Re: “Cuts and an inconsequential conversation” (Jan 29)

Abraham Moussako’s latest article “Cuts and an inconsequential conversation” is an example of the tired and monotonous intellectual sludge which has come to define his contributions to the McGill Tribune.

In his article, Moussako claims he hoped this year would be free of past turmoil. He then goes on to state that these hopes have not been fulfilled, seemingly ignorant of the fact that this year has been extremely quiet in relation to the 2011-2012 academic term.

Even the Daily Publications Society (DPS) referendum has been nearly unanimous, without an official “No” campaign to even put up a fight. It seems like right-wingers on campus are asleep, so perhaps this is why Moussako has chosen to write the same article about “campus radicals” numerous times this semester.

Yet, Moussako constantly misrepresents the “campus radicals” he seems fascinated by. For example, he attempts to portray strike supporters as naïve pawns of the Parti Québécois (PQ), when in fact many did not support the PQ, and had no illusions as to what they would pursue while in power. Moussako may not trust my observations on the “campus radicals,” but he should, as he’s thrown me in with this mysterious group in a previous article of his.

Moussako goes on to poke fun at the reaction of the “campus radicals” to the PQ’s cuts to university budgets, though he admits that their protest calling on administration to go on strike was largely “satirical” and “ironic.” He claims that “formal student and campus organizations thankfully responded with more coherent expressions of dismay,” but fails to mention exactly what these expressions were. Due to this, he leaves it up to the reader’s imagination, and I cannot regard joining ModPAC as any sort of example of coherency.

Additionally, Moussako focuses on Arts Senator Jimmy Gutman’s response to the news that one hundred arts classes will be cut, portraying it as one which represents the entire group of “campus radicals.” Moussako would do well to actually speak to these individuals as opposed to assuming Gutman accurately represents them in any way.

Finally, Moussako calls the response of the “campus Left” to the cuts in classes “predictably nonconstructive.” Maybe so, but has there been a response from anyone else? Is Moussako an art critic who has never painted before?


  1. Tee hee.

  2. This article could have said something proactive instead of attacking another campus journalist.

    How embarrasing.

    • I apologize for not having the time or resources to launch a “proactive” lawsuit.

      I find opposing misguided ideas which are printed in a public fourm to be “proactive” enough, though I don’t need qualification to send in my thoughts anyways. Also, note that this is a “Letter to the Editor” and not an article.

  3. 2-4-6-8 organise and swag the state

  4. UnderTheCobblestones

    “Is Moussako an art critic who has never painted before?”
    “I never realised that to become a jockey you needed to be a horse first.” – Arrigo Sacchi
    Forza Milan!

  5. Passing Observer

    A response like this leads me to believe that either Moussako’s points hit home, or that Mastracci is remarkably thin-skinned.

  6. Davide Mastracci is clearly one of those egotistical, entitled left-wing imbeciles with a false sense of moral and intellectual superiority. He has contributed absolutely nothing to any meaningful campus discourse but intends to create hype with his inflammatory, poorly argued, pieces. He, along with those other hippies in the McGill Daily (e.g. Shannon Palus, Ethan Feldman, Christina Collison), have served to disrupt and destroy the peaceful atmosphere that normally characterizes McGill University. He is an embarrassment to all of campus journalism because his “monotonous, intellectual sludge” serves to lower the IQ points of everyone who reads his articles/pieces by at least 20 points.

    To address this letter in particular, Mastracci only criticizes Moussako to the extent that this piece cannot even be classified as one which engages properly with the original author’s material. His arguments are largely ad hominem attacks on Moussako’s journalistic capabilities. As a previous commentator said on the McGill Daily, Mastracci is one of those ‘poster boys of leftist propaganda, masquerading as journalism’, and he clearly lives up to his expectations with this sorry excuse for a piece of English writing. He vehemently criticized the Bull and Bear (in a piece he wrote in the McGill Daily), but in an act of hypocrisy, now works for it. As a student in the University of Toronto, I am proud that I chose to reject McGill because clearly, people like Davide Mastracci are the reason that campus journalism over there is going down the toilet.


    Stanley James Ashford

    • DavideMastracci

      He doesn’t even go here!

      • Quiet you foolish child! You are the reason that campus journalism at McGill is rotting in a heap of cockroaches. You have not even responded to my comment because you know deep down that everything I said was the truth. Egotistical megalomaniacs like you deserve to have their evil communist agendas flushed down the toilet.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *