babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Toronto Pride funding in danger - here we go again!
November 22, 2010 - 1:03pm
It might be the same battle as last year but it's a different battlefield. There are new councillors and there is a new mayor and executive committee that are probably more willing than the previous ones to let this get to council.
It's amazing what a small grassroots group can do, scare some people so badly.
Go, QuAIA!
I'll be intrigued as to how (and if) social conservativism will trump fiscal conservatism, given that the extra taxes paid always outweigh the money the city, province and the feds give to it. Plus, does Ford really want to beat up small businesses (bars, restaurants, B&Bs)? I can see this being a fight that will be Kristyn Wong-Tam's calling card, given that she's been perfectly clear on where she stands on QuAIA. She makes a fight of this, the seat's hers for life, win or lose on the vote itself.
While there is a pro-Israel lobby, I don't think even the most myopic observer can deny there's a streak of homophobia about this issue. More than a few homophobes are leaping on the pro-Israeli government bandwagon as cover for their own prejudices.
Yeah I thought that too, edmund. When Tim McCaskell talked about will Nuit Blanch be under this same scrutiny, I thought that was a good point.
And Pride brings at least tens of millions of dollars into the city, what with visitors spending money on hotels, restaurants, taxis, food, booze, etc. The amount the city grants to Pride, compared to those other dollars makes it a fiscal non-issue.
And Wong-Tam will rock this issue. Unlike her predecessor, Kyle Rae.
It looks like Rob Ford had a meeting with the major cultural institutions and events the city funds, including Pride, telling them that funding wouldn't change for them this coming year but with no guarantees as to what would happen after that.
Actually I don't think this issue would be a vote winner for KWT. People that are vested in this issue are already supporting KWT. There are lots of people in the Church-Wellesley community who are not particularly supportive or anti QuAIA, but wish the issue would just go away so they can have their party. Taking a vocal stand (I mean more than just a "clear/firm stand") on this may alienate the large number of otherwise not very political queer voters.
This new crowd at city hall may just defund pride anyway, just because it is too much fun.
When they were trustees Pasternak and Matlow tried hard to get the TDSB to ban the Shepherd's Graddaughter and Three Wishes because the books were deemed critical of Israel.
So expect Pasternak and Matlow to push hard on QUAIA and on any other Isreal related issue they can come up with.
The issue of funding is important and I believe that QuAIA is just not being strategic. Its the name that rankles. Why play into it? I agree with Ellie Kirshner from NOW, why not have the same goals with a name change say "Queers against the Israeli occupation" or something similar? It would stop the matter dead in its tracks.
I'm with MCsquared here, with one caveat: How about "Torontonians Against Israeli Apartheid"? I think that would be more strategic, certainly more inclusive.
First, as someone who has been involved with organizing IAW, there's no fucking way I'm going to let the opposition decide on the terms and discourse available to me. The only way we will placate them is if we completely neuter ourselves, and this movement isn't going to roll over and do that because the opposition is telling us to. Fuck that shit, the reason why people get so upset about "the A-word" and about BDS is precisely because it's effective. The apartheid analysis and BDS are our most effective weapons - it's no wonder that the opposition wants us to disarm. Why do you think people get so upset about IAW? It's because it's remarkably effective.
Second, apartheid is a perfectly legitimate term, a term defined in international law, which is from what I can gather the most accurate term to describe the situation in all of historical Palestine - the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and within the '67 borders of the Israeli state. The apartheid analysis is very important, because it conveys the reality that Palestinians are oppressed within Israel as well. The word occupation implies that everything is hunky-dory within "Israel proper" and the only problem is the military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza - something which just isn't true.
I disagree, I think QuAIA is one of the most important groups on the Canadian left these days. By applying a radical queer analysis to Israeli apartheid, it both counters the pinkwashing of the Israel lobby (which gets especially absurd when groups which are close allies of the likes of McVety are trying to tell queers what their politics should be), and challenges apolitical "we just want to party" attitudes within the LGBT community.
Pasternak "won" with 19% of the vote.
Yes I do. And as long as people stick stubbornly to a name that most folk react negatively to, QuAIA will remain a fringe group whose message will not be listened to.
Sorry, genstrike - I was kidding. It was a bad attempt at a jab. MCsquared wants to change the name of QuAIA - by eliminating the word "apartheid", because that's what drives the Israel lobby and their champions into a frenzy. I said, "Good idea - let's tell the world that all of Toronto is against Israeli apartheid!" See? Bad joke.
Of course I agree with you. Damn the internet. I should have included a sarcasm emoticon.
Then I think you're naive. As long as they're an "anti-Israel" group ie an organization critical of Israeli actions and supportive of Palestinian rights, the Hasbara lobby will argue that they should be denied a "platform" at any event funded by the city.
I think it is terribly revealing that the online survey being conducted by Toronto Pride's Community Advisory Panel only identifies a single named group and questions whether or not it should be allowed to participate (part 2 of Question 9 "Queers Against Israeli Apartheid should be allowed to participate in the Pride Parade - Strongly Agree/Agree/Disagree/Strongly Disagree/Don't Know or Not Applicable").
I think it is terrible too.
I know! I was a little upset by that as well. Clearly the agenda is to drive them off.
I knew unionist was kidding. I hoped others did too :)
Of course the problem with public consultations via the internet is the tendency for them to get freeped. (The comments to this story in Xtra are pretty revealing).
Yikes,! "Jew haters"?
Incumbency is all-powerful in Toronto politics, though. I can't see any way KWT is going to be levered out, unless something happens to totally discredit her (which I find very difficult to see). The anti-KWT crowd threw every piece of 'dirt' they could at her, and it still didn't work. I think most of the Chan vote will go to KWT next time round, and she'll defeat her challengers in 2014 with ease.
Oh, looks like I am the first one reporting this. (How come the Torontonians themselves are asleep at the wheel... I guess being a Central Canadian Overlord is very, very tiring... LOL)
Toronto report finds "Israeli Apartheid' does not promote hatred
Perhaps you could send us a weekly digest of events so that we could remain focused on extracting wealth from our Western and Maritime vassals?
Le T.... I would love to control the flow of information --- that way you will won't have a clue until IT happens!
Thanks for the bump, bagkitty.
Proud of Toronto Campaign (Facebook page)
Levy Urges Jewish Leaders To Press City To Defund Pride Toronto
http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/Levy_urges_Jewish_leaders_to_press_ci...
wow, whart a whack load of haters replying to that article.
...think I will go have a middle of the night shower to wash the stench off of me.