The problem with the student movement is that that their complaints on disrespect of syndicalism (and by their logic democracy at large) on the government’s part are based on the fact that they believe themselves to be a full fledge union, with all that this includes. To them, who seem to think that all the aspects of syndicalism are inherently applicable to any organisation that claims to be a union, there is no difference between a trade union and a student union. A strike is always legitimate if it was voted upon favourably by it’s members, picket lines are the natural byproduct of a legitimate strike and must therefor be respected, and anybody defying the strike, within or outside of the organisation is a scab. Unfortunately for them, in a legally constituted state such as ours, this anarcho-syndicalist vision of things is not only invalid, but illegal. As grown-ups, I am sure that militants from the student unions understand that they only need to be nice and obey the law when they want to; what I WISH they would understand is that choosing to disobey the law inevitably brings consequences: namely fines, imprisonment, and all that unpleasant stuff. This is my main critique of the movement as of now: their inability to accept the consequences of being self-proclaimed revolutionaries with an agenda based on civil disobedience. If your cause is important enough to warrant throwing bricks at the defenders of public peace, shouldn’t it be important enough for you to sacrifice a couple of ribs to a policeman’s baton?

Teachers are the ones that get it real easy in all of this. Many of them are members of the same big-shot unions to whom many student groups are affiliated, and consequently share the same vues on the whole issue of legitimacy of the student boycott. From my own experience with CEGEP teachers, most of them seem to have grown very fond of the Quebecois societal model of which they are now  part of. Who can blame them for that, really?; biting the hand that feeds you is not a very intelligent behaviour.  My gripe with the teachers isn’t so much on their manifestation of political allegiance , but rather the cozy conditions under which they have the leisure of doing it, in absence of any potential consequences for supporting the student movement. They have been known for cancelling class for phony concerns of security, respecting  picket lines that have no legal value, and on several occasions  have even  using class time to fill the ranks of the student protesters; all this while receiving their pay in full, something guaranteed to them through generous labour agreements. In this series of events, teachers are inside men, mercenaries hypocritically bleeding the government from it’s very entrails while their student counterparts call out of the poor financial management of our network of  public universities. Common sense says that if they aren’t in the classroom teaching, then they shouldn’t be paid; it’s as simple as that. But sadly, in this province, common sense does not seem to apply.

All in all, the most dangerous part of all this disrespect of our judicial system is the chance that we might be setting precedents. Public demonstrations are, within reason, legal and legitimate, but all that surrounds them and that is not must not be taken lightly. I’m talking about the illegal picketing lines and blocking off of schools to students in right to receive their education, and the disrespect of court orders by students, teachers and management staff. I’m no  expert on the matter, but I’ve been told that in court-room practice, law is based on both written legislation and case law. I believe that the same thing type of two-sided conception of the law occurs in peoples minds: it’s one thing to understand textual law, but it’s a whole other to know the intricacies of it’s application. By not swiftly enforcing the law and court orders, the authorities are allowing a distortion of the population’s idea of the application of the law, a devaluation of our legitimate means to justice. If we set precedents now, what is to become of it with in other instances of the manifestation of popular concern? I’m all too afraid that if we give an inch, they’ll take a mile, and for that reason, police forces push on in ensuring that the law is observed.

This is why I am very critical of the proposed “special law” proposed by the government as a solution to the current crisis. Such legislation is not only totally unnecessary as the students have no legal backing, but would be quickly picked up by protesters as an overly authoritative, anti-syndicalist action by a government who is at wit’s end. Past laws like these applied to regular employer-vs-employee strikes have always seemed morally wrong even to my essentially anti-syndicate self, never mind to those who actually believe in the concept of unions.  If anything, this law would add fuel to an already very lively fire.

My position on this situation as a whole is very simple: deep down, this whole debate boils down to a cleavage between each group’s fundamental conception of democratic institutions, responsibilities of governance and state involvement. With these matters, the status quo can only be broken by one thing. Elections. Hold on to your horses, they’re coming soon enough.

