* VIGIL outside Senate House
* Thursday 12th February
* 5 - 6pm
* Bring your own light!
CUSU (posted by Voluntary Slave) | 03.02.2004 15:01 | Education | Cambridge
CUSU (posted by Voluntary Slave)
Indymedia
Publish your news
Radio
FAQs
View all posts
Resources
Workspace
General Activism
Cambridge Action Network
People and Planet
East Anglia Social Forum
Local Community
Just Living (ethical guide)
Mill Road Social Centre
Keep Tesco Off Mill Road
We're All Neighbours
209 Radio
Green
Cycling Campaign
Critical Mass
CUECS
Transport 2000
Stop Stansted Expansion
Anti-war
Cambridge Campaign Against the Arms Trade
CamPeace
Students Against the War
Women in Black
Cambridge Amnesty
Animal Rights
Animal Rights Cambridge
Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty
Trade Justice
Baby Milk Action
World Development Movement
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World
Other UK IMCs
Bristol/South West
London
Northern Indymedia
Scotland
www.indymedia.org
Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video
Africa
Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia
Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela
Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney
South Asia
india
United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester
West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine
Topics
biotech
Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech
Comments
Hide the following 20 comments
This is pretty lame...
03.02.2004 17:39
You hold vigils when people die in wars and stuff; not when the government wants to introduce top up fees. When the government wants to introduce top up fees, you for example occupy buildings and refuse to leave them... You don't stand outside them holding little candles..
Anita
A vigil?
03.02.2004 17:46
m
go to it then
03.02.2004 17:52
hammy
Organise it myself?
04.02.2004 00:23
https://www.headporter.com/display.php?section=cms&uni=1&module=index&page=206
m
Agree, and what is more...
04.02.2004 09:41
However, it wasn't till AFTER the 1000 pound tuitition fee had been introduced that the boys and girls decided that, yes, maybe there should be student union busses down to demonstrations and even then mobilisation has been pretty minimal - stretching at best to a couple of hundred people, which at best is a fraction of the number actually gaining CV points by 'representing' people.
In all of my experience with CUSU, this gaggle has primarily excelled in timidity.
Anita
Tell you what....
04.02.2004 12:36
So please, please, don't suggest that they have more time than you, it's just silly.
More seriously, FACT (funding and access campaign team) would apreciate suggestions as to how to do things better, and how to motivate people to come on these demonstrations. Please email fact@cusu.cam.ac.uk with any ideas you have.
I admit that the vigil idea might seem silly, but considering we've already done marches, sit ins, big noises, lobbies, etc., it's hard to find something different.
And for people who are complaining about lack of impact - which was the last protest you were on that helped to get the governments majority down to 5 votes?
Liam
e-mail: ljow3@cam.ac.uk
No more ideas about what to do?
04.02.2004 15:20
Oxford: http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/oxford/2004/01/284430.html
Germany: http://www.education-is-not-for-sale.org/
Let's be serious. I have spent years in the CUSUcracy circles, and the issue of the sabs and executive being overworked is always the first excuse. For some reason effective campainging and mobilizations is ALWAYS at the bottom of their priorities, and there is never enough time for it. The only president who followed and created a very effective campaign was Tristan Jones that launched the rent strikes: He did find time, presumably because he prioritised it.
It is political timidity, a paper-shifting attitude to their job, poor time managment and prioritisation and cluelessness when it comes to building grassroots movements that makes them ineffective. Not other overwritting priorities and overload.
m
Could we have a clue, please?
04.02.2004 17:15
You've used the word timid again? The idea of them being paper-pushing (What exactly does this mean?) seems a bit odd, but I'm curious as to what you mean by timid.
As for clueless when it comes to building grass-roots activism, perhaps you're right - Could you give us a clue? As far as I'm concerned, far too much time is put into ineffectively trying to build up support from students. i assumed the failure was due to apathy, but if we are doing something wrong, please let us ( fact@cusu.cam.ac.uk) know.
P.S. Am aware of the oxford action, and am pleased it went well. But, to be fair, we get more than 50 people at CUSU's actions (and that's just from 1 uni), so I'm not sure it's a damaging comparison.
