching Trump mock Serge Kovaleski, a reporter with arthrogryposis. Yet Hollywood has a long history of failing to cast disabled actors: In 2015 Eddie Redmayne, a fully able-bodied actor, won both a Golden Globe and an Academy Award for his portrayal of Stephen Hawking, who struggles with ALS, in The Theory of Everything. Disability activist Kody Keplinger told the Huffington Post, “I couldn’t help rolling my eyes [at Streep’s speech]. The applause in the room felt almost self-congratulatory.” 

Self-congratulation is not inherently flawed. There are many movies, television shows, and other creative forces worth celebrating. It is problematic, however, when Hollywood congratulates itself at the cost of improvement. Awards shows are a good time to look at not only where the entertainment industry is doing well, but also where it can do better. Streep’s speech was undoubtedly moving, and public figures will always play a role in influencing public affairs. Still, in conducting a Trump post-mortem, Hollywood must recognize that the scope of its outward political effectiveness is limited. Hollywood must work against the structures of inequality within itself to make the most effective difference. 

A previous version of this article stated that Kovaleski has cerebral palsy. Kovaleski has arthrogryposis. The Tribune regrets this error.

Editorial, Opinion

Political conversation must break echo chambers at McGill in 2017

by The McGill Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

On Jan 12, Conservative Party of Canada leadership candidate Kellie Leitch spoke at a meet-and-greet on Peel St., co-hosted by the Conservative Association at McGill University. In response, members of the Montreal community, including McGill students, staged a peaceful protest. While divisive, both the event and the protest are essential expressions of political engagement and should be respected. The interaction between the two exemplifies the varied and continuous dialogue that is vital to productive political conversation. Given the recent political polarization and degeneration of discourse on North American campuses and in American politics, it is increasingly important to create room for political conversation on campus. 

Leitch has raised considerable controversy on the campaign trail thus far, most notably for praising Donald Trump and for proposing the mandatory screening of immigrants for “Canadian values.” Protesters claim that Leitch’s platform and ideas are “morally reprehensible” and promote “bigotry, racism, and xenophobia.” Her presence close to campus and the involvement of a group of McGill students raises questions about the purpose of controversial figures on university campuses.

Whether the students in attendance at Leitch’s event and those that protested it ever see eye-to-eye, exposure to different perspectives is critical to meaningful political conversation. Without it, students won’t be introduced to new ideas, and risk becoming entrenched in a political camp without questioning their political beliefs. Confining political discourse to conflicting echo chambers has real consequences, as the rhetoric and outcome of this past American election demonstrated. To prevent ideological silos on campus, students must remain informed of opinions different from their own.

 

 

 

 

Whether the students in attendance at Leitch’s event and those that protested it ever see eye-to-eye, exposure to different perspectives is critical to meaningful political conversation.

Hate speech should never be tolerated. Accusations of racism and xenophobia, like those levelled at Leitch, deserve serious consideration. The rights of the students who invited Leitch must also be considered: As a student branch of a political party, the Conservative Association at McGill University is well within its rights to host a party leadership candidate to speak to student constituents, especially at an off-campus venue. Indeed, many student groups bring speakers to campus in order to spark conversations and share ideas outside the classroom. Such actions should not be discouraged. 

In many cases, differing views may never be reconciled—as Leitch spoke to her supporters inside the event and protesters voiced their objections outside, two different preachers were arguably addressing two different choirs. Points of fundamental disagreement are an inevitable part of contentious political conversation.

Just as Leitch’s presence is a valid contribution to the campus discourse of ideas, protest is also a valid response. As a means of both verbal and symbolic objection, peaceful protest is a different form of political speech than a formal address, but it is no less legitimate. It plays an important role in starting and maintaining communication between opposing groups. Importantly, protesters at the Leitch event did not attempt to disrupt the event from proceeding. Doing so would have the same silencing effect as cancelling the event. 

Political conversation takes different forms —sometimes it is a protest, sometimes it is a formal meet-and-greet—and it must be continuous. To this end, it is crucial to maintain space for the views of different groups and the potential for dialogue between them. Controversial figures provoke conversation; observers and commentators must engage rather than entrench. 

