• If anyone out there in the vast realm of virtuality follows this blog, even a little bit, you may have noticed that the last two postings had titles that seemed to suggest a commitment to a regular, even weekly, offering. You will subsequently have realized that such commitment is not forthcoming. My apologies.
    The following, in fact, is less a review, and more a short rant, so you needn’t expect a lot of coherence. Lately, though, incoherence seems to be the name of the game where the Bible is concerned. Appeals to its authority appear grounded in a quasi-mystical idolatry. The Bible fell from heaven, apparently, to be mined for spiritual nuggets for pious individuals to save their souls and shore up their ideological positions. Or else it functions as a kind of giant literary reference point harboring the guarantee of ultimate meaning. Never mind that all of this is contrary to Scripture even in terms of its genre and production. I realize that this is not a universally applicable statement, of course. There are many both in an outside the Church with dedicated commitments to making sense of Scriptural authority in intelligible and complex ways. Nevertheless as a predominant condition of North Atlantic spirituality/reading habits, I find my complaint to be valid.

    Equally problematic is the unintelligible rendering of what we might call the natural world, and particularly the human response to it. Particularly since a two-fold take-over of the colour green by commercial and political forces to the point that our environmental judgement can hardly be anything but nebulous. A few months ago I began working with a faith-based conservation organization. Of course, every one of those words is quite ambiguous, but we must bracket that for now. One of the books on the bookshelf was The Green Bible. Doubly suspicious I hesitated to take it off the shelf for quite some time. Today I finally did, and found it quite a welcome surprise.

     Following the tradition of the red-letter text, the editors of this particular version took it upon themselves to draw attention to creation theology, a long neglected theme in Western Christianity. The green letters appear to highlight texts that deal explicitly with the created order. What this makes plain is that the abstraction of the Bible from land, people, animals, and heavens -what in fact perpetuates its properly non-sensical or insensible diffusion- is in fact anathema to the spirit of the text and its creation.
    So far I have not begun the text itself, but I have read a number of the opening essays, all of which highlight, in vimarious aspects the damage done to the earth, including its human communities, by a careless treatment of the world perpetuated by an improper Christian understanding of the world as subject absolutely to destruction, while only the brilliant souls go on to live in eternity. The fact that this is a misreading of the Biblical texts, and that this misreading has justified gross defamations and violations of all the creatures of the earth, including perhaps especially the most vulnerable human beings, is painstakingly elucidated through careful readings by the various essayists. Much of the argument I had heard before and, at least cerebrally, agreed with.
     Yet it is one thing to give assent to a proposition, and quite another to be struck and convicted. In my life I have not carefully cultivated  my habitat, as though each aspect of life was something beautiful and integral. Something which lives into the hope of a future of redemption. That the whole earth might be transformed into a new creation mandates the practice of care, of thoughtfulness and responsibility now. The earth, in its groaning and travail, should be given the care we ourselves would wish to receive if we lay dying painfully. So too the art of reading should be undertaken, not to distill the text and leave it hollow and fragmented, but to serve it and preserve it- to cultivate for the harvest while not depleting the soil. 

  • Robyn Ferrell Sacred Exchanges: Images in Global Context 
    New York: Columbia University Press, 2012, 192 pages. $50.00

    Time and again, as I read through Robyn Ferrell’s new book, the words of Frank Scott’s villanelle passed, unbidden, through my mind. Not steering by the venal chart, that tricked the mass for private gain.We rise to play a greater part. Reshaping narrow law and art, whose symbols are the millions slain, From bitter searching of the heart We rise to play a greater part. Through the lens of the Australian Aboriginal art movement Ferrell confronts the reader with some surprising truths about the world we live in and the myopic and murderous callousness which makes us inattentive to these realities.

