The World at Home
Letter from the Editor
Having spent almost my entire life in Metro Vancouver, aside from a semester at the LLC and a few summers spent in the interior working at summer camps, I have seen much of the change Vancouver has gone through since receiving the Olympic bid. I remember when Vancouver first won the right to be Canada’s bid for the 2010 games – beating out Quebec City and Calgary. I was sitting in my computer class at Don Christian Elementary in Cloverdale when an announcement came over the PA system to notify all of us concerned 11-year olds. I remember letting out a gregarious eruption along with the rest of my grade 5 class.
I’ve seen countless infrastructure projects built that would have never occurred otherwise. I’ve seen the property values of homes in Metro Vancouver increase dramatically, increasing the wealth of all Vancouver residents fortunate enough to not be renting. I’ve also seen a strong backlash by several Vancouverites against the games – the largest contingent upset that Vancouver’s homelessness problem was not being addressed strongly enough.
To straighten a few facts out, Metro Vancouver – Canada’s largest city on the West Coast, has a homelessness rate of 12 per cent of one per cent (0.0012%). Los Angeles County, the largest U.S. city on the West Coast, has a homelessness rate of 70 per cent of one per cent – or about six times the level of homelessness seen in Vancouver. To be clear, one homeless person is one too many, but decide for yourself if Vancouver’s homelessness rate is the epidemic it’s often portrayed as.
While valid criticism of anything is healthy, as a third generation Vancouver resident I believe criticism of the Vancouver Games should be reserved for those of us that call Vancouver home. I have no patience for carpetbaggers. For those of you who desire to undermine the strong majority of Vancouver-residents in favour of hosting the Games (nearly two-thirds), I’d prefer you or your parents paid tax dollars to our municipal and provincial and governments for a few years first. If you believe you have the right to tell us where our tax dollars should be going, pay some.
To those of you onboard with the games, let’s enjoy ourselves as much as possible.
Go Canada,
John Hennenfent
Editor-in-Chief
23 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
John,
Have you actually taken the standpoint of telling all students who currently or previously attended Trinity from out of the province or country that their opinion about the Olympic games (or anything else that has the potential to affect Vancouver’s economy and community) DOESN’T matter (unless of course, it coincides with that of the majority – right or wrong)? NEVERMIND the fact that we play a part in stimulating BC’s economy (both through paying tuition to Trinity and paying for the cost of living). Are we not allowed to love the city we call home and have a concern for its well-being? While students might not currently be adding to your beloved government’s tax revenue, I’d recommend you don’t discount the potential they have to do so in the future, and watch the exclusive attitude you’re apt to portray through sentiments such as this – those “carpetbaggers” might be a bit less likely to call Vancouver “home” in the future.
Sincerely,
H. Retka
Former Carpetbagger
Comment by Haley — February 4, 2010 @ 5:56 PM
I would try to offer a response here, but I’m still not clear on what you’ve said. Here’s my best guess:
It sounds like you’re taking a shot at those who question the sense of hosting these games in light of some of the social issues that need addressing. It sounds like you’re particularly going after your non-Canadian fellow students, who you seem to think have no right to an opinion. Finally, it sounds like you’re defending the level of homelessness in Vancouver, despite your assertion that “one homeless person is one too many.” If that’s true, then why bring it up?
The issue of hosting the Olympic Games is a complex one, particularly for people of faith. Perhaps seeking to understand those whose opinion differs from yours would be less divisive than simply dismissing them out of hand.
Comment by Mike Todd — February 4, 2010 @ 6:28 PM
John,
What I say I say with all the sincerity in my heart.
I am glad that you have had an opportunity at education. I am glad that you have had the chance to experience private school. I am glad that you have the opportunity for your voice to be heard. I am glad that you have somewhere to live and still have money to eat. I am glad that you do not have to sell your body to make ends meat. i am glad that you do not commit crime to support yourself. I am glad that you are not driven to drugs to numb out the experiences of your childhood and other parts of your life. I am glad that you have grown up with these priviledges. I really am. But I caution you, who much has been given, much will be expected. If you wish to discount the input of others who may have experienced differently from you I would suggest that you get a job then when you pay the rent that costs you most of the money you made at that job and have to line up in food lines for food daily, maybe you won’t be so quick to underestimate the challenges of hiked taxes, costs of living and property costs, or underestimate the challenges of those homeless and less priviledged than you have been. Take the time to make friends with someone who faces these challenges, hear their voice, then maybe you won’t be so quick to dismiss the experiences and challenges of those around you.