 

 

 

 

 

Science & Technology

McGill offers 3-D printing service to students

by Zapaer Alip & Alice Shen on

More in Science & Technology:

On Jan. 11, the McLennan Library held this year’s first “Introduction to 3-D Printing” workshop. The workshop taught procedures necessary for students to get access to the library’s newly acquired 3-D printers under the Research Commons initiative launched in September 2016.

3-D printing, sometimes known as additive manufacturing, involves printing successive layers of materials, often plastics, in precise forms to create an object under computer control.

While McGill University has several 3-D printers of various sizes and types, most are located away from the general student populace in labs and restricted to professors or researchers in certain faculties. The Research Commons is making this new and promising technology more accessible. Currently, three 3-D printers are available to students at the McLennan Library: Two Tinkerine Ditto Pro’s and one AirWolf AxiomE. In addition to the 3-D printers, the Research Commons offers an array of advanced technologies, including a data visualization video wall, virtual reality kits, and a 3-D scanner.

The 3-D printers were placed in McLennan Library in an effort to make them easily accessible to the majority of students at McGill.

“It’s in a convenient location,” Chantal Petgrave, U2 Industrial Relations and 3-D printing tutor, said. “A lot of students, no matter what faculty they are in, are going to come to McLennan library so it just gives easier access to 3-D printing. I think it also allows students who won’t normally be interested in 3-D printing an opportunity to discover something new.”

The workshop, hosted by Petgrave, introduced the basics of 3-D printing, including how to use 3DPrinterOS–the cloud-based online platform which the library uses to manage 3-D printers–and the procedure for students to use to start printing their own objects.

After completing the workshop, students can book time on 3-D printers through the Research Commons subpage on the McGill Library website–similarly to booking study rooms. While several colour choices are available in terms of print material, the 3-D printers are restricted to only print in Polylactic Acid (PLA), as other common plastics, such as Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) produce toxic fumes which require powerful ventilation infrastructure–something which the library space does not currently have.

According to Michael Groenendyk, the Research Commons staff member managing the 3-D printing service, it took McGill about a year and a half of planning to join the growing list of Canadian universities operating 3-D printing centres dedicated to students and faculty. Groenendyk acknowledged McGill has had a relatively late start compared to other universities, but highlighted the advantages of being a late adopter.

“We are only a few years behind, but [3-D printing] is becoming very popular,” Groenendyk said. “Ours is done better than the other ones, which is kind of the benefit of doing it later, as you can see all the mistakes and different ways people do it and assess everything.”

During a pilot trial run in the Fall 2016 semester, 3-D printing was free of charge to students. Starting this semester, students will be charged one dollar per hour of printing plus the cost of materials. There is a minimum of two dollars per job as the service transitions from a pilot project to a service.

“The rate of one dollar per hour will be applied after the model has been completely successfully,” Groenendyk wrote in an email to Tribune. “I won’t charge for failed prints.”

So far, Groenendyk estimates 150 students have completed the workshop.

Even with the price increase, the Research Commons 3-D printing service is possibly the cheapest and most accessible 3-D printing option in Montreal for McGill students.  

Hockey, Men's Varsity, Sports

Queen’s Gaels beat McGill Redmen in Carnival game

by Patrick Beacham on

More in Hockey:

 

 

 

McGill Redmen
1

 

 

 

 

 

 

Queen's Gaels
2

 

 

 

 

     The McGill Redmen (15-4-2) faced off against the Queen’s Gaels (15-4-1) on Jan. 13 in front of a roaring crowd of almost 1,200 McGill fans and carnival participants at McConnell Arena. Despite the home crowd’s fervour, McGill lost both the game and sole possession of the OUA conference lead as Queen’s took the game 2-1 with a winning goal in the final two minutes of play.

    “I thought we battled hard,” Redmen defenceman Francis Lambert-Lemay said. “We came in short, but we need to take less penalties because we were [penalty] killing all night and that killed us.”

    The Redmen came out aggressively against the Gaels, a break in a long trend of slow starts for the squad. McGill’s urgency in the first period could be attributed to the energizing effect of the masses of McGill students dressed in colourful onesies.

    “Those games kind of remind you why you’re playing hockey,” McGill forward Simon Tardif-Richard said. “[With] a lot of people like that, it’s a lot of fun for us players to play in front of a big crowd [….] I think that’s part of why we started really strong.”