    At the heart of this callousness lies an aesthetic impoverishment. Ferrell frequently makes biting references to the Real World of Western subjectivity. One suspects that Ferrell’s Real World has overtones of Scott’s venal chart, focusing simultaneously on the private individual subject and the apparent commensurability of objects. In the study of indigenous art, observes Ferrell, it matters that we consider the operations of Western desire, because they pass through that redactive lens, and even in passing through it have the power to “remind us of our own lack of self-possession.” The vivacity of images in their capacities of ordering and unseating have the power to take us beyond exchange, whether specifically market-driven or the comparative exchange of sacred lore so dear to the ethnographer. In a passage of considerable wisdom Ferrell considers the mystery of indigenous arts and what is known by them in their Western reception:

    These mysteries come from the same place and time – the “Real World” of the twenty-first century, already technologized and rapidly globalizing. This is from where the echoes of other times and places are heard, as precious revenants, or as genuine gifts in an uneven exchange of ontologies. (Ferrell, 5) 

    There is power, then, in this artwork with its distinctive ontological concerns and phenomenological deployment. Noting some of the visual similarities between Aboriginal art and Abstract Expressionism, which led European artists to presume some sort of spiritual kinship with ‘primitive’ art, Ferrell details the very different genesis of the use of abstraction and the claims made by the paintings. European artists like Mark Rothko claimed this kinship on the basis that the subject matter they painted was ‘timeless and tragic’. Aboriginal paintings, bourne out of traditional knowledge practices known as jukurrpa or Dreaming, on the other hand have strong connotations of legality and claim of title to country. “The Dreaming emerges as an ordering of sensations and impressions that ‘makes sense.’ It does so as a living practice.”  This act of embodiment is of absolute importance, the claim of title to country is not the claim of privation we might commonly understand today, but rather a claim to a knowledge of the living law of the land. At on level Ferrell reads this as ontological difference. The separation of subject and object, so central to Western thought, appears not to be the case for the Aboriginal Dreamings. Recognizing the difficulty, as one shaped in a Western subjective mode, of inhabiting a world Ferrell names the body as the leading example of an object which at least questions the dualism. “my body… belongs to me a little less than I belong to it.” (9) The Aboriginal understanding of “country”, she suggests, could in a way be understood as an extrapolation of precisely this sentiment. Understanding of “country” is irreducible to the abstractions of the map. A whole bodily experience and orientation towards the land is involved.

    Yet, in the translation of the Dreamings to canvas and the medium of acrylic, abstraction also occurs. In naming its distinct genesis and development, which she goes on to outline in further detail both aesthetically and historically, Ferrell tells the story of a people whose work and history is powerful and unique and resists the logic of colonialism and commodification even as it enters the global market. There is no question that Aboriginal Art, with an increasing place of prominence on global art markets, participates in a commodity form. The economic reality is a part of those artistic creations, indeed a very important part. However, to reduce artistic creation to that subjugation is, Ferrell argues, is naive and misguided. Markets do not create value, she says, they are merely an effect. It is rather from the aesthetic mode, which produces a certain order, that value can be generated. This accords as much to legal value as economic value, which in the end are in a sense indistinguishable. The power of the image, and in this case the images of the Aboriginal Dreamings, are potent indeed. What they carried forth was an ordering of the world, a reverberation of the past, which both remembers the violence of the West and challenges its hegemony. British common law had, in its first encounters with Aboriginals, discerned no law among them. The revelation, through art, of law and ordered being challenges the viability, at the heart of British law itself, to the land claims laid. Ignorance, as Ferrell points out, is not a legitimate claim.

    Sacred Exchanges, finally, is a harrowing dialectic of the confrontations of forms of being in the world. Creativity and natality, destruction and death. The abjection perpetuated by ignorance when one historical form becomes so insular as to refuse being to another. At the same time it is an account of hope, of vigorous persistence and the possibility of renewal. If I have done this book a disservice it is in failing to attend  to its nuance and subtle rhythms of hope and reshaping.