P.P.S. If you really want us to have an oxbridge rivalry going, take a look at
http://www.ousu.org/system/systempages/file/265/file/awp.pdf and
http://www.cusu.cam.ac.uk/campaigns/blairrich/hefunding_whitepaper.pdf
Liam
money is more powerfull than death
04.02.2004 17:39
9000
did someone die?
no. just a bunch of students lost 9000
fuck off
translator
Comparisons
04.02.2004 20:36
Nothing against your current action, but you got permission from your university authorities to occupy the building. The most controversial thing you did was light candles. At Oxford the whole thing was against university regulations start to finish. Maybe there were less people there, but at least it meant a lot more.
A. N. Other Student
True but....
04.02.2004 20:43
Liam
Apathy?
05.02.2004 14:24
Well we (CamSAW) managed to realise a (non-authorised) occupation of a university building without the participants even knowing where they were going, with police and proctor escort (let alone having the warm feeling that nothing bad is going to happen to them). This was at the beggining of the anti-war campaign, which would only affect people 6000 miles away, and at the time when it was not yet mainstream to oppose the war. It is not a question of apathy but ability to mobilise.
Timid: it is the attitude that says that while most poor people will effectively be excluded from HE we should still behave like we are having a civilised debate with polite people. The documents that you presented above (from CUSU and OUSU) are a good example: they assume that it is mere logic and argument that will make us win the campaign. While this is necessary it is unfortunately bargaining power, effective mobilization and disruption that makes a difference in practice. The animal rights protests are an unfortunate example of this: not logic but constituant power makes a difference.
Always yours, Manos
m
C'est pour toi que tu fais la revolution
05.02.2004 17:48
If God existed, I would be very tempted to say "amen" to this.
d. cohn-bendit
Can we politen the tone here then?
05.02.2004 19:01
As for the argument over timidity, the reason that the lines you've pointed out have been persued is not, as far as I can see it, down to people being scared. Instead, it is two-fold: firstly, it is a complex debate (much more so than, say, the war), and there is a need for a thorough rational backing to any action. Secondly, disruption is unlikely to be effective here as with the animal rights protests. Essentially, they won because it would cost the university too much money to protect people against them. The potential for the university to make money here would outweigh any disruptive costs.
(NB: I'm not suggesting direct action's crap - It is a great tool and it has its places. But within this debate it can only really be used for (a) publicity and (b) as a means of expression. But both are unuseful without large numbers.)
Oh, and one more response (I'm really sorry aobu this long-windedness) - the new legislation will undoubtedly get more poor people into HE, i.e. it's not the case that "most poor people will effectively be excluded from HE".
Liam
Now I understand
05.02.2004 21:33
Now, this comment leaves me speechless.
This goes against any logic (that more people will be coming here if they think they will have to pay. Particularly from poorer backgrounds), and any experience (where is it that fees widened access? Harvard? Yale?). If you count as HE the university of Luton, that might end up not charging as much as Cambridge (questionable) maybe. We will definitelly not see more people from the three lowest social categories having better access to Cambridge, Oxford or the other top ones. (For the situation today see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3313687.stm)
Let aside the pressure that debt will be putting on further choices: pursuit of post-graduate studies, careers in less well paid jobs (rush to the city of London) or the ability to buy a house or get further loans. Dept is basically slavery: since all your further choices are conditioned by it.
A subtle argument: I do not think so. When Greece and Spain, quite poor countries compared to Britain, can afford to provide free education at all levels, I cannot believe that you cannot get it here. Or to put the question differently: how many studentships could the cost of each bomb dropped in Iraq support? When was the cost of the war (aside the link to terrorism and WMD) an issue? How many state subsidies has the arms industry got in the last 10 years? These are just examples that I am personally aware of because of my campainging. It is not therefore a question of cost but priorities: Bombs and Fees is Blair's choice.
But at least now I understand why you guys are not bothered enough to properly mobilise against top-up fees. If you think they might not be that bad!
m
it seems less like timidity...
05.02.2004 22:04
It seems that you are arguing that the reason Cambridge students are not getting more angry about the top-up fees debate is not that they are timid, but that they either don't really care too much about fees (apathy) or that they are unclear about the merits of the anti-fees argument. I don't think that the fees arguments are too much more complicated than the various pro- and anti-war arguments were, it's just that there are fewer people articulating a range of possible political choices that can be made; in fact, so far there have been only two real options put forward: the Blair option ('we need to charge fees to be fair to the poor', a masterful piece of classic Blairite strategy), and the Rebel option (more revenues should come from general taxation, and the rich should foot the bill). The fact that Blair has responded to this option by saying (to paraphrase him) that the rich will simply hire better accountants and cheat the state out of any additional tax revenues, and that therefore the UK has (presumably) hit some sort of absolute limit of income extraction from the upper classes, seems to me to be quite ludicrous. That there might be additional options (stop pouring cash into a militarist grand strategy and devote it to education instead) seems to be not on the agenda.