    Despite the hot start, Queen’s managed to open the scoring at the end of the first period. Constant McGill penalties throughout all three periods led to an increased burden on the penalty kill team. The Redmen had to defend against a total of seven man-down situations throughout the game, impeding any offensive momentum needed to take on the Gaels’ strong defence.

    “We don’t control the refs, so we’ve gotta be ready to go out there and kill some penalties,” McGill defenceman Etienne Boutet said. “You get to play with one more on their side, so it’s hard, but whatever, that’s part of hockey.”

    The Redmen next face the Concordia Stingers on Friday, Jan. 20. McGill defeated Concordia 6-5 the last time the two teams faced off and with Concordia just behind McGill in the standings, the game is expected to be close and intense.

    “Concordia has a lot of speed offensively, so we’ll need to contain that,” Lambert-Lemay said. “And we’ll need to score goals because we scored one tonight [against Queen’s] and we need more to win games.”

 

Quotable: “If we would have that many people every game, we would win way more games than we would lose.” —McGill defencemen Etienne Boutet on the rambunctious crowd.

 

Stat Corner: McGill had three times as many penalty minutes as Queen’s on Friday night.


Moment of the Game: Gaels forward Eric Margo made a rebound shot from the slot immediately after it had deflected off of the goalie’s pad, scoring the game-winning goal for Queen’s with less than a minute and a half remaining in the game.

Montreal, News

McGill and Concordia student groups host Kellie Leitch event

by Calvin Trottier-Chi on

More in Montreal:

Conservative Member of Canadian Parliament Kellie Leitch held a meet and greet organized by student political groups from Concordia University, Marianopolis College, John Abbott College, and McGill University at the downtown restaurant Chez Alexandre on Jan. 12. About a dozen McGill students stood outside the restaurant with signs, protesting the event and Leitch’s definition of what constitutes ‘Canadian values.’

Leitch is running for leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada; the election will be held on May 27 this year. Although she has received attention for controversial ideas, Leitch is reportedly polled to be in the middle of the leadership race, according to a Forum Research survey.

The Conservative Association at McGill University had a leadership role in organizing the event. Conservative Association President Adam Wilson, U3 Arts, commented on how Leitch is less controversial in person.

“I think [Kellie Leitch] is portrayed much differently in the media than she actually is, so I think these one-on-one interactions, which are unfiltered, when people can actually listen to her speak, people will come to appreciate what she has to say a lot more,” Wilson said. “When she hands out her business card, it is her cellphone, it is her email account [….] We have over a thousand registered volunteers across the country, so it’s really a grassroots type of campaign.”

Protesters outside the restaurant criticized Leitch’s idea of screening immigrants for ‘Canadian values’ as being a discriminatory and Fascist policy.

“We stop having a debate when racism and bigotry become part of the discourse,” said protester Malaya Powers, U3 Arts. “What we hope to accomplish by standing here is not only showing that Trump-style politics will not be tolerated in Canada, but also to stand in solidarity with those her politics are targeting.”

Powers carried a sign reading ‘Trump Style Politics = NOT WELCOMED’ in response to Leitch calling Trump’s victory an “exciting message that needs to be delivered to Canada as well.”

Powers expressed concern that Canada could be influenced by the recent political trends and rhetoric in the United States.

“We need to really be careful that Leitch’s policies don’t gain ground,” said Powers. “Trump’s messages were racist, they were sexist, they were homophobic, and if she thinks that those messages are exiting, we will show her that they have no place in the Canadian discourse, and they are not Canadian values.”

Leitch defended her concept of Canadian values as an important national inspiration.

“What I’m talking about is being a proud Canadian,” Leitch said. “For me hard work, generosity, freedom, and tolerance, those are Canadian values, and there’s nothing intolerant about them. What I find interesting is that we have a Prime Minister who believes we don’t have any values.”

Wilson echoed Leitch’s concept, defending the existence of Canadian values.

“We’re asking immigrants whether they believe in equality of opportunity, generosity, [and] freedom of speech,” Wilson said. “So by people saying that screening is racist, to me, it’s racist of them to be insinuating that people don’t hold those values.”

The Conservative Association at McGill will continue hosting candidates for the Conservative Party leadership. The next event will be held on Jan. 18 at Trois Brasseurs with candidate Erin O’Toole attending.