The almost-daily protests are quickly transforming into what they were doomed to become, an all-out revolution-themed shit-show, with abstract concepts like democracy, liberty, equality, and justice as a theme, but without any forethought to what those words actually mean. Many protests organized by student unions not only aim for accessible education, but are also calling for a “struggle for social justice” at large. Others have even had the arrogance to come up with the term “Quebecois Spring”, an outright disrespectful reference to the events in which Arab populations fought REAL opression. Of course, all this revolutionary talk wouldn’t be complete without dusting off our old complexes on our collective identity. An event has been organised in Montreal to discuss themes like our existence as a unique and distinct nation, an intelligent, resourceful people, how much capitalism sucks and how we are worth better; because you know, there hasn’t been enough of those in the past 50 years.

I find it ironic, and frankly a bit sad that we are repeating the same behaviours that got us in this situation in the first place. All these events that we were told in school to consider as capital turning points of our existence, those of the Quiet revolution, are repeating themselves. Exaggerated enthusiasm for “progressivism” (I hate that word, more on that later), the worship of our providence state as if it were some sort of god, the demand for free this, universal that, state-monopolies here, oppressive regulation there; from what I’m getting, this is what theses protests are going for. It didn’t work the first time around, what makes you think that it’ll work this time?

So, who is backing this up? The usual suspects, the left-leaning and nationalist intelligentsia. Because it’s awfully convenient. In a province of emotive electors and political incults, what better way to give your project some appeal than backing it up with a tale of epic struggle against the evils of the Canadian governement and the free market? The amorphous mass, the 5 o’clock news watchers, what better way to stir them into voting radically than to show them a televised revolution? This, to me, a disgusting attempt at transforming the inertia of legitimate popular concern into political capital of sympathy.

At first, I wrote this long, angry article about this situation, but I scrapped it. Because frankly, in the end, all of this agitation isn’t going anywhere. The socialists and nationalists are feeding the fire of protest with old junk they found buried in the back yard, our constitutional failures, our pathetic referendums, our angst and discomfort with our identity as North-Americans. That might work for a while but eventually, they’re going to choke the fire out. Despite our gaudy pretensions, our firm belief that we are worth better, we just don’t have the balls for a real social change, let alone a revolution. In the end, we are but backyard revolutionaries.

As a computer enthousiast, I have live the most part of my life dreaming of big computer rigs. Gigantic cases with massive airflow, push-pull fan setups on everything, LED-lit this and that, all that jazz. After owning progessively bigger and bigger cases, from a Thermaltake Armor Jr (standard ATX mid-tower) to a Rocketfish RF-FULLTWR (E-ATX compatible behemoth of a full tower), I have lost my interest in blingy modified cases, and have started to build my computers with minimalism in mind. For pragmatism’s sake, I traded big for small, and loud, in-your face styling for a more discrete, clean and timeless look. The form-factor of choice for my latest build being micro-ATX (mATX), I found that the Lian-Li PC-V354B fit the bill perfectly.

Read the full review at epinions.

If you’ve seen Scuba play a set live or if you’ve heard some of his recent output, this album will not be a surprise for you. In his latest opus, Paul has pushed past what he and his label has been known for from 2003 to 2010, that is solid OG dubstep that has nothing to do with all the brostep noise that has become so ubiquitous. His last LP, Triangulation, was to me one of the last true dubstep albums, presenting deep yet unagressive basslines and a plethora of tweaked sampling over a shuffle of 2-step percussions at the usual 140 bpm. The game has changed since 2010, and it seems that Hotflush has changed with it, for the best. Not that I would say that Personality is a far cry from Triangulation… but Scuba and his label definitely seems to have turned the page on “traditional” dubstep and moved on to something else; Adrenalin and all the other EP’s released in 2011 tend to prove this according to me.