    Copyright: Joshua Paetkau

  • Today I came across a piece of news which further confirms some deeply disturbing trends in the Canadian political scene. I am reposting this article, because, it seems one small last-ditch effort, not so much to stave off the onslaught of barbarism, but at least to keep the awareness alive of what is happening .  Have we really learned nothing from history? 

    Immigration bill’s impact cause for concern

    Tags: Canada

    0 Comments

    Jason Kenney
    If the government’s proposed new immigration law passes, it might turn away legitimate asylum-seekers fleeing persecution, including Jews, immigration experts and community activists say.
    Bill C-31 – titled Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act – is being considered in the House of Commons, and its sponsor, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney, has said he wants the bill passed by June 29, before Parliament adjourns for the summer.
    Detractors such as the Canadian Civil Liberties Union and the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, among others, say that provisions in C-31, including the proposed creation of a list of designated “safe” countries of origin, give too much power to ministers and don’t give refugees enough time to establish their cases before Canada’s Immigration Refugee Board (IRB).  
    -Originally posted at Canadian Jewish News  
    Click on link above for full article. 
  • Giorgio Agamben The Kingdom and the Glory: For a Theological Genealogy of Economy and Government (Translated by Lorenzo Chiesa and Matteo Mandarini) Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2011, 303 pages. 

    Glory, both in theology and politics, is precisely what takes the place of that unthinkable emptiness that amounts to the inoperativity of power. And yet, precisely this unthinkable vacuity is what nourishes and feeds power (or rather what the machine of power transforms into nourishment.) – Giorgio Agamben, The Kingdom and the Glory

    In his newly translated book, the original Italian version was published in 2007, Agamben sets out a magisterial and breathtakingly erudite analysis of the theological origins of several of the key concepts of modern governmentality and economy. The Kingdom and the Glory, which forms a part of a larger series including Homo Sacer and State of Exception and has been heralded as Agamben’s most theological work to date, is composed around two central questions: Why has power in the West assumed the form of a government of people and things, that is, an ‘economy’, and if power is essentially government why does it need glory, or the ceremonial and liturgical apparatus that always accompanies it? 
    Foraying into the genealogy of governmentality Agamben consciously locates himself in the wake of a project begun by Michel Foucault. Agamben’s methodology clearly owes much  to Foucault, this is evident particularly in Agamben’s articulation of his project as an archaeological/genealogical investigation. Agamben  intends to show -and this did not become clear to me but would perhaps be evident to a diligent reader of Foucault- that there were internal reasons that Foucault’s investigations were incomplete. On this basis Agamben reaches further back, chronologically, to the early Christian theology and the formulation of a doctrine of the Trinity as oikonomia. This formulation, Agamben contends, amounts to a delineation of the Trinity as a form of divine household management, and forms part of a definitive and traceable lineage, which he terms the theological-economic, that, despite a lack of conscious engagement, has had decisive effects on the conception of modern politics. 
    The theological-economic, or economic theology, is one of two paradigms that Agamben sees as deriving from Christian theology. The other, political theology, can be seen in political philosophy and modern theories of sovereignty. Economic theology, on the other hand, concerns the immanent ordering of life and is witnessed in the contemporary scene in the form of “modern biopolitics up to the current triumph of economy and government over every other aspect of social life.” This economic paradigm has, moreover, been largely passed over in silence. Agamben attributes this to a theological embarassment, as it finds the original locus of the Trinity as essentially a glorified household (oikonomia)
    This, at least, is the facile rendition of Agamben’s take on economic theology. I should hasten to add that at this point Agamben introduces a quite fascinating, though by no means novel, interlude on the secularization thesis. Following Carl Schmitt, but against Max Weber, modernity does not entail a disenchantment or detheologisation of the world. Theology continues to be very much present, though this also does not mean that theology and politics merely overlap. Secularization is, in fact not a concept but rather a signature: 