Just a thought
Comment by Jacynta Pittaway — February 5, 2010 @ 9:35 AM
Shame on you John for referring to homeless people as CARPET BAGGERS????
As the body of Christ we are expected to love and protect the homeless.
Jesus loves the poor and if we want to strive to be more like him we are compelled to love the poor also.
Yes one homeless person whether it be in Vancouver or L.A. is one too many,but if you can not bring your self to help them you can at least stop bashing them.
Jen’s Kitchen,Rehab Ministries and the Salvation Army to out every Friday night into the back alleys of the Downtown East Side to feed the homeless.
John I publicly challenge you to come out with us some Friday night and you will see that these CARPET BAGGERS are human begins who have unique stories as to how they have ended up in poverty.
You will see faces not stereotypes or satistics!!!
John you will get an experience and an education that you can not buy at any university.
I hope to see you soon.
Jen Allan
Comment by Jenniofer Allan — February 6, 2010 @ 1:19 PM
John,
I would like to invite you to re-write this editorial in the next Mars’ Hill- complete with the other side of the story and a humble apology. I too am a carpetbagger, all the way from Colorado- paying A LOT of money to your government supporting their decision to host the games. Perhaps at the heart of the Olympics lies values that seek to unify the world, celebrate the personal accomplishments of athletes from across the world, and attempt to inspire greatness in all of us. But has this ideal not been polluted by greed, selfishness, pride, and a whole lot of money? I have no problem with someone enjoying the Olympics, but not in the La-Z-Boy recliner of ignorance and naïveté, and certainly not from the platform you have as editor-in-chief. By all means, do sit in your nice home and enjoy the games with your friends and family. But please, do not dismiss the fact that there are people around you experiencing this life and these Olympic Games differently. They at least deserve acknowledgement and a voice if you are going to suggest that “homelessness is not the epidemic it is portrayed to be.” I challenge you to walk down East Hastings and look people in the eye, ask them about their experience. Perhaps you will have a different response as you hear stories of people being kicked out of the hotels they called home so owners could do renovations for the Olympics and give the world some idea that the downtown eastside is not the shame of the city.
I will say “Go Canada,” when the widow and the orphan are viewed as more of a priority than ensuring that the athletes have ample entertainment during their brief stay. Cheers to the widening gap between the rich and poor as wealthy Vancouver homeowners celebrate their increased property value while the rest of us consider becoming ‘carpetbaggers’ elsewhere.
Thank you for your consideration.
Emma Strobell
Comment by Emma Strobell — February 7, 2010 @ 1:26 PM
Jen, I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that I was referring to homeless people as carpetbaggers. The term ‘carpetbagger’ stems from Reconstruction following the Civil War, and today commonly refers to any outsider that attempts to influence another location’s public affairs. It is not a derogatory expression for homeless people.
-JRH
Comment by John — February 7, 2010 @ 1:29 PM
John
There are so many things wrong with this editorial.
First of all, if you think that the only people who have a the right to criticize the games are those who have paid into it, then you are talking about all Canadians: http://www.vancouversun.com/Sports/Olympics+bill+tops+billion/1207886/story.html. Over 6 billion dollars so I think we all have a right to speak into what is happening this month. Yet aside from who is paying, the games will only be in Vancouver this month. In four years it will be somewhere else and those of us who criticize the games see this as a global injustice. The fact of the matter is that the International Olympic Committee has no national allegiance so I don’t know why criticism of their actions should be relegated to those in close proximity to the games.
Second, you say “To be clear, one homeless person is one too many.” Well in that paragraph you were not being clear at all. Where did you get this percentage and in what capacity does it make sense to compare Los Angeles to Vancouver on the basis that they are the U.S. and Canada’s biggest west coast city? Why not Portland or Seattle, who have similar population bases. It is widely known that Los Angeles is one of the epicenters of homelessness in the United States, a country with a much larger population than Canada. I can appreciate your rationale but only in the capacity to make Vancouverites feel like the problem in the city isn’t so bad.
Well John it is bad. How about comparing Vancouver to itself? According to this site (http://intraspec.ca/homelessCanada.php#Vancouver) Vancouver’s total homelessness rate has risen 137% since 2002. It isn’t like the city is improving, to be fair there has been an increase in funding to BC housing to get people off the streets but it is unclear if that is going to last post games. Vancouver’s housing market is volatile and it is one of the least affordable in the world (http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2010/01/26/consumer-home-affordability.html) and it is hard to believe that the government will maintain affordable housing in this climate. The mere fact that there is likely to be more homeless people than athletes participating in the games is a discouraging factor (http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/05/28/Homeless1/).