 
Arts & Entertainment, Music, Pop Rhetoric

Pop Rhetoric: Drake wins the game of egos

by Noah Sutton on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

In Dr. Dre’s 1993 tripartite diss track called “Fuck Wit Dre Day,” Dre delivered the ethos of rap beef: “You fucked with me, now it’s a must that I fuck with you.” 

Diss tracks historically do not get radio play—partially because of their violent content, and partially because rappers focus on lyrical muscle rather than catchy hooks. However, for Toronto rapper Drake, wit, catchy punchlines, and memes have been his diss weapons of choice.  In the past, Drake has shown himself able to step away from the old norms of beef and only engage when he knows the outcome will be in his favour. Yet, on his latest single, “Two Birds One Stone,” Drake makes a move towards force—becoming  uncharacteristically aggressive when launching attacks towards Meek Mill, Pusha T, and Kid Cudi. 

In “Two Birds One Stone,” Drake finally responds to Pusha T by questioning his well-documented drug-dealing past. Drake also goes after Kid Cudi, labelling him as crazy for starting a Twitter feud in Sept. 2016. Finally, Drake references his past conflict with Meek Mill, a longtime adversary. Mill’s accusation in 2015 that Drake used a ghostwriter was a clear invitation to drop the gloves. We can only guess Meek expected that rap fans would abandon Drake as a fraud, but this didn’t happen. Instead, Drake’s fans turned Meek’s Twitter rant into mocking memes and by the time he could release a proper diss track—“Wanna Know”—Drake had already released two—“Charged Up” and “Back to Back.” Meek vastly overestimated the sway of ghostwriting allegations against Drake, whose audience is largely unconcerned with the rap rules of the past. 

Shortly after the release of Drake's ablum Views, Joe Budden and Drake got into a haphazard squabble after Budden called Views “uninspired” in his podcast, I’ll Name this Podcast Later. After that, Budden launched a series of diss tracks aimed at Drake that went  unanswered.  Although many speculated that Drake’s silence stemmed from a tacit recognition of his lyrical inability to outperform Budden, Drake’s silence only prompted fans to act for him. A few OVO fans took it upon themselves to show up at Budden’s house to harass him in support of Drake. The Twittersphere quickly latched onto to video footage of the exchange, and memes featuring an aggravated Budden exploded. Through memes and snide references to “Pump It Up”—Budden’s most popular and most mocked song—Drake sidestepped Budden’s criticism and won the beef in the court of Twitter opinion. 

Drake has survived criticism against his talent as a rapper before. Directly responding would only serve to bring more attention to his weaknesses. Similarly, as rap becomes more commercial, it has moved away from feuds. “You can’t beef with people because it’ll scare money away. In the streets you can strong arm people and take money but you can’t do that in the industry,” French Montana said in a 2012 interview with Complex. For this reason, “Two Birds One Stone” feels like an anomaly in the contemporary rap world. 

With Drake dominating the most commercial spot in rap, why did he bother to release a track responding to his critics? The industry may be moving away from the impulsive and violent spats of the 90s, but Drake’s pride is still at stake. His contemporaries are still people who can tarnish his image and prod at his vulnerabilities. Despite his platinum records, Drake still has something to prove. The norms of rap may be shifting, but rap is still a game of egos.  

Horoscopes, Student Life

The Tribune Predicts: Jumping in to January’s Horoscopes

by Catherine Morrison & Jacqueline Casson on

More in Horoscopes:

Image Credit: Winnie Lee

Capricorn (Dec. 22 – Jan. 19)  – With the sun in your sign this month, get ready to be your confident and ambitious self and watch as you achieve your goals. Take on your New Year’s resolutions and be determined to make them a reality. Activity to try this month: Show off your altruistic side by getting involved in volunteering opportunities on Jan. 19 at the SSMU Volunteer Fair!

Aquarius (Jan. 20 – Feb. 19) – As the sun moves through Capricorn, it also moves through your twelfth house, which indicates a time for reflection and forgiveness. Reflect on your time in 2016 as you enter 2017. Resolutions and ambitious planning can wait. This is cosmic permission to relax so don’t feel guilty over binge-watching your favourite Netflix show all day! Activity to try this month: Enjoy a relaxing shopping day at the All Gender Clothing Swap on Jan. 17 at the Montreal Diocesan Theological College!