    [T]hat is somethin that in a sign  or concept marks and exceeds such a sign or concept  referring it back to a determinate interpretation or field, without for that reason leaving the semiotic to constitute a new meaning or a new concept. Signatures move an displace concepts and signs from one field to another (in this case, from sacred to profane, and vice versa) without redefining them semantically. (Agamben, 4. italics in the original) 

    Theology, then, does not simply become economic by virtue of a disenchanment or even a semantic morphology. It is already constituted economically though it does not for that reason cease to be theological, or glorious. The glorification of economy is actually necessary and provides the link to liturgy. Agamben elucidates this via a dispute that took place between Carl Schmitt -the coiner of the term “political theology” – and a Roman Catholic theologian named Erik Peterson. Peterson argued that political theology was impossible in Christianity, and that Christian political action was possible solely on the presupposition of a triune God. Peterson, disavowing both political and economic theology, articulated politics as liturgical action, or participation in the heavenly city. Agamben, who will go on to draw out some surprising connections between medieval discourses on angels and contemporary bureaucracy, finds this disavowal revealing. The liturgical apparatus is part parcel of the articulation of the triune God as oikonomia, and more pointedly of government, whether divine or human managed by angels or officials.

    Here we should perhaps return to the discussion of the two paradigms of political theology and economic theology. The two paradigms, which briefly we can refer to as sovereignty and government respectively, continue to oscillate throughout the numerous discourses to which Agamben makes reference. Establishing that the mystery of God in early Church theology, though significantly not in Paul, is nothing but the mystery of economy itself (that is the glorification of oikonomia) Agamben goes on to relate the conceptual gaps between ontology and praxis and finally kingdom and government. A central idea here is that of the sovereign as one who “reigns but does not rule”.  In its final guise this takes the form of the empty throne, the glorious symbol of  power. The centre of power is, in fact, empty and precisely for this reason glory -that is liturgy, acclamation, and ceremony – play a constitutive role. The contemporary connection to which Agamben refers here is the role of the media and the idea of “government by consent.” Drawing out the parallels with theology, or better the theological signature, Agamben refers to a theologian called Bossuet in whom theology and atheology overlap, as it were, without remainder. God governs the world as if it governed itself.

    In sum The Kingdom and the Glory is a valuable contribution to the study of governmentality,liturgy, and glory. It is certainly a thought-provoking and challenging read for someone who lives within the Christian tradition, and particularly a variant of Christianity which celebrates the liturgical, often in a politicized way that resonate eerily with some of Agamben`s descriptions. Reading Agamben`s book thinkers such as John Milbank or Catherine Pickstock came frequently to mind. Is liturgy, after all, the deeply formative practice that forms us to depth of our being and allows us to participate in divine life, or is it a glorification of economy that occludes politics and leads to the sacralization of management?

    On a more pressing level, Agamben challenges the contemporary “society of the spectacle” and the triumph of government and administration over other forms of social encounter. Agamben’s keen historical insights into the state of the exception, particularly with regard to Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, are deepened here. Noting the role of acclamation, including explicitly liturgical formulations, in the rise to power and adulation of government officials Agamen not only irrevocably indicts the Church in its complicity in the horrors of genocide,  he also makes us aware that the dangers are not past. The ubiquitous presence of media, the overwhelming triumph of the managerial cult and the way these feed into a political-juridical system designed to produce outcasts. In Canada we have a minister of immigration who wants the (sovereign) right to revoke the permanent resident status, not to mention the increased use of biometrics. And this is a “majority government.”

  • Sorry this didn’t work the first time.  I will try it again.
    Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 11:28 AM
    Subject: CLASSE – Urgent Appeal to the Rest of Canada

    From Max Silverman, student at UQAM and former mcgiller –

    *PLEASE READ AND SPREAD FAR AND WIDE. BRING MOTIONS TO YOUR LOCAL UNION COUNCILS, YOUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. I AM IN TORONTO FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE A PRESENTATION AT THEIR MEETINGS. PERSONALIZED VERSIONS OF THIS LETTER (WITH PERSONAL CONTACT INFORMATION) CAN BE SENT TO YOUR ORGANIZATION AS WELL*

    Request for solidarity and support for the Legal Committee of the CLASSE

    Sisters, brothers,

                We write you during a dark time for democratic, human and associative rights in Quebec with the following appeal for your help and solidarity. As you have no doubt heard, the government recently enacted legislation that amounts to the single biggest attack on the right to organize and freedom of expression in North America since the McCarthy period and the biggest attack on civil and democratic rights since the enactment of the War Measures Act in 1970. Arguably, this recent law will unduly criminalize more law-abiding citizens than even McCarthy’s hearings and the War Measures Act ever could.

                Among other draconian elements brought forward by this law, any gathering of 50 or more people must submit their plans to the police eight hours ahead of time and must agree to any changes to the gathering’s trajectory, starttime, etc. Any failure to comply with this stifling of freedom of assembly and association will be met with a fine of up to $5,000 for every participant, $35,000 for someone representing a ‘leadership’ position, or $125,000 if a union – labour or student – is deemed to be in charge.  The participation of any university staff (either support staff or professors) in any student demonstration (even one that follows the police’s trajectory and instructions) is equally punishable by these fines. Promoting the violation of any of these prohibitions is considered, legally, equivalent to having violated them and is equally punishable by these crippling fines.

                One cannot view this law in isolation. In the past few months, the Québec student movement – inspired by Occupy, the Indignados of Spain, the students of Chile, and over 50 years of student struggle in Québec; and presently at North America’s forefront of fighting the government’s austerity agenda – has been confronted by precedent-shattering judicial and police repression in an attempt to force the end of the strike and our right to organize collectively. Our strike was voted and is re-voted every week in local general assemblies across Québec. As of May 18th, 2012 our committee has documented and is supporting 472 criminal accusations as well as 1047 ticket and penal offenses. One week in April saw over 600 arrests in three days. And those numbers only reflect those charged with an offense, without mentioning the thousands pepper sprayed and tear gassed, clubbed and beaten, detained and released. It does not mention Francis Grenier, who lost use of most of !
    an eye when a sound grenade was illegally thrown by a police officer into his face in downtown Montreal. It does not mention Maxence Valade who lost a full eye and Alexandre Allard who clung to life in a coma on a hospital bed for days, both having received a police rubber bullet to the head in Victoriaville. And the thousands of others brutalized, terrorized, harassed and assaulted on our streets.  Four students are currently being charged under provisions of the anti-terrorist laws enacted following September 11th.

                In addition to these criminal and penal cases, of particular concern for those of us involved in the labour movement is that anti-strike forces have filed injunctions systematically from campus to campus to prevent the enactment of strike mandates, duly and democratically voted in general assemblies. Those who have defended their strike mandates and enforced the strike are now facing Contempt of Court charges and their accompanying potential $50,000 fines and potential prison time. One of our spokespeople, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, will appear in Superior Court under such a charge for having dared say, on May 13th of this year, that “I find it legitimate” that students form picket lines to defend their strike.

                While we fight, on principle, against this judicialization of a political conflict, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the struggle on the streets has been, for many, transferred to the courtroom and we must act to defend our classmates, our friends and our family.  This defense needs your help. Many students have been denied access to Legal Aid to help them to defend themselves. This, while students filing injunctions to end strikes have been systematically granted Legal Aid. While sympathetic lawyers in all fields of law have agreed to reduced rates and alot of free support, the inherent nature of the legal system means we are spending large sums of money on this defense by the day.

                It is in this context that we appeal to you to help us cover the costs of this, our defense. Not only must we help those being unduly criminalized and facing injunctions undermining their right to associate, but we must act now and make sure that the criminalization and judicialization of a political struggle does not work and set a precedent that endangers the right to free speech and free assembly.