Aside from the issue of homelessness there are numerous other issues like infringing on civil liberties (http://www.kelowna.com/2010/01/25/anti-games-activists-drop-suit-over-bylaws-restricting-protests/), exploitation of unceded territories of first nation peoples and environmental concerns (even though the Suzuki Foundation gave them a bronze). These are issues that should not be marginalized.
I suggest watching “Five Ring Circus” where you can see Vancouverites such as the mayor of Burnaby expressing their criticisms, which according to your standards should be the most valid. I think those of that are “onboard with the games” are either ignorant or apathetic to the problems that the games present. I can understand supporting athletes but not at this expense.
Comment by B. Mason Judy — February 8, 2010 @ 2:04 PM
iiiiii O feeling the heat there John however carpet baggers?!!! And have you even owned a home? Have you even been out of Canada? Do you realize that the Olympics is impact everyone! Positively and negatively and we’ll be paying off this crazy game thing for years while others get to go back to their own provinces? Yes I get that you edit my articles and have control of what is printed from me but John, carpet baggers. Be careful what you write next time!!! Holy smack. I know there’s a thing called un-biased journalism but I was very offended with what you wrote.
Comment by Erica — February 8, 2010 @ 10:45 PM
And, FYI, those who aren’t from Vancouver originally, such as MYSELF, are proud and happy that the Olympics are in Canada. We will be cheering loudly.
Comment by Erica — February 8, 2010 @ 10:53 PM
Ohh I am sorry John
This article is so poorly written that I thought you were trying to referring to the homeless as Carpet Beggers.
John if this is the best job you can do,you really need to step down as Chief in Editor.
With your education and privilege,maybe you should take a writing course at UBC and then once you have your 18 year old prejudice views in check,then maybe you can write an article that we can all understand.
Jen Allan
Comment by Jen Allan — February 9, 2010 @ 8:21 AM
John,
How dare you undermine the struggles, pain and injustice that many of our neighbours go through every day. This is an epidemic, clearly, as B. Mason Judy stated, since homelessness has risen by 137% since 2002. Not only so, but you cannot compare Vancouver to Los Angeles. Vancouver has a significantly less population size and a completely different climate. Comparing Seattle and Portland to Vancouver might be more suitable since the climate, general population size and the rate of homelessness is quite similar. However, both Seattle and Portland have made considerable progress in providing housing for the homeless. In 2005, Portland introduced a 10 year action plan to decrease homelessness. By 2006, they surpassed their goal of housing 160 people (in that year) to 600 people. Clearly, our municipal, provincial and federal governments are not addressing this issue of Vancouver’s homelessness effectively.
I am a carpetbagger from Edmonton, Alberta, and being from this great country we all call home, I feel that I can form and voice my opinion of the Olympics, with in reason. While I support the Olympic games for the international cooperation and unity, I cannot support the injustices that have resulted not only from the Winter Olympics 2010, but past Olympics as well. I think its an international shame, that an event that is to uphold international cooperation and unity is (directly and indirectly) causing the spread of injustice around the world. While I am by no means a scholar in homelessness in Vancouver or of the Olympics, I have seen the state of the DTES, met the people who call it home, and will see the repercussions of the Olympics.
I am disappointed that our Editor-in-Chief of our university’s newspaper, the voice of the students, is representing us in this way. Not all of us are completely against the Olympics nor we completely for it. John, next time, ask what the students they think, do some valuable research -take a walk down East Hastings on a Friday night and talk to those who endure these injustices everyday- then write an editorial for our newspaper.
Callie Cochrane
Comment by Callie Cochrane — February 9, 2010 @ 8:10 PM
I invite you to meditate on the parable of Lazarus at the gate of the rich man (Luke 16:19-31), and reconsider your article in the light of it. Based on this article, I don’t believe you are at all sincere in your comment that one homeless person is too many.
Aaron
Comment by Aaron — February 11, 2010 @ 3:08 PM
Erica and all,
Maybe you should get your facts straight and learn how to read properly before you jump all over an editorial. You all are acting like a bunch of post modern fascists. Oh how terrible of John to point out that our homeless rates are lower than Los Angeles. How dare he!
John was merely asking us to put some things in perspective. But it’s true, you all are right, it’s best to squash anything that brings about open debate on important and relevant issues. I parallel your reactions to people who are intolerant of religion. The sad thing is that in this case, you think it’s justified.
