Many angry and extravagant things have been said about the 15 weeks
of student demonstrations in Quebec. Their printemps
erable—“maple spring”—has put Montreal’s streets in the center of Quebec’s
politics.
The street was no longer just a visible and convenient place to exercise
free speech. The crowds were not assembled merely to impress, but also to
enfeeble the state; to reverse legislated decisions by the Government and the Assembly
of Quebec; and, conceivably, to force the Charest government to resign.
End-running the sticky ways of traditional democracy is appealing,
especially to the young. A charged crowd and insolent demonstrators can be
endearing, especially in cautious places like Canada. Les Perreaux of The Globe and Mail reports, however,
that serious people—people who are expected to think through consequences and help
prepare society for intelligent change—are willing to grant the printemps erable a significant voice in
deciding Quebec’s future.
“University
of Montreal philosopher Christian Nadeau sees a more pragmatic motivation. ‘This
is no revolution, but instead a confrontation with a government that has
decided its authority to govern comes strictly from the ballot box.
Representative democracy is a delegated affair, but the problem with that idea
is that it's always provisional. In representative democracy, it's never a
blank cheque. Delegating power to a third party, to a government, is an act of
confidence. They must work to maintain it or they lose their moral authority.”
This is beguiling sophistry.
The Government of Quebec’s authority—now that Queen Elizabeth II
has none—does come strictly from the
ballot box. It can lose it’s nerve because of what the people and the pollsters
say. The courts can check it actions. It
is not above the law, but it doesn’t answer to public opinion or sweet reason
from the street.
The Government and its legislative majority have no contract with
the street or any obligation to keep the confidence of any exercised faction in
Quebec society. Indeed, Charest is entirely within his rights as a democrat to
squander his popularity.
That sounds harsh and I acknowledge that the Quebec Government
hasn’t used belligerent language. Nevertheless, democrats shouldn’t indulge the
idea that the street—or poetry, a good argument, and even a palpable change in
the zeitgeist—can shave the authority of the ballot.
Election days and the secret ballot are the only tools we can all
use to demonstrate that we are equals and to stand up to the
louder voices and the bullies.
The street is nothing? Tell it to Gaddhafi and Mubarak. Not to mention the Czars.
ReplyDeletePower to the People, baby!
Haven't you been off the boat long enough to stop pretending that this is St. Petersburg?
ReplyDelete