    If you, your union, or your organization is able to give any amount of financial help, it would make an undeniable difference in our struggle.  In addition to the outpouring of support from labour across Quebec, we have already begun to receive trans-Canadian and international solidarity donations. We thank you for adding your organization’s support to the list.

    If you have any questions, please contact us via email legal AT asse-solidarité.qc.ca. Telephone numbers can be given to you in a private message. You can also send you donation directly to the order of “Association pour une solidarité syndicale étudiante” (2065 rue Parthenais, Bureau 383, Montréal, QC, H2K 3T1) noting “CLASSE Legal Committee” in the memo line.

    In solidarity,

    Max Silverman

    Law student at the Université du Québec à  Montréal

    Volunteer with the Legal Committee of the CLASSE

  • Here is a letter I received this morning regarding the events concerning the university protests and the imposition of Emergency Measures in Quebec. The recent attack on the right to organize and freedom of assembly is a clear warning sign. This must not be allowed to continue. Please take time to read this, and excuse some of the typing anomalies – that formatting was present in the original e-mail. 









    Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 11:28 AM
    Subject: CLASSE – Urgent Appeal to the Rest of Canada


    From Max Silverman, student at UQAM and former mcgiller –



    *PLEASE READ AND SPREAD FAR AND WIDE. BRING MOTIONS TO YOUR LOCAL UNION COUNCILS, YOUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. I AM IN TORONTO FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE A PRESENTATION AT THEIR MEETINGS. PERSONALIZED VERSIONS OF THIS LETTER (WITH PERSONAL CONTACT INFORMATION) CAN BE SENT TO YOUR ORGANIZATION AS WELL*



    Request for solidarity and support for the Legal Committee of the CLASSE



    Sisters, brothers,



                We write you during a dark time for democratic, human and associative rights in Quebec with the following appeal for your help and solidarity. As you have no doubt heard, the government recently enacted legislation that amounts to the single biggest attack on the right to organize and freedom of expression in North America since the McCarthy period and the biggest attack on civil and democratic rights since the enactment of the War Measures Act in 1970. Arguably, this recent law will unduly criminalize more law-abiding citizens than even McCarthy’s hearings and the War Measures Act ever could.



                Among other draconian elements brought forward by this law, any gathering of 50 or more people must submit their plans to the police eight hours ahead of time and must agree to any changes to the gathering’s trajectory, starttime, etc. Any failure to comply with this stifling of freedom of assembly and association will be met with a fine of up to $5,000 for every participant, $35,000 for someone representing a ‘leadership’ position, or $125,000 if a union – labour or student – is deemed to be in charge.  The participation of any university staff (either support staff or professors) in any student demonstration (even one that follows the police’s trajectory and instructions) is equally punishable by these fines. Promoting the violation of any of these prohibitions is considered, legally, equivalent to having violated them and is equally punishable by these crippling fines.



                One cannot view this law in isolation. In the past few months, the Québec student movement – inspired by Occupy, the Indignados of Spain, the students of Chile, and over 50 years of student struggle in Québec; and presently at North America’s forefront of fighting the government’s austerity agenda – has been confronted by precedent-shattering judicial and police repression in an attempt to force the end of the strike and our right to organize collectively. Our strike was voted and is re-voted every week in local general assemblies across Québec. As of May 18th, 2012 our committee has documented and is supporting 472 criminal accusations as well as 1047 ticket and penal offenses. One week in April saw over 600 arrests in three days. And those numbers only reflect those charged with an offense, without mentioning the thousands pepper sprayed and tear gassed, clubbed and beaten, detained and released. It does not mention Francis Grenier, who lost use of most of !
    an eye when a sound grenade was illegally thrown by a police officer into his face in downtown Montreal. It does not mention Maxence Valade who lost a full eye and Alexandre Allard who clung to life in a coma on a hospital bed for days, both having received a police rubber bullet to the head in Victoriaville. And the thousands of others brutalized, terrorized, harassed and assaulted on our streets.  Four students are currently being charged under provisions of the anti-terrorist laws enacted following September 11th.



