Election is in the air and once we are done debating about service issues the discussion will turn to the vision for the future of our soon-to-be robust city. But who is going to provide the vision to get us there? The inclusion of youth and their perspectives are an integral part of the future of this city. It is inarguable.

This became an increasing central discussion early this past summer at the Winnipeg Youth and Winnipeg City Summits. Mayor Katz made this assertion in a large part of his last election platform and it’s sure to be included this time around as policy is rolled out.

But early on in this civic election it seems that the only youth perspective, at least seen, are the ones that market candidates. Those squeaky clean versions of a troubled inner-city youth turned Christian rapper and an athletic female curler are nothing more than PR tools, akin to sentinels of dialogue, that diffuse potential criticism.

After all, who would dare question a candidate’s commitment to inner-city youth when they have an inner-city success on their team? Who would dare raise questions about an April incident involving female Olympic athletes and a certain - feeling like Hugh Hefner - comment when one has a young successful female athlete on their team, diffusing any potential blowback? The funny thing is that these public relation campaigns have more to do with hip-factors and youth cool personas to buy young votes and manage internal fears than to actually address youth issues.

To make a point I, begrudgingly, wish to reflect on the well-flogged issue of critical mass, this past summer’s ‘new black’ of civic dialogue. This reflection is not because of issues like bicycle safety, or alternative transportation are important (though they are). It is the perplexing public and political reaction that was taken against these individuals that tells a story about Winnipeg’s democracy and future. If the goals of critical mass are bicycle safety, transportation issues, and inclusiveness then they are not at all egregious to the concept of the healthy city envisioned by our leaders. In fact our mayor said just the same thing in his last election pamphlets when he envisioned “Expanded pedestrian and bicycle-rollerblade paths … and ‘green paths’ for people to make their way home after work or to access major public transit junctions.” I’m sure this position hasn’t changed.

What makes the critical mass issue so perplexing is the fact that dialogue has changed from discussion around these issues to the tactics of critical mass, to the detriment of civic dialogue. The PR machines would make it seem like the police, paramedics, traffic and the mayor have all been held hostage by a small band of leaderless anarchists, and many who do not consider themselves anarchists, who want nothing more that to topple our civil liberties because they have decided to take a hour and fifteen minutes, on one planned day a month, to make a point about how our roads, and not just the condition of them, have become one of the more problematic issues in our city. And to add to this civil disrespect they won’t take out a pass or show a map of where they are going. These, as well as the previously mentioned celebrity campaigners, are in my opinion chicanery.

Critical mass is a perfect indication that Winnipeg’s youth are willing to step up and be part of this city. It shows a vested interest by youth for their community in a society that preaches that youth do not care, because they don’t vote.

Civil disobedience is what liberal democracy thrives on, what created it, and what made movements like the civil rights movement so important to the fabric of nations. The pitched nature of confrontations makes it unclear if Winnipeg wants to listen to the opinions of youth. A simple cursory look at other movements shows that not having an equal voice in society usually predicates this sort of disobedience.

Despite its detractors, the rise of new ‘legitimate’ bike demonstrations like SPIN and a renewed public dialogue in broader society, these ideas are now on the agenda more than ever. This wouldn’t have happened without these youth taking the risks that they did. These actions are simply the product of leadership in Winnipeg’s liberal democracy.

Winnipeg’s youth want their voices heard, and some are willing to risk personal, physical and financial harm because they believe in what they are trying to achieve. There is nothing violent about this. It is active citizenship and the results are democracy in action.

Despite Mayor’s Katz’s distain for the tactics, critical mass participants have engaged issues in an election that could have been mute. That would have been sad for Winnipeg in more than one way. Thankfully the inaction of our mayor helped to enact a couple parts of his vision for Winnipeg, and just in time for the election too. His vision includes, “to put the immense energy and idealism of our youth into action” and “youth are the energy, vitality and future of our community. A strong and vibrant Winnipeg will harness this energy and give our youth a sense of pride and ownership of their neighbourhood.”

With a hype-filled civic election unfolding and given that in the last three years the city has gone from a sense of renewed optimism to having to defend itself against Globe and Mail articles that portray Winnipeg negatively, it seems like a good time to realize that Winnipeg’s future is at a very real crossroads. The question is: Are our supposed leaders going to simply continue the romantic prose of a dynamic, creative and progressive city found in their think tanks, focus groups, branded idioms and election platforms or will they move to the hard part? Action. The City’s youth have started to figure this out. Hopefully our appointed leaders can find a way as well.