By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In Montreal, a group calling themselves “Robins of the Alleys,” dressed as Santa and elves, stole groceries from a supermarket, intending to distribute the food to the needy. The group released a statement explaining the act as a protest against the rising cost of living and the perceived profiteering of grocery chains. Metro, the owner of the supermarket, condemned the act as a crime, citing various factors influencing prices, including retail crime. Despite the ongoing investigation and the supermarket’s charitable contributions, the group highlighted their cause with a festive message.
Read the original article here
Santas and elves rob Montreal grocery store to ‘give food to the needy’ — now that’s a headline that grabs you, doesn’t it? It’s the kind of story that makes you do a double-take, a mix of amusement and a little bit of, well, rebellion, I think. And the fact that it keeps happening, and that people are actually *cheering* about it? That’s definitely something that should make you think.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t just about a few rogue individuals. It points to a deeper societal issue. There’s a palpable frustration, a feeling that something’s not right when it comes to basic necessities like food. The sheer audacity of the act – Santas and elves, for crying out loud! – almost feels like a performance, a deliberate jab at the system. It’s like a modern-day Saturnalia, a time of festive chaos where the established rules get playfully overturned.
And that’s why this isn’t just about the act itself. It’s about the context. Grocery prices have been climbing, and we know that major chains have been caught price-fixing before. These events aren’t happening in a vacuum. It’s a response to a situation where people feel squeezed, where the gap between the haves and have-nots seems to be widening. It’s a spark that might just ignite the flame.
Now, I understand that stealing is, generally speaking, wrong. However, there’s a point where you have to look at things differently. If someone is stealing to survive, or to help others survive, it presents a very different moral dilemma. Some would say that, from a moral standpoint, condemning survival is itself condemning life. It’s tough, because you don’t want to encourage a free-for-all, but you also have to consider the very real plight of people struggling to put food on the table.
Of course, some raise the point of how it can hurt the very people the “Santas” are trying to help. Closed stores mean job losses and can create “food deserts” where there are no nearby grocery stores. This is a legitimate concern. But at the same time, it is easy to say that if large, profitable stores, often at the behest of their investors, are choosing profit over the needs of the consumer, then something is deeply wrong with the system.
And then there’s the question of who’s really to blame. Someone in that supply chain is making a lot of money, more than is reasonable for basic commodities, and that’s the real target here. What about the begging at checkout lines? It’s a sad state of affairs when you’re being asked to donate to a large store’s cause. Why aren’t these stores doing more themselves?
We’ve seen similar actions before, like the San Francisco suicide club. There’s a history of protest through acts of creative expression, and this seems to be another example. Some would call it “badass,” and point out how it would align with Jesus’ teachings, or at least, how he might react if he were around today. This, after all, is a society that, at least in some circles, is ready to “deck your halls” in response to this, while at the same time some are begging, “Won’t someone think of the billionaires?”
It makes you think about what constitutes a crime in the first place. Is it always wrong? What happens when a person’s ability to survive is at stake? The moral landscape gets really gray, really quickly. It also brings the potential of an increase in food prices. Stores need to recoup their losses. This, though, only fuels the fire. It’s a tough situation for everyone involved.
And, of course, the people in charge aren’t helping. What’s the response? Price increases from disruptions in the global supply chain, volatility in commodity prices, changes in international trade conditions – and retail crime. But they’ve been caught price-fixing before. It’s a vicious cycle.
So, where does that leave us? With a story that’s far more complex than it first appears. It’s a story about desperation, inequality, and a system that some believe is failing. It’s a story that highlights the ever-present question of what is right, what is wrong, and, perhaps most importantly, what we are willing to do about it. When you see it, you didn’t.