                In addition to these criminal and penal cases, of particular concern for those of us involved in the labour movement is that anti-strike forces have filed injunctions systematically from campus to campus to prevent the enactment of strike mandates, duly and democratically voted in general assemblies. Those who have defended their strike mandates and enforced the strike are now facing Contempt of Court charges and their accompanying potential $50,000 fines and potential prison time. One of our spokespeople, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, will appear in Superior Court under such a charge for having dared say, on May 13th of this year, that “I find it legitimate” that students form picket lines to defend their strike.



                While we fight, on principle, against this judicialization of a political conflict, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the struggle on the streets has been, for many, transferred to the courtroom and we must act to defend our classmates, our friends and our family.  This defense needs your help. Many students have been denied access to Legal Aid to help them to defend themselves. This, while students filing injunctions to end strikes have been systematically granted Legal Aid. While sympathetic lawyers in all fields of law have agreed to reduced rates and alot of free support, the inherent nature of the legal system means we are spending large sums of money on this defense by the day.



                It is in this context that we appeal to you to help us cover the costs of this, our defense. Not only must we help those being unduly criminalized and facing injunctions undermining their right to associate, but we must act now and make sure that the criminalization and judicialization of a political struggle does not work and set a precedent that endangers the right to free speech and free assembly.



    If you, your union, or your organization is able to give any amount of financial help, it would make an undeniable difference in our struggle.  In addition to the outpouring of support from labour across Quebec, we have already begun to receive trans-Canadian and international solidarity donations. We thank you for adding your organization’s support to the list.



    If you have any questions, please contact us via email legal AT asse-solidarité.qc.ca. Telephone numbers can be given to you in a private message. You can also send you donation directly to the order of “Association pour une solidarité syndicale étudiante” (2065 rue Parthenais, Bureau 383, Montréal, QC, H2K 3T1) noting “CLASSE Legal Committee” in the memo line.



    In solidarity,



    Max Silverman

    Law student at the Université du Québec à Montréal

    Volunteer with the Legal Committee of the CLASSE

  • Church challenges refugee bill

    Canada’s shameful refusal to offer asylum to Jews fleeing Nazi Germany aboard the SS St. Louis in 1939 would have been perfectly possible under the provisions of a new refugee bill the Conservative government wants to push through by June 29.
    The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers explains that under the proposed Bill C-31, “The SS St. Louis was piloted by human smugglers intent on abusing Canadian immigration system. The passengers are part of a ‘human smuggling event’ and will be automatically detained for one year. If their refugee claims are rejected, they will be deported back to Germany with no chance to appeal the negative decision.”
    That’s among several reasons the Right Reverend Dennis Drainville, Anglican Bishop of Quebec, has added his voice to the chorus of opponents calling for the proposed legislation’s withdrawal.
    Bill C-31 gives arriving refugees just 15 days to prove their claims, and 15 days to appeal a refusal. It removes an expert, independent advisory body from the process for designating certain countries as “safe,” thus removing safeguards against countries being designated on the basis of political, trade and other considerations. The bill permits the minister of citizenship and immigration to seek to revoke an individual’s refugee status and deport them at any time up until they gain citizenship. A person’s permanent residence could be revoked should the circumstances in their home country change or should they return home for any reason, including to see a sick parent or to look for a lost child. This last provision will apply equally to those who were recognized as refugees in Canada and those who were processed overseas when sponsored by church groups such as the Diocese of Quebec’s Noella Project.
    “The concentration of wide-reaching and vaguely defined powers in a political minister, with no mechanisms of judicial accountability, displays a dangerous inclination away from the rule of law and principles of responsible and democratic governance,” said Bishop Drainville, himself a former member of the Ontario legislature. “The diocese is deeply concerned that major portions of this law fail to comply with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and with international law.”
    Over recent decades the Canadian churches have been in the forefront of efforts to ensure that Canada offers protection to refugees, through refugee sponsorship, through legal action, and through calls on the government for the fair, just and humane treatment of those who arrive here seeking asylum. The Diocese of Quebec supports an immigration system that is fair, independent of political considerations, and affordable. Bill C-31, however, is unconstitutional, undermines our humanitarian traditions, and violates our international obligations.
    With Bill-31, Canada would be turning its back on its tradition of welcoming the stranger. As Christians who share this tradition, we demand that Bill C-31 be withdrawn at once.
    To learn more and to add your voice opposing Bill C-31, visit the Canadian Council for Refugees.
    -Originally posted at http://quebec.anglican.org/?p=1580 
  • “For ten years we’ve been engaged in wars that have enriched the wealthiest one percent, decimated our economy and left our nation with a generation of traumatized and wounded veterans that will require care for years to come.” 
    – Joseph Carter, Iraq war veteran. From the Guardian Newspaper.