A few questions for you:
Do you think that there is any pattern to the worldwide assault on public education, health services, etc?
Do you think that direct action only succeeds because of monetary disruption, or is this only one reason among others (such as the assertion of effective physical control over a piece of the earth's surface)?
Do you really think that the Blair plan, which destroys the principle of a single publicly funded system, is going to benefit the poorer sectors of society in the long term? That is, what do you project will happen ten years from now if Blair gets his way?
Finally, and this goes to M as well: why do you think that it matters if poor people go to Cambridge?
daniel
Yeah, well..
08.02.2004 00:52
Since the end of the 1990's, there has been a spectacular failure to build a strong (dare I say militant?) student union tradition in the UK. Primarily, I blame the student Union leadership for this. Christ knows why the NUS didn't call for a general (1000 pounds)fee strike a few years back ("ca- ca- ca-reers??") - CUSU (my local union) didn't - because it would be illegal. And that would be difficult. And there were other things to think about. Careers and stuff.
The point is that many students just in general believe organisations like CUSU will stick up for them. And so they don't want to 'strike', because CUSU doesn't support it (i.e. hasn't made a little book about it). You can talk all you will about 'why' Cambridge student don't support X, Y or Z - fact is that the position of the union they have elected to represent them has a lot to do with it. Timidity does, I fear, breed apathy.
It is quite probable - as someone pointed out on this site - that the 'historical task' of 'students' in this particular epoch is to provide a 'managerial class'. This, it seems to me, would be one of the best reasons to start kicking up a stink anyway. The debates on access are often centred around the idea that 'everyone should have a fair chance at cracking the whip', or: 'it's OK that we have inequality in society, just as long as there is some equality in university access for people who are clever enough'.
Thing is, if student can't even be arsed to 'do something' when their direct financial interests in becoming part of the 'managerial class' are jeopodised - well, when the hell can they??
Anita
im not surprised
09.02.2004 21:35
If you look at the anti war movement in the universitys it is in most cases 1 - 2 years behind the anti war movement in the towns and schools and sixth forms! Cambridge university for example has a pitifull rag of an anti war group, that has gone and called 1 meeting all term. This is during a period where radiclisation over the war is huge. Where people should be planning to give tony blair a thrashing, and its going on outside of the universitys but there has been a real vacum within the political spectrum in the universitys.
Cambridge university had rubish meetings that wern't involiving or inspireing but had people who were so up themselves that they would only involve people if they waved there hands arround in the right way. Looking at this to the background to the situation its not surprising that the mobilisations against fees were crap.
And on the student unions how can you expect anything from them. Come on, theres nothing political about there leadership at all, ben brinded suposedly was ellected as being "non political" and then hes the one that people wan't to run a political campain. Just forget it. He made a speach where he said this is not about blair its about the state of our universitys. Well actuly it is about blair, its a blairite policy pushed by a blairite govenment. When thatcher was closing the mines people didn't go arround saying it's not about thatcher its about our mines, fuck of did they it was all maggy maggy maggy out out out.
Tution fees are the epitomy of blairite policy so they must be attacked from a political perspective. And to do that you have to make political links, to the other things that blair has done; war, privitisation etc. and also you must fight this as a neoliberal policy, without challeneging the ideas of the market andneoliblisim you are hitting blair with a rubber hammer.
This reqires a mass movement with meeting of people on the ground orginisng arround political ideas, like the anti war movement, not a bunch of students listening to what mandy telford has to say, and lets face it its crap, the day before the vote she was canvasing for the labour party, and she spent the day of the vote in the pub. What a fuck wit we have to have people that talk the talk on the ground, but they canna arse about cos theve gotta be on the ground they have to walk the walk as well.
ed
e-mail: ed@wide.eu.org
Homepage: http://www.wide.eu.org
OK, Ed, calm down
28.02.2004 17:51
daniel
Quick, quiet correction
29.02.2004 17:53
Oxford