Speaking of which, if you enjoyed the Adrenalin EP, you will not be disappointed with this album . “Ignition Key” starts off strong with frank percussion and a solid yet simple bassline over an airy backdrop of reverb’ed synths. The minimal sampled vocals is pretty much the only thing reminding you that you aren’t listening to 90′s techno. The tone is set: you’ll be hearing a lot of techno-influenced stuff in the next hour. Underbelly follows suit with a consistent 4 to the floor stomp, weird ambient noise samples (birds and a garage door?) and jazzy percussions… again, it’s isn’t actually techno, but it’s pretty damn close. “The Hope”, one of my favorites, brings back that jacked house mood from from “Adrenalin” and makes for a sure-fire dance floor igniter. “Dsy Chn”, “July” and “Tulips”, are also all reminiscent of early techno, cheesy synth lines included. “Cognitive Dissonance” invokes jungly drums and silky smooth female vocals, with another healthy dose of interesting if not weird samples (I’ve heard a dog, a lock, and a long-travel bolt action rifle). The distortion-filled “Gekko” reminds one of Gesaffelstein, but with an upbeat rhythm and a definitely more “happy” percussion track. “NE1BUTU”, “Action” and “If U Want” are also all heavily techno-infused, albeit with longer and more present crescendos and decrescendos that defy the general convention of very progressive, predicitive beat construction and deconstruction present in minimal-techno. Here again, there are some cheesy moments… but if you ask me, it’s a very important part of the aesthetic value of the pieces. The bonus track, “Flash Addict”, almost sounds more like 2562 than Scuba, with ever-present ringing, the synth stabs, the hushed toms and an overall mysterious feel.

They say that everyone is a product of their environment… Scuba certainly corroborates this by having recently moved to Berlin, seeing the omni-present amount of minimal-techno influences. People keep talking about that famed “UK sound”, and how unique and distinctive it is. Too little is said of the “German sound”, or rather the “Germanophone sound” present in all of central Europe; a simple, well-built, no-frills aesthetic that values beauty within attention to minute details. Consciously or not, it seems to me that Mr. Rose is definitely assimilating this regional characteristic, and that’s all for the best.

With all this, where are Paul Rose and his label going now? It’s pretty hard to tell considering all the confusion in genre names going on. I’d be tempted to dust off the old “IDM” moniker to describe Hotflush’s output as whole… the label of “bass music” being not quite sophisticated enough to describe their latest content. It’s slightly slower, more soul-foul, yet it packs all the body-rocking energy of the techno influences that seem to have given it birth (see anything by George Fitzgerald). Is techno making a comeback, or is Hotflush bringing a new half-blood mix of UK-born bass music and German minimal-techno the masses? Is there more than that in the mix? One thing’s for sure, with the release of Personality, the label has further cemented it’s status as one of the best sources of forward thinking material in electronic music.

On a related note, if you have an hour and a half to spare, check out this great interview Scuba gave at the Red Bull Music Academy last year… it’s a very good watch, as are all the other RBMA interviews.

I am not of the those libertarian, border-line anarchists a la Ron Paul who condemns every single attempt at regulation with one hand on the flag and the other on the heart, screaming for liberty. I am however, or so I like to think, a logical thinker, and to me, removing the rights to 0.08 BAC to what is legally considered adults here in Quebec is totally illogical. What becomes of young adults aged 18-21? Are they no longer true adults in the eyes of the law? I was raised to believed that a privilege always has a counterbalance of responsibility ; we are stripped of a privilege, what responsibility are you also taking away to compensate? From the time I turned 18, I was asked to jump through the hoops that every other adults has had to jump through, file my income taxes, pay my dues and contort through the maze of bureaucratic procedures relative to school and healthcare, why in hell would I not be considered like a lesser adult?