I am intolerant of all your opinions.
You are ignorant.
Comment by Fergus — February 12, 2010 @ 3:04 PM
Ridiculous Fergus. Utterly ridiculous. Who is squashing anything? The people responding to this are saying they disagree with the editorial. It is wrong to disagree? Is it wrong to express that, in a comment section designed for that? Doing this makes one a “post-modern fascist” (an absurd designation, but that’s beside the point)? Honestly? And then you proceed to engage in precisely the thing that you call ignorant, dismissing the opinions of others, “squashing” open debate. I fine with you saying what you say, having the right to say it, but I will also feel free to call nonsense nonsense. Insults, while you are free to spew them, do not make for the informed debate you affect to cherish.
Yes, rates are lower than LA. Posters have pointed out reasons for this. But even if there were no reasons, John’s message is mixed. He says that one homeless person is too many, but the rest of his article is about how homelessness here is really not that bad, not worth getting so upset about. I contend that it is he who does not understand the issue, nor has it affected him too deeply. And why would we wish to compare ourselves to LA, which is a disaster in terms of social housing and policy? I parallel this reaction to saying the following: “Well, at least we’re not as bad as Mexico City in terms of pollution.” This is not our standard, particularly if we follow Jesus.
Comment by Aaron — February 13, 2010 @ 8:12 PM
Fergus, I completely understand your point. It’s great to say thought-provoking points, even if they’re not PC.
However, the points in this case didn’t really make sense. He compared the homeless rates of two cities with a massively different population…
Also, the “carpetbaggers” comment was a tad ridiculous because its not just Vancouver paying for the Olympics, but all of Canada, and even people from the states who are paying into Canada’s economy. Also, it was a great stretch to think that only people from outside of Vancouver disliked having the Olympics there.
So, I agree that its good to hear interesting stats, and that we shouldn’t be offended by stats that say the homelessness rate isn’t as high as we might think, but this was just poorly executed. (And pretty offensive for an Editor to say, especially for a school that is generally very good about helping the homeless in Van, as well as made up of people from many different places…) This editorial was a bold move, even if it was poorly executed, offensive, and a bad representation of our University.
Comment by J — February 14, 2010 @ 4:53 PM
J – homeless rates were used – as in per capita – not total. So a population disparity isn’t an issue here. Thank you for your interest and comments. Some good debate here.
-JRH
Comment by John — February 14, 2010 @ 5:48 PM
Guess what everyone?
CANADA WON A GOLD MEDAL!
Comment by Nicole — February 14, 2010 @ 7:10 PM
Boo! i dont want to celebrate a gold medal. noone should celebrate a gold medal for canada til every bum on hastings has crack in their pipe. also boo to free concerts. these olympics suck
Comment by Patrick — February 14, 2010 @ 8:20 PM
I live on Hastings and I love the Olympics
Comment by John Doe — February 15, 2010 @ 1:02 PM
Guess what. I am a Christian. So for those who just bashed us and called us ignorant can all be quiet. I have been working with homeless and the poor for over ten years. This is a pointless debate. No one is going out and doing anything about it are they? So unless you are I think you should all ignore this ignorant piece and move on.
Comment by Erica — February 15, 2010 @ 1:56 PM
Great column.
At the very least it’s great for being aggressive and pushing back. I love articles in the Mars Hill that exhibit point of view. Point of view is interesting, eminent and far more important than columns that summarize the debate from both sides.
Good for you John, you’ve got a legitimate point of view– I say understand the criticisms, change if you want but continue to share your views.
Comment by Steve Benjamins — February 16, 2010 @ 8:37 AM
Also you shouldn’t rewrite anything, apologies are way to pacifying. It’s the mars hill, not a corporate or government publication.
Comment by Steve Benjamins — February 16, 2010 @ 8:40 AM
I agree that the article should not be rewritten. It is important for the mind-set of power and privilege, a general philosophy which forms the basis of much Western Thought, to be publically declared, and not kept secret. This way it can be more effectively critiqued and judged.
It is also important that this is coming from a Christian publication, representing a Christian campus. The Church is far from immune from the allure of power and privilege, and its attendant mind-sets, so it is good to have this out in the open. Again, it is an instructive read for those who think power and privilege in the Church is a grave danger.
My earlier call for John to reconsider his article in the light of poor Lazarus was for him to do so privately, not to do a rewrite.
Comment by aaron — February 17, 2010 @ 10:55 AM