05) WHAT'S THE STORY ABOUT YOUTH
APATHY?
(The
following
article is from the December 1-31, 2008, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the
source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $25/year, or $12 low
income rate; for U.S. readers - $25 US per year; other overseas readers
- $25 US or $35 CDN per year. Send to: People's Voice, c/o PV Business
Manager, 133 Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Johan Boyden, Toronto
For young people, the 2008 federal election could have been a critical
arena of struggle to curb the vicious neo-liberal offensive of the
Harper Conservatives. However, many young people did not respond by
voting. In fact, in an election with the lowest voter turn-out in
Canadian history at less than sixty percent, fewer youth appear to have
cast a ballot than ever before. Over a million youth in Canada didn't
vote.
Is this really about youth apathy, or the
disinterest of the big
parties to engage youth in the issues? Does the omission of youth
issues from the discourse of the big business parties have an
ideological goal, to disengage youth from the process?
It is worth noting that many youth were
effectively
administratively disenfranchised. Voter enumeration is no longer done
before elections (surveys suggest that not knowing where and how to
vote is the main reason youth don't vote). New regulations on I.D.
meant students living away from home, young workers who have recently
moved, renters who don't pay utility bills, and youth without drivers
license or passport identification could not register at the polls.
CBC, for example, reported that two-thirds of
Dalhousie students
in Halifax were turned away from polling stations and could not vote,
as were people from oppressed Aboriginal communities in the north, like
Nunavut.
Some claim the low youth vote echoes youth
cynicism towards
parliament as an arena of struggle, and that it may even be
positive(!). Certainly, Young Communist League members on the campaign
trail heard comments like "voting doesn't matter," or "they're all the
same," or even, in response to the Communist demand to elect a large
progressive block of MPs, "maybe a coalition government could be just
as bad."
Really? Despite my differences with their
generally pro-market
policies, I applaud the Green Party for raising the issue of coalition
politics in the election, which I overheard discussed in more than one
student bar. Of course, the effectiveness of any form of
"coalition-ish" government would depend on the composition of the
coalition, and especially public pressure. Medicare, federally
legislated under a Liberal minority with the NDP holding the balance of
power, comes to mind.
Municipally, Canada has seen left-wing
labour-community formations
including Communists and socialists, like COPE in Vancouver. Allende's
Chile was a coalition including Communists, as are many of Latin
American's contemporary anti-imperialist governments. Those coalitions
reflect militant struggle on the streets, campuses, and workplaces. A
powerful and broad People's Coalition on the streets could germinate a
parliamentary expression, and move Canada in a fundamentally new
direction.
This is a serious issue for anyone who seeks a
better world, and
asks what might create revolutionary conditions that would open a path
to socialism. It's serious for anyone who wants to defeat Harper and
the corporate agenda, because we are not going to see the resistance
come from parliament or by electing the Liberals; it will come from the
broad people's struggle.
Given that youth can be a radical and dynamic
force for change,
nobody should celebrate the lower youth vote. Not voting essentially
votes for the incumbent. Youth should vote for the candidate who most
closely represents their class interest. In fact, had youth voted
en-masse, it would be unlikely that Harper's Conservatives would be
returning to power with 16 new seats and less than a two percent
increase in their popular vote.
Even though Student Vote had more private
schools participating
than ever before, and voted for a (very weak) Harper minority, it still
gave the NDP 66 seats, and the Greens 25 percent of the popular vote.
That's a good argument for lowering the voting age to 16. The
Communists received, on average, five percent.
Still, if youth are now ideologically cynical
towards elections,
what then of the Obama phenomenon? Rather, isn't the low youth vote a
reflection of the failure of the mainstream parties to put forward real
alternatives for young people's concerns? And what confidence should
youth have in our voting system, which desperately needs some form of
proportional representation - or even the entire capitalist system,
which today offers a bleak future of debt and financial crisis?
To be sure, the corporate media's election
debates included many
"youth issues" - youth crime, the arts, and climate change. Just before
the election, Conservative MPs issued a taxpayer-funded flyer demanding
police "get tough" against "young thugs" which would increase the
already disproportionate numbers of youth of colour and Aboriginal
youth in jail.
When announced, the platform plank to lower
the Young Offenders
Act to age fourteen drew widespread public anger. The Bloc correctly
pointed out that jails were "a university of crime." In his acceptance
speech, Harper refrained from mentioning this proposal in French. The
warm sweater was swept away exposing the Harper Conservatives'
dangerous anti-people agenda, and raising tactical problems for the
right-wing. (I expect this proposal will now temporarily disappear into
the dark crypt where Tory policy wonks live in vampire's coffins.)
Still, the large opposition parties did not
project a real
alternative. The NDP were relatively quiet about creating good quality
jobs for youth, despite today's manufacturing jobs crisis. Their
proposal for raising the minimum wage was below the poverty line. What
about police racial profiling? And how seriously can we take their
demand for tuition reductions when they are increasing fees in Manitoba?
I challenge any party to go ahead and steal
this idea: abolish
tuition fees. This is exactly the type of issue that would engage young
people. Our reality is that youth unemployment is rising, young
workers' earnings are falling, and murders of Aboriginal youth and
youth of colour at the hands of the police are becoming a common
occurrence across Canada.
Take Alwy Al-Nadhir, a young high-school
student, shot last
Halloween at age 18 by the Toronto Police. Or Michael Langan, a
17-year-old Métis who died shortly after being tasered in
Winnipeg by
police this July. Or African-Canadian Freddy Villanueva in Montreal,
shot by police this August (the Ligue de la jeunesse communiste du
Québec has prepared a music video of a recent demonstration
against
police brutality, at http://www.Youtube.com/ycltube).
Did you hear their names mentioned during the
TV debates? Who is apathetic here?
Harper's criticisms of the arts also
explosively exposed their
anti-people agenda. However, funding for physical culture, especially
women's sports, and emerging young artists was largely absent from the
debate that followed. Likewise, only market-based solutions were
presented on global warming.
In short, the scope of proposals by the big
parties on youth
issues was superficial and narrow. On many issues important for young
people - military recruitment on campuses, two-tier contracts, or
access to education - the corporate media silence was, generally, not
broken.
Here is a big challenge for all progressive
youth and student
forces: to break that media black-out, confront the failures of the
corporate parties to speak to youth, and unite young people behind a
fighting agenda - all the more urgent, necessary and possible given
today's systemic crisis of capitalism.
(Johan
Boyden is the General Secretary of the
Young Communist
League of Canada. The next issue of PV will carry an assessment of the
economic crisis, and its implications for youth and students.)