    I began this post quite some time ago and have, for various reasons, found myself occupied with other concerns. I would still like to publish this just for the quote above, while pointing out that it has been a lot longer than ten years that the United States, as indeed many and perhaps all nations, have been engaged in warfare for the enrichment of its upper crusts. As Rosa Luxemburg clearly saw at the dawn of World War I, the war to be fought under the auspices of nationalism, of Fatherland, of heroic efforts against oppression was a reprehensible outcome of devious political machinations. She calls it the international recipe of capitalist statesmanship, and so it is. 
    Luxemburg decried the party which she had helped birth, the German Social Democrat Party, for failing to see through the obvious guises which, historically, it had the resources to refute. Now, along with Mr. Carter, we must make her cry our own in this time. To fail again to learn from history is inexcusable. More than that it is entirely too devastating a possibility to consider. Carter points to the victimization and wounding of the nation’s veteran enjoining a responsibility upon the national body, and particularly those most responsible for the war in the first place. This is one face of a new occupation. There are others. To paint them broadly we might talk about ecological concerns, food production, indigenous rights and justice, and numerous other concerns. The reason, however, that I feel it appropriate to invoke the legacy of Rosa Luxemburg at this time, is because I think at this time we are seeing the re-emergence of class consciousness in a way that makes possible an internationalist politics. 
  • Welcome to WordPress.com. After you read this, you should delete and write your own post, with a new title above. Or hit Add New on the left (of the admin dashboard) to start a fresh post.

    Here are some suggestions for your first post.

    1. You can find new ideas for what to blog about by reading the Daily Post.
    2. Add PressThis to your browser. It creates a new blog post for you about any interesting  page you read on the web.
    3. Make some changes to this page, and then hit preview on the right. You can always preview any post or edit it before you share it to the world.
  • There has been a class warfare going on… It’s just that my class is winning. And we aren’t just winning, I mean we’re killing them. -Warren Buffett, a rich financial capitalist. 
    In a bizarre turn of events some of Wall Streets biggest names, like Warren Buffett and George Soros have come out in support of the Occupy Wall street movement. Finian Cunningham of Global Research chronicles this development here  and remark on the possible danger of the movement being co-opted. Part of the strength of the Occupy Wall Street protests lie in the recognition, from diverse sources, that there is something wrong about  the system. If the financiers themselves become involved the narrative could change to one between the good and bad financiers, thus losing the most powerful part of their analysis. Cunningham goes on to name the current state of the capitalist economy a “parasitic aristocracy”. And just note the boasting tone in the Buffett quote above, although I don’t actually know the context. Is he just throwing a bone to the masses? From the vantage point of his class Buffett is actually making an astute decision in supporting populist sentiment, it takes the edge off any possible threat that the movement posed. The reality is, though, that from the perspective of class struggle Buffett’s position is one of saboteur regardless of his intentions.