Pushed further, it becomes clear that the logic behind the Table’s recommendations for the measure makes strictly no sense. De Konick defends this initiative by presenting statistics on automobile accidents saying that young people are more likely to cause fatality won the roads, in a way which doesn’t directly correlate accidents in which young adults are involved and the presence of BAC less than 0.08. He says that since young drivers are more likely to get in an accident, young drivers under the influence of alcohol, even if minimal, is twice as dangerous. Nowhere does he mention that youth are more frequent offenders with regards to drunk driving. De Konick is adding 2 and 2 and getting 8. If young males are more at risk of getting in a fight, and if bars are statistically more violent places, does it make sense to restrict legal age for going out to 21, but for boys only? This asymmetry in the concept of adulthood is unacceptable, and I fear that giving in to such incongruent practices might set a precedent that would open the door for other such pieces of legislation.

I find it particularly funny that this measure is announced right after the Parti Quebecois has positioned itself in favour of lowering the voting age to 16 years old. Everybody has had this reflection: why is it that a teen can give his life to his country at 16 years of age in the US but can’t purchase alcohol? “Stupidity is not exclusive to the youth,” said Stephane Bergeron defend his party’s orientation. I wholly agree… I’ve seen 40-some year old man-childs rake up DUI’s just as much as I’ve seen friends take the wheel after a couple of drinks. Obey the law or go to jail if you get caught with solid proof, it should be that simple. In the end, the message that the adoption of this new legislation is sending out is that 18-21 year olds aren’t responsible enough to be entrusted with things like the assessment of their capacity to drive. What other things aren’t we responsible enough for? All this goes a long way in showing how Quebec’s socialising tendencies are getting out of control. When your government starts putting more value in statistics and modelized analysis of risk factors for car accidents than in responsibilization of the youth, you know something has gone wrong.

Now that it has been announced, there pretty much is no going back, unless an election comes around very soon and aborts the adoption of the measure, which I hope it will. In the meanwhile, enjoy the times when you can still have a beer or two before going somewhere with your vehicle… because it’ll most likely be gone to never come back.

I’m currently reading a book, Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy by Robert Michels. It’s first part deals with the paradox between the idea of democracy and the necessity for hierarchical organisation, then goes on to describe the psychological predispositions of human beings that permits the formation of a ruling class amongst political parties and entities. In his treatise of leadership, Michels talks lengthily of the necessity of a leader to be a great orator and communicator.

Jean-Marie Aussant is the provincial MP for Nicolet-Yamaska. He used to be part of the Parti Quebecois, but left a while ago in the gigantic gaggle-fuck of resignations that hit the party over Pauline Marois’ leadership. He has now start his own party, which according to what I understand seeks to consolidate the motivated separatists so that we can have ANOTHER referendum. The horrible video you saw up top is an official video for his new party.

Nearly 100 years after the initial publication of Political Parties, the requirement of being a good orator has largely transformed into having the capacity to communicate effectively over different media. On this point, Aussant has failed… the collection of poorly edited hand-held video clips that he presents to us as official material speaks for itself. Lens flare from dirty optics, totally unmastered audio along with cheesy poses and soundtrack all make the video so tragically bad it almost becomes funny.

I don’t believe that this guy knows what he’s undertaking… with funds and party adhesion a thousand time his, after 2 failed referendums and countless times in power over 40 years of existence, his former employer the Parti Quebecois has still not been able to get a referendum to pass. And this guy expects to win with THIS?

It’s no secret that nationalists are losing a lot of ground these days, so if Aussant REALLY wants to venture in this rocky terrain, he better come well equipped. As of right now, with a platform that reeks of PQ’s leftovers, no (good) promo material, and no big names rallied to his cause means that he’s not going to succeed in a political arena filled with experience players. Especially not with the elections coming up at such a short notice.

Something tells me the upcoming provincial elections are going to be VERY interesting.

Obviously, the video is a parody. There is no such thing as Malroney’s secret plan for nation-wide convergence to chiac, and the Institut nationale du Chiac. Radio-Canada ISN’T pushing for more chiac; in fact, any french-speaking Canadian knows that our public broadcaster has a soft spot for sanitized, text-book french, mostly stripped of local linguistic particularities.

