SOAS motions on Msex Phil campaign and Censure of Wes Streeting, NUS president

Two motions at SOAS UGM this Friday.

2. Save Middlesex Philosophy

Proposed by: Alexej Ulbricht
Seconded: Shanti Ulfsbjorninn

This union notes:

    2.1    That on April 26th Middlesex University executive decided to close its Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy (CRMEP), and in the course cut all philosophy programmes, undergraduate, postgraduate, and MPhil/PhD;

    2.2    That CRMEP is one of the most important centres for the study of modern European philosophy in the English-speaking world, and is well known for its social and political engagement;

    2.3    That philosophy is the highest research-rated subject at Middlesex, with the RAE rating 65% of its research as either ‘world-leading’ or ‘internationally excellent’;

    2.4    That the MA programme in philosophy is the largest of its kind in the country, with 42 students admitted in 2009;

    2.5    That as such, the department also generates a substantial amount of revenue for the University, currently contributing close to half of its total income to the University's central administration;

    2.6    That despite all this the Dean for Arts and Humanities, Edward Esche, has stated that the reasons for closure where simply financial, and that the department made no ‘measurable’ contribution to the university;

    2.7    That a ‘Save Middlesex Philosophy’ campaign has been formed to oppose the closure;

    2.8    That this news follows a whole string of announced cuts around the country: at UCL, at Kings, at Westminster, and elsewhere;
 
 --

This Union Believes:

    2.1    That there is nothing to justify the closure of CRMEP;

    2.2    That this is a foreboding sign of the kind of pressures that are going to hit Arts and Humanities subjects, if even a university’s most prestigious department faces the axe;

    2.3    That taking action against these measures is fundamental to defend the quality of Higher Education not only at Middlesex, but nationwide;

    2.4    That allowing a precedent of this kind paves the way for further cuts to be implemented in other institutions;

    2.5    That the SOAS academic tradition has always been at the forefront in Arts and Humanities, and is as such incompatible with cuts of this kind;
 
 --

This Union Resolves:

    2.1    To formally support the Save Middlesex Philosophy campaign;

    2.2    To support every form of action that students at Middlesex are going to take against the announced measures;

    2.3    To send a letter to Dean Esche, voicing our opposition to these plans;

    2.4    To circulate the petition to save Middlesex philosophy in the next Union email;

2.5 To mandate the Students' Union executive to lobby the School to express its opposition to the damaging measures taken by Middlesex management.

==============
5. Condemn Censure at National NUS Conference

Proposed By: Elly Badcock
Seconded By: Symeon Brown

 --

This Union Notes

5.1  That Durham University Union Society planned, in March 2010, to invite the British National Party to a formal debate.

5.2  That the National Union of Student’s LGBT Officer and Black Student’s Officer wrote a letter to Durham Student Union requesting that they cancel the debate due to both the danger posed by inviting fascists onto campus, especially to black, LGBT, disabled and women students, and the NUS No Platform policy which they are mandated to campaign for within Student Unions. They stated in the letter that if the debate was not cancelled then they would organise a protest alongside Unite Against Fascism

5.3  That Durham Union Society cancelled the debate.

5.4  That Durham Union Society argued that the letter was threatening because of the line “if students are hurt around the event, responsibility will lie with you”.

5.5  That the signatories pointed out that this line was in reference to the statistically proven link between the BNP organising in an area and the rise in hate crime and violence.

5.6  That, subsequently, a campaign was staged at Durham to disaffiliate from the NUS, with a referendum voting narrowly for disaffiliation.

5.7  That at NUS National Conference 2010, a motion of censure was brought against both the Black Student’s Officer and the LGBT Officer, and was passed only against the Black Student’s Officer.

5.8  That Wes Streeting, current NUS President, as well as six other NEC members voted for this censure, and that the censure passed by exactly seven votes.

 --
 
This Union Believes

5.1  That wherever fascists organise in an area, hate crime and violence rises.

5.2  That fascists threaten the very right of black, LGBT and disabled students to exist and are extremely misogynistic.

5.3  That the BNP are a fascist organisation seeking a veneer of respectability, but that their comments belie their true fascist nature. Speaking about the Holocaust, their leader Nick Griffin stated: “I have reached the conclusion that the‘extermination’ tale is a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie, and latter [day] witch hysteria.” On the subject of the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence, he said: ““Everyone down there knows he was notorious for taxing kids for their dinner money and he was a drug dealer. According to many people within the Metropolitan police, he was killed by another black – not a white racist attack at all.”

5.4  That fascists are not welcome in our Student’s Union.

5.5  That the Black Student’s and LGBT officers were right to request the cancellation of the debate, and to organise a protest.

5.6  That censuring a Liberation Officer for anti-fascist work sends out an extremely dangerous message that will be seized by the BNP as evidence that they are a legitimate party.

5.7  That censuring a black woman and not a white man for the same actions is disturbing at best.

5.8  That the censure of the Black Students’ Officer and attempted censure of the LGBT Officer gives the false impression that the NUS and (therefore NEC) does not support our liberation campaigns and their officers.

5.9  That these false impressions, if not corrected, have the potential to damage the organisation further, up to and including discouraging participation from Black and LGBT students and constituent members like ourselves who represent a high proportion of students from these campaigns.