Pisces (Feb. 20 – Mar. 20) – With both confident Mars and alluring Venus in your sign this month, new and old admirers won’t be able to resist your charm and energy. Take a chance on love and put yourself out there by asking that cute pal you’ve spotted in lecture hall out on a date! Love is in the air this month, Pisces. Activity to try this month: Enjoy a night of dancing at the Redpath Museum Semi-Formal Gala on Jan. 20!

Aries (Mar. 21 – Apr. 20) – As Mercury becomes direct in motion on Jan. 8, you will be full of energy and ready to take on new adventures and challenges this month. With all this extra energy, allow your ambition to push you forward and find out how you can get involved on campus. This newfound sense of power will kick start your classes and the new year off to a good start—use this time to get out and seek new experiences. Activity to try this month: Stop by the SSMU Winter Activities Night presented on Jan. 10-11 to find out which nifty clubs you can get involved in this semester!

Taurus (Apr. 21 – May 20) – This new year may have you feeling a fresh sense of adventure as the sun blazes through Capricorn and your worldly ninth house. Go forth and seek new excitements! This month is the perfect time for you to take risks and go on a new adventure: A weekend getaway with some friends to Mont Tremblant would be the perfect way to ski off your energy and have some fun. Activity to try this month: Have a good laugh at Comedyworks Montreal’s “La Belle Improv #10” on Jan. 17!

Gemini (May 21 – June 20) – You are starting your winter semester on an introspective note as the sun moves through Capricorn into your eighth house of privacy. Set personal boundaries for yourself and devote attention into your self-reflection as others scramble to accomplish New Year’s resolutions. Yes, that means you’re off the hook for the classic “new year, new me” promises. Who really needs the gym when you can work out by having a dance party at home? Activity to try this month: Treat yourself to a relaxing night at the ASA Film Showcase hosted by the McGill Anthropology Students’ Association on Jan. 20.

Cancer (June 21 – July 22) – As the full moon is in your sign on Jan. 12, you will feel determined to make changes in your work life. Consider expanding your academic and professional horizons. Take a new and interesting elective or maybe seek out a new job opportunity that interests you. Activity to try this month: Inspire yourself at the U.S. & Canada Internship Info Session hosted by the McGill Faculty of Arts Internship Office in Leacock on Jan. 10!

Leo (July 23 – Aug. 22) – Stay focused on relationships this month as the sun moving into Aquarius will remind you of your need for interpersonal ties. Luckily, midterms are a ways away, so you can put less pressure on work this month and more on your friends and family. Think about attending something fun with close friends. Within and beyond the McGill bubble, this city always has something to offer! Activity to try this month: Take a break from studying to check out Igloofest in the Old Port throughout January, or the McGill Symphony Orchestra on Jan. 20-21.

Virgo (Aug. 23 – Sept. 22) – With the full moon entering into Cancer on Jan. 12, your eleventh house of activity will urge you to take part in a group outing. Make the most of this determination and energy to participate in a volunteer activity in your community! Activity to try this month: Bring a group of friends along to the McGill Students’ Cancer Society’s Relay for Life on Jan. 28.

Libra (Sept. 23 – Oct. 22) – As the full moon on Jan. 12 is positioned in a Grand Cross with the sun in your domestic zone, you could experience family drama. Prepare for this potentially harrowing situation and remember that you have friends by your side upon which to rely. Activity to try this month: Bundle up and go out for a night of skating at Parc Lafontaine. Don’t forget to wear your snow pants!

Scorpio (Oct. 23 – Nov. 22) – Need to get something off your chest this new year? Now is the time, Scorpio! As the sun moves through Capricorn, it also moves through your third house of communication. This is the prime time to connect with new and old friends and impress your professors with your studious remarks in class or simply enjoy your surrounding McGillians. Activity to try this month: Let out your wild side and attend the McGill Students for Save a Child's Heart (SACH) fundraiser at Apartment 200 on Jan. 18.

Sagittarius (Nov. 23 – Dec. 21) – As Mercury is in retrograde through the beginning of this month, communication with others will be difficult. Take this time to focus on your academic life and get back into your routine if you find your interpersonal relationships lacking. New year, new focus on yourself! Activity to try this month: Make sure to take a study break to go see Heathers the Musical presented by AUTS on Jan. 19.