But despite the humurous tone, to me, Chiac maybe is the solution, or at least part of it. The solution to Quebec’s torments on it’s identity, the problem it has with setting forth what is it’s culture and defining it’s essence.

The debate on cultural identity obviously has a lot of things to do with language; it’s usually the primary characteristic that is noted when explaining the schism between Quebec and the ROC to outsiders. Essentially, it is a symbolic difference that, according to me,helps perpetuate the idea that Quebecers and Canadians are intrinsically different and irremediably incompatible. Most in favor of the protection of the french language carry the message that the French language is an important part of our heritage, and therefor must be protected by all means necessary. How does enforcing the perpetuation of a language given to use just under 400 years ago contribute to defining our collective identity?

What I see in this is nothing else than obstinate conservatism, refusal to accept change and the fluid nature of both collective and individual identity. I find it quite ironic that the proponents of french, delved so deep in this conservatism, are unable to understand the aspirations of their english counterparts. Likewise, these people are eager to perpetuate certain aspects of their heritage: the presence of symbols of the monarchy within our federal establishments is the first example that comes to mind. The difference between the two cases being that I haven’t seen any english people talking about the need for legislation to safeguard their heritage… it just perpetuates naturally, waning to more distant symbolism as time passes.

That said, I believe that the solution to Quebec’s torments on identity is fundamentally the acceptance of change, perpetuated by both our artistic elite and legislation like Bill 101. In this sense, chiac is a beautiful example of how cultural baggage combines with time to create something truely unique, something that truely defines one’s identity; while chiac can clearly be identified as the language of the people of the maritimes, the same thing can not be done with Quebec’s french. The struggle to keep alive certain aspects of our identity has ruined our opportunity to become something else.

The truth is, unlike what kids are still being told in schools across the province, you can’t kill a culture just by exposing it to others and allowing it to integrate certain aspects. The beautiful thing about cultural heritage is that it lives on no matter what… culture doesn’t die, it transforms. It is my opinion that if anything is going to kill off french and the Quebecois culture, it’s an implosion, a result of the amassed frustration of years of being forced into the state-defined mold; cultural change comparable in scale only with the Revolution Tranquille. If Quiet Revolution brought on a flurry of nationalist tendencies and a providence state which still plagues us, what will a second cultural revolution bring with it? Far-right neo-nationalists? Far-left revolutionaries? I see our habit of cultural protectionism not only as something that is unwanted, but also potentially dangerous.

Au premier coup d’oeil, ce projet de loi est une disposition tout à fait sensée qui permettera de réduire les emissions du parc automobile Quebecois. Cepedant, en regardant le programme similaire qu’on en place les Ontariens depuis maintenant plusieurs années, et en considérant tout les cotés de la medaille, on se rend bien compte que cette loi est vouée a l’échec.

Regardons d’abord l’example Ontarien. Depuis 1999, le program Drive Clean impose au propriétaires de tous les véhicules personnels non-commerciaux agées de 7 ans ou plus des inspections bi-annuelles qui sont obligatoires pour l’obtention de l’immatriculation. Le test en lui-même est une courte inspection visuelle, suivi d’un test sur dynamometre accompagné d’un “sniff test”, une analyse des émissions polluantes du véhicule. Si le véhicule semble conforme et satisfait au normes d’émanation des divers polluants selon les spécifications originales du véhicule plus une marge d’usure, l’inspection est réussi. Grosso modo, le cas Ontarien est un example dans ce qui se fait a travers l’Amérique du Nord; plusieurs états américains ont un système similaire en place.

Ce type d’inspection présente plusieurs problèmes. Le premier, le plus apparent, est qu’il ratisse trop large pour retirer trop peu de véhicules pollueurs de la route; selon George Iny, de l’Association pour la protection des automobilistes, 6000$ en inspection sont requis pour retirer un seul véhicule fautif de la route (7:40). Ceci pénalise ainsi plusieurs automobilistes, la grande majorité, qui sont en règle et qui n’auront jamais à faire face à un échec. Les plus touchés seront nécessairement les moins nantis, qui aurait sans doutte bien envi de consacrer cet argent dépenser en inspection et en réparations à l’achat d’un voiture plus récente, et donc plus propre sur le plan environmental. Personne n’a envi de rouler en minoune.

Deuxiemement, la démarche du ministre ne semble aucunement tenir compte du cout en carbon que représente la fabrication d’une automobile. Une étude suggère que certain véhicules aurait une empreinte environnementale à la fabrication aussi sinon plus élevée que ce qu’elle générera en gazes polluants a rouler. Une question se pose alors: est-il vraiment plus raisonnable de changer son véhicule plus fréquemment pour un modèle plus éconénergetique? Entre Gaston qui a le pieds lourd qui change son gros Cadillac loué aux 3 ans et Mme Bergeron qui conduit sa petite Tercel entre l’église et l’épicerie du coins depuis 1995, qui a participé le plus aux changements climatiques? Et pourtant, on sait très bien qui payera dans l’éventualité de la mise en vigeure de la loi 48.

Troisièmement, les plus grand pollueurs ne sont pas pour autant éliminés, du fait qu’il est pratiquement impossible de pleinement inspecté tout les systemes anti-pollution du véhicule sans dépenser une fortune. Les véhicules a grande cylindrée, peut importe leur émanations de gazes a effets de serre, ont automatiquement un passe-droit: ils on été conçus pour consommer plus de carburant, et sont évalués comme tel. De plus, la tricherie a prouvé être beaucoup trop facile et largement répendu dans le program Ontarien. N’importe quel amateur de voitures avec un peu de volonté et de savoir-faire peut actuellement passer avec aise le e-test Ontarien avec AUCUN équipement antipollution sinon qu’un catalyseur (dans certains cas, même sans celui-ci!). Dans les véhicules plus modernes, on peut facilement retrouver 4 systèmes anti-pollution ou plus, qui sont plus souvent qu’autrement invisibles pendant une inspection rapide en dessous du capot… pensé qu’un mécanicien payé a l’heure et cherchant a rentabilisé une inspection a taux fixe prendra le temps de vérifier la présence de tout ces systèmes si le “Check engine” n’est pas allumer, c’est surestimé le zêle des mécaniciens.

Autre problème: le projet de loi pue le lobbyisme. Dans le cadre d’un dossier monté par Argent, la chaine affaire de Canoe, les représentants de l’industrie ne cachent pas avoir mit des pressions considérables sur le gouvernement pour la mise en place d’une telle mesure; La Corporation des concessionnaires d’automobiles du Québec et l’Association des recycleurs de pièces d’autos et de camions se sont clairement positionnés. En tant que lobbyistes, l’environnement n’est pas leur priorité: ils savent très bien que ce projet de loi sera un occasion en or, tant pour les détaillants que les garage indépendants. Le ministre lui-même a dit vouloir crée une “étanchilité entre la personne qui inspecte et les gens qui vont faire les réparations” (6:00), ce qui pourrait permettre a l’organisme mandaté pour les inspections de mettre le couteau à la gorge du consommateur quand vient le temps d’un inspection.

Concrètement, que seront les résultats de l’application de ce projet de loi? Les moins nantis se verront privés de leur moyen de transport. Les amateurs d’automobile qui ont un minimum de genie contourneront sans problème l’inspection. Mme Bergeron, qui se fait deja arnaqué chaque fois qu’elle se rend au garage avec son Tercel pour faire changer son huile aura une chance de plus de se faire avoir par un bandit en chienne bleue. Pendant ce temps, le gouvernement dépensera de votre argent pour faire appliquer se programme a grand frais, et en plus de refiler une facture au consommateur. C’est une triple sur-taxe qui a mon sens est totalement inutile et injustifié, qui affectera les propriétaires de plus de 1.6 millions d’automobiles.