5.10 That the Liberation Campaigns (Black students, Women, LGBT and Disabled students) are autonomous and should be mandated by and answerable to their members.
5.11 That it is shameful for seven NEC members to vote for this censure.

5.12 That the NUS must take a strong, anti-fascist stance and actively defend the case for No Platform.

 --

This Union Resolves

5.1 That we have no confidence in Wes Streeting and the NEC members who voted for the censure.

5.2 To pass a motion of censure from SOAS Union against Wes Streeting and said NEC members.

5.3 To call on the NEC to release a statement which re-affirms its support for the No Platform policy of the NUS

5.4 To call on the NEC to further include in this statement a re-affirmation of its support for both the Black Students’ Campaign, LGBT Campaign and all liberation campaigns

5.5 To affiliate to and continue our work with Unite Against Fascism

5.6 To implement a No Platform for fascists policy in SOAS Union

Petition to Save the Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy, Middlesex University

Just quickly, (I'm going to add my own thoughts to this post later in the day), here's the petition to sign. It has nearly 5,000 signatures already

The abrupt closure of the Philosophy programmes at Middlesex University is a matter of national and indeed international concern. Not only does it flatly contradict the stated commitment of Middlesex University to promote 'research excellence', it represents a startling stage in the ongoing impoverishment of Philosophy provision in the UK.



Planning for the resistance meeting today at 3pm at the Trent Park campus. See the facebook event HERE

Can Spivak speak? Radical philosophy conference this Saturday

Power to the People?

Saturday 9 May 2009, 10.00am–6.00pm

Birkbeck College, Malet Street, London WC1

‘Power to the people!’ was once a revolutionary slogan, but reference to government by the people and for the people has long been an empty cliché of the post-revolutionary status quo. Numerous alternatives have been proposed: the proletariat, the workers, the masses, the soviets, the the nation, the community, the multitude, the commons... And now? How might we assess the different conceptions of political change embodied in these often conflicting ideas? What is the political and philosophical significance of ‘the people’ and related terms today?

Programme

9.30–10.00 Registration

10.00–10.15 Introduction (Peter Hallward, RP)

10.15–11.30 The General Will (chair: Peter Hallward, RP)

'The General Will on the Street: Parisian Activism, Sovereignty and Power, 1789–93'

David Andress (Portsmouth)

'How Do the People Make Themselves Heard?’

Sophie Wahnich (CNRS, Paris)

11.45–1.00 Class, Commons & Multitude (chair: Esther Leslie, RP)

‘Can We (Still) Break the Vicious Circle of Domination?'

Daniel Bensaïd (University of Paris-VIII)

'Crisis, Tragedies and the Commons'

Massimo De Angelis (University of East London)

1.00–2.00

Lunch break

2.00–3.15

Urban Collectivities (chair: David Cunningham, RP)

'Urban Intersections and the Politics of Anticipation'

AbdouMaliq Simone (Goldsmiths)

‘Reflections on the Post-Political City: Reclaiming the Polis?’

Erik Swyngedouw (Manchester)

3.45–5.00 Population & Biopolitics (chair: Stuart Elden, Durham)

'Biopolitics, Diasporas and (Neo)Liberal Political Economy'

Couze Venn (Nottingham Trent)

'Feminist Strategies Revisited – Sexopolitics, Multitude and Biopolitics'

Encarnacion Gutierrez Rodriguez (Manchester)

5.00–6.00 ‘They, the People’ (chair: Peter Osborne, RP)

Gayatri Spivak (Columbia University, NY)

Tickets £10 students £25 waged

Advance registration from: RP conference, Peter Osborne, School of Arts and Education, Middlesex University, Trent Park campus, Bramley Road, London N14 4YZ.

Cheques payable to ‘Radical Philosophy Ltd’. Inquiries: matt.charles@blueyonder.co.uk

Tony Cliff, an inspirational leader.

“Intellectual toughness does not mean dogmatism; grasping a changing reality does not mean vagueness. Our criticism of orthodox Trotskyism was conceived as a return to classical Marxism.” – Trotskyism after Trotsky

http://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/

I'm not doing nothing, honestly...

As you are well aware, recently I have been trying to do 'nothing', especially activism.

Pondering upon this, whilst trying to do my essays, I have discovered that not only is doing nothing practically impossible (ie how on earth can an activist switch off completely?) but, also, philosophically/biologically it cant be done. Has anybody ever written on this subject? Perhaps Alan Badiou? I would be interested to read.

Nothing, even in its state of being a big fat zero, is still doing something; not only to itself in whatever form it is ie lying on the piece of paper or being spoken out aloud, but also to the thing that receives said information; the person, animal, mineral etc. The point being that it hits the senses is one way or another.

To do nothing is to still to consume; oxygen for example, is still to interact and transform the material world around us; oxygen into carbon dioxide, and, to do nothing is, therefore, always doing something. We, as individuals, are never ever free-floating; we participate in the material world around us whether we like it or not.

All I can say is, in the words of my son, 'i not doing nuffin' forever...

Long live optimism.

Just found wikipage that explains how to do something nothingly but...

Derrida-the infinite search

Click here for short obituary article on Derrida

Spectres of Marx

...Of Grammatology