“Not exactly,” says Isabelle. “Tat’s a com-
plicated question.” And then, slowly, a few people say yes. “People who break the law could be show-
ing that the law was wrong,” Audrey begins. “I saw a documentary on the weekend,
about Indigenous rights and how the Cana- dian government and the oil and gas compa- nies wanted to put a pipeline through their land,” Cleo shares. “So the Wet'suwet'en peo- ple put up blockades.” Te moments when protestors have bro-
ken the law to advance social justice begin to spill out. People protesting a dictatorship. Rosa Parks and the bus boycott. Women fight- ing for the right to vote. Highways shut down in support of Palestinians. Te lunch counter sit-ins as a strategy to fill up the prisons. “Tere was a time when I wouldn’t have
been able to go to the same school as Ivy, or use the same washroom, or drink from the same water fountain,” says Kora. Te gravity of this question is sinking in. “I know someone who is in a bad situa-
tion and lives outside on the street. Tey will do something illegal, especially in winter- time, so that they’ll be arrested and put in prison with food and a bed,” says Sachi.
“Ok then, how about the January 6 riot-
ers?” I ask. “Tey thought that the 2020 U.S. election was rigged, they wanted their votes to count and make a difference, and a bunch of them definitely broke the law while at the Cap- itol. So, what’s the legitimate criteria for break- ing the law? What counts as ‘good trouble’?” “I’m a strong believer in science and facts,”
says Ivy pointedly. Indeed. Te 67 lawsuits claiming widespread election fraud were all dismissed or dropped and followed quickly by defamation cases against Trump and his allies. Evidence matters. Others point out that intent to uphold or
to take away human rights also matters. And, most importantly, whether protestors are tak- ing part in non-violent civil disobedience. “Some of the rioters on January 6 wanted to hurt other people. Tey did hurt other peo- ple,” says Audrey. We near the end of our discussion with
a quote from Banksy’s book Wall and Piece: “Te greatest crimes in the world are not committed by people breaking the rules. It’s people who follow orders that drop bombs and massacre villages. As a precaution to never committing major acts of evil it is our solemn duty never to do what we’re told, this
is the only way we can be sure.” Finally, we circle back to Isabelle’s remark: “It’s a complicated question.”
A STARTING POINT, NOT A STOPPING POINT
My teacher candidate Simon has been re- flecting on the significance of our graffiti alley. “Students had ownership of this proj- ect – they discovered that every one of them had the ability to create a beautiful piece of art with deep meaning,” he says. “Te buzz of excitement and discovery as students pulled out their phones to scan the QR codes and the echoes of excited conversations as new learning took place were inspiring. What struck me was their deep understanding of what was happening. Te medium was the message, and it created the circumstances for an inclusive, expressive, relevant piece that students were so proud of.” Banksy writes, “When you go to an art
gallery you are simply a tourist looking at a trophy cabinet of a few millionaires.” But here, in this tiny little hallway – this place feels different. n
David Stocker is a member of the Elementary Teachers of Toronto.
ELEMENTARY TEACHERS’ FEDERATION OF ONTARIO 25
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