D’autre mesure moins regressistes s’offre a nous si nous voulons véritablement contribuer a réduire les émmanations du parc automobile Quebecois. Les prix du gaz ont déja encourager les ventes de véhicules de moins grande cylindrées et donc généralement moins polluants: la monté en puissance de la popularité du petit moteur turbo-compressés en est une preuve tangible. Dans cette optique, pourquoi ne pas abaissé la taille des moteurs élligibles à une surtaxe à l’immatriculation à 3 litres (plutôt que 4), et stratifié de manière plus aggressive la tarification pour punir les vraies pollueurs, peu importe l’âge de leur véhicules? Pourquoi ne pas adopter les habitudes des européens, et d’encourager l’achat de véhicules au diesel, un carburant généralement beaucoup plus éfficace?

Le projet de loi 48 est à mon sens un example parfait de comment les lobbies et l’industrie peuvent se servir de sujets intouchables pour influencer la législation en leur avantage. L’environnement étant devenu un intouchable au Quebec au même niveau que l’identité et la culture, il faudra être doublement vigilant quand l’on verra des lobbies annoncer en grande pompe leur appui à un projet de loi en prétendant défendre de beaux ideaux. On ne sait jamais quand on tombera sur un complot communist!

Les médias n’ont pas manqué de couvrir l’évènement, et la phrase la plus rapportée est sans doute la menace qu’a fait Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, porte-parole de l’Association pour une solidarité syndicale étudiante (ASSÉ) à l’endroit du gouvernement Charest:

C’est le dernier avertissement à ce gouvernement avant qu’on passe à la prochaine étape dans les moyens de pression. S’il ne recule pas sur sa hausse des frais de scolarité après la mobilisation exceptionnelle d’aujourd’hui, on va se diriger vers une grève générale illimitée à l’hiver.

Juste un petit rappel en passant: une “grève générale illimitée”, ça veut dire une levée de cours permanent pour tout la session, autrement dit une session, ou deux, ou trois… de perdues. Donc, ce que Gabriel propose en le nom des 40 000 étudiants qu’il représente, c’est que tout le monde cesse d’étudier le temps d’une session, jusqu’à ce que les demandes des assemblés étudiantes soient satisfaites. Peut-être que Gabriel, étant étudiant à temps partiel (2) (moins que 4 cours par session) à l’université dans un programme de penseurs, ne trouve peut-être pas ce sacrifice trop important, mais permettez-moi de douter que ses membres sont prêts a le suivre dans sa noble démarche.

Heureusement que l’AGECTR n’est pas affiliée à l’ASSÉ, non? C’est mal connaitre les milieux syndicaux: solidarité l’oblige, fort est a parié que la FEUQ, dont tous les étudiants du CÉGEP sont membre via l’AGECTR, sera contrainte à considérer cette grève générale elle aussi. Si le même vote non représentatif s’opère, c’est un congé pour tous!

L’année passée, j’ai écrit plusieurs articles concernant la représentativité quasi nulle des associations étudiantes de la véritable base étudiante; comment la poignée de soit-disent représentants s’empare de manière illégitime de nos voix et se permettent d’émettre des opinions pour nous. J’ai été heureux de constater que mes allégations ont fait quelques vagues au sein de la clique de l’AGE… mais comme la population étudiante se contrefout (avec raison) de la Gifle et des affaires de “vie étudiante” en faveur d’une dévotion sérieuse à leurs études, à leurs loisirs et au travail, la situation en est restée là. La clique a continué à gérer son agenda, laissant une grande majorité des étudiants dans l’indifférence la plus totale.

Maintenant que la d’une grève générale mets en danger le parcours scolaire de plusieurs d’entre nous cependant, il faut que ça change. Prenez les moyens nécessaires, frappez où ça fait mal: la loi 32 sur accréditation des associations étudiantes dites qu’un règlement doit être prévu à l’effet que les cotisations soit remboursables ou non (Chapitre 5, article 52): retirez les! Ne laissez pas votre argent servir des intérêts qui vous ne représentent pas. Si la grogne se généralise, sur demande de 25% des étudiants, la présence de l’association peut être contestée; cette situation serait bien embarrassante pour la minorité des activistes qui disent parler en notre nom.

Je comprends les enjeux de la lutte pour les frais de scolarité, bien que je ne sois pas d’accord avec les arguments en faveur d’un gel continuel, encore moins d’une gratuité totale. L’accessibilité à tous, c’est bien beau; privé une majorité qui veut mener à terme leurs projets d’études postsecondaires par contre, ça ne passe pas, particulièrement quand cette privation se fait selon une ligne directrice partisane qui pue le corporatisme syndical. Une grève générale, ce n’est ni un mal nécessaire, ni un noble sacrifice: c’est un handicap que l’on ne doit pas se faire imposer.

(1) Calculé de manière approximative selon les chiffres publiés dans La Gifle et ceux disponibles sur le site du CÉGEP de Trois-Rivières. Chiffres plus précis à venir.
(2) http://bit.ly/vpB8Cl

The journey on bike was long and perilous; after being slowed down by the Gay Pride parade and put off track by the distant bass hits coming from the neighbouring “Fete des enfants“, I arrived at the Ste Helene Island for the show. The site is surprisingly intimate: while the area reserved for the Picnik can probably hold 1000+ people the area nearest to the stage, which forms a pit and is bordered with lawn furniture, is probably smaller than some of the bigger indoor venues.

First off was Dorobo: a local electro-fiend who I had never had heard about. I arrived late because of all my misadventures, but the last 15 minutes of his set was mostly deep house.

Second off was Appleblim, hailing from Bristol. Previously co-owner of Skull Disco and currently running Applepips, this guy was also a regular DJ at the legendary FWD>>. I was expecting nothing less than all-out dubstep from him, but I felt that the harsh transition between the previous set and an attempt at spinning some 2-step material made the set much more dance-y. Mixing was flawless and massive tunes were dropped. At the one hour mark, the area in front of the stage was filling up, and the crowd was very much into it.

Third up, Addison Groove. Originally scheduled for later that Night, AG took Scuba’s spot for an undisclosed reason. He rocked the ones and two with his distinctive style, however I felt that he too watered down his set a bit for his Quebecois audience. I request his remix of Jimmy Mack for the end of the set, but sadly I didn’t get it. Montreal isn’t nearly “rave-y” enough, according to him… What I did get thought is info about upcoming releases on Tectonic as AG, and Blackbox as Headhunter. Props to AG to have talked and shaken hands with his fans… Try doing that with YOUR favourite artist!

Last but not least, Scuba hit the decks. Or rather SCB in this case, as his set too was more on the dance side of things. Awesome none the less though… By the time the sun had set, the place was completely crowded and people were straight up juking out. I unfortunately had to leave before the end of his set, which probably lasted past 9PM as was planned. Big tunes were dropped, including Scuba’s own “Feel It“.

There was only one disappointment: the fact that damn near nobody even knew who were the artists and what they were playing. At some point, Joy Orbison’s “Source Delight” (“Ellipsis”?) was cued in, and I was the only one howling with my gun-fingers in the air at the MASSIVE, unreleased tune. I was ashamed of being part of such an uninitiated and non-reactive crowd. To add insult to injury, I heard one of the Piknicers commenting on how he had “heard better dubstep” during AG’s set… Yeah, whatever.

Overall though, the event was awesome. Fresh air, sunshine, cold beer and an excellent line-up of artists you definitely don’t get to hear live very often… everything was set for success. Thanks to the Piknic for putting Sundays back on the map!