Features

Discarded treasures: Delving into dumpster diving

by Audrey Carleton on

More in Features:

Simrin Desai, recent McGill graduate and Montreal resident, slowly lifts the flat top of a grey dumpster in a back alleyway in the Plateau. As she opens the lid, peering in, there is a clear sense of excitement in the air: The garbage bags in the dumpster could be filled with bounties of fruit, loaves of bread, or bundles of practically fresh vegetables—or it could contain virtually nothing. Without hesitation, she plunges her hands into the dumpster, reaching for a bag. What would normally be considered an unsanitary activity has become a regular practice for Desai. She is a dumpster diver.

 

Dumpster diving, the act of sourcing one’s food from dumpsters, is practiced by an increasing number of students, social activists, and environmentalists in Montreal. Taking to alleyways behind stores at all times of day and night, many local dumpster divers manage to sustain themselves on products that are slightly past their expiration date, or deemed unsellable by storekeepers. After a few safety precautions—including washing produce with vinegar and cooking the food—one grocery store’s trash becomes a dumpster diver’s treasure.

Off the Board, Opinion

Humans need not apply: analog solutions to digital problems

by Daniel Lutes on

More in Off the Board:

There is an apocryphal story about Henry Ford II and Walter Reuther, the Union Head for the Ford Motor Company, touring a new factory. The two are looking over a balcony at an assembly line of robots when Ford turns to Reuther and says, “Hey Walter, how are you going to get those robots to pay your union dues?” Walter pauses for a minute and then replies, “Hey Henry, how are you going to get them to buy cars?”

This parable pinpoints the fundamental economic issue caused by phasing out human labour, a problem that is more relevant today than ever. A University of Toronto study released this past November predicts that within the next 15 years, up to 41 per cent of Canadian jobs will be at risk of being phased out due to automation. Despite these mounting concerns, the Canadian government is doing nothing to prevent an unemployment disaster that could dwarf the likes of the Great Depression. The casualties of this change will be the millions of truck drivers, factory workers, and fast food employees who will be left unemployed. Therefore, the Canadian government has to prepare for a shift away from a service-based economy towards an information-based economy.

As much as we humans may not want to admit it, computers are better than us in a lot of ways when it comes to our jobs.

2016 saw massive amounts of innovation in the field of artificial intelligence. Google’s AlphaGo beat Grand Master Lee Sedol at Go—a game 300 times more complex than chess. Uber purchased Otto—a company that manufactures driverless long-haul trucks. Meanwhile Tesla and Google both unveiled their prototypes for autonomous cars. The growth of artificial intelligence in the past decade has made the use robots for jobs viable where it wasn’t before. Fields like transportation, service, and manufacturing have all become susceptible to job automation.

As much as we humans may not want to admit it, computers are better than us in a lot of ways when it comes to our jobs. They don’t make mistakes, they don't want dental plans, and they don't hit on Janice from accounting. Computers are essentially model employees. So it should come as no surprise that more and more companies are opting to replace human labour with that of robots.

From an economic standpoint, the issue with job loss to machines isn't that labourers don’t have jobs. It is that these newly-unemployed labourers don’t have any money to spend to help grow the economy. Among economists, the widely agreed-upon solution to this is basic income. As the most fundamental form of social security, basic income is an unconditional salary paid out to the population of a country. The idea is that every week, an individual would receive a paycheck from the government simply for being a Canadian citizen. With this solution, unemployed labourers may not have a job, but they will have money to spend, curbing the negative effects of technological unemployment. The federal government has yet to tackle the partisan issue of basic income, leaving the fate of millions of Canadians up in the air.

However, basic income is a short-term band-aid for the structural unemployment caused by automation. A more long-term approach, which has also been neglected by provincial governments, is that of offering more relevant public education. The automation of jobs can only go so far. The reality of the situation is that there are many skills—such as abstract thought, complex problem solving and human interfacing—where robots are still inadequate when compared to humans. In spite of this fact, public schools still continue to teach to standardized tests, championing memorization and regurgitation over the less tangible skills required in the evolving job market.

Unemployment induced by automation will only continue to grow in Canada. There are solutions to the problem that requires preemptive action at a federal and provincial level, but if the government continues to bury its head in the sand, it may be too late.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daniel Lutes is a Web Developer at the McGill Tribune and a U2 student

 

@ |

 

 

 

 
1 … 692 693 694 695 696 … 1,364

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue