BRmfflllBRAByofPOLmCAl s Ecomc sum 18JBfl199o mF A LTHOUGH Union has adopted the new constitution, Adams, of course, still regards us as acting under the old constitution—which makes any interpretation of the state of the present union structure an extremel}' complex one. Additional complications came when the Judge, who was also,confused by the two constitutions, was pressured to throw into the Order he was making the condition that Union Council hold elections under the old Constitution in return for the release of the second sum of £750 on Tuesday, January 25th. Unfortunately, Union Council were not informed of this fact until two or three days later and after having already expended ;a considerable portion of the money in salaries, thus placing themselves in contempt of court unless they then held said elections. Elections previously called under the new constitution had been screwed up by the Returning Officer (who shall not be named) and have had to be delayed by a further ten days. Union Council were therefore faced with either a "sell-out" to the old constitution or the prospect of a period in jail. At present they are fighting a desperate rearguard action to return the position to before the Court Order on the grounds, that (a) they were not aware of the conditions attaching to the Order, (b) they are in no position to hold elections under the old constitution since they are not mandated to by Union, and ORTERS, cleaners and kitchen staff were understandably bemused by recent events in the School although they kept their cool despite much provocation. Efforts were made before the occupation to explain to the various stall' at the School what students were doing and why they thought it necessary. Reaction was generally good, particularly since the stafi' are usually the last to be consulted on any aspect "of School life. We did create a lot of extra work for them which donations, help, etc., cannot really repay, and we owe—particularly to the porters—a debt of gratitude for their forbearance and good humour. . In struggles for freedom, it is uniortunate that rarely does physical combat involve the oppressors and oppressed—those who wield power and those who wish to destroy it. The first line of defence for the oppressors is inevitably those who one would least wish to fight (in our case, the porters). Thus it isn't the senior academics, or even the lowly junior ones, who stand in line protecting the senior common room from being stormed by the rabble; they do not chance injury and abuse defending their own bastion of privilege. Instead they call in the porters to do the dii'ty work and to i-isk the unpopularity of students. And porters are forced to fight off invaders into sacred terri-toi'y which they are themselves not otherwise allowed in. No matter how sympathetic they may personally be, the porters have to obey the commands of their class-enemies. So in most other instances (as in Ireland) a working-class army fights a working-class populace in defence of the privileges of tho.se who sit back and pull the strings. The lily-white puppet-masters have nothing to lose, one side is played against the other, and nobody wins. So stand up, administrators, academics, governors and Ministers, we'd like to take on the real enemy. Whose questions? MNION SHOP have available a large number of essays for those who are only prepared to give standard answers to standard questions. All such essays are freely distributed, but it would be appreciated if people would also contribute their own efforts to the essay library. Participating in this exchange seems to us a useful way of protesting at the present educational system and of releasing time and energy to studying more important matters -—after all, why should we waste our eflorts answering questions already answered ad nauseum by other students ? If, as is possible, your tutor challenges the essay as not YOUR answer, simply respond by telling him it is not your question either. St. Clements Extension and the Clare Market buildings was Florrie's coffee bar! Similarly, the School is negotiating for the Smith building, not to increase student facilities but to build a better library ! They are doing this so that they can proudly boast the best social science library in the world (but what about the worst student accommodation ditto?). Nor will the .space released help us very much. Students are fifth on the list of priorities for this extra space ! So it is clear that the union will have its hands full fighting for the rights of students and that, as the title to this piece suggests, autonomy is not the beginning of the end but the end of the beginning. NEASDEN SOC. IJNIVERSITIES have deve-loped as centres of political activity not because of the 'social conscience' of students but largely because of the opportunities that they provide for political debate and practice. All political tendencies are represented in students' unions, in varying strengths, and union meetings are arenas for political activists to sound off against each other. No other institution (apart from trade unions to some extent) provides such a forum for debate and activity. There are many people in society apart from students who are interested in politics and whose outlet at present is within certain well-defined tendencies such as the three big political parties and a host of small ones. But membership of these tends to stifle debate rather than to encourage it. Lines have already been worked out and criticisms of theory lead to splits and expulsions. But why can't local organisations be set up on an inter-party basis with members whose only qualification is an interest in politics, a concern for society, no matter how conventional or weird ? Then perhaps LSE and UCS would be joined by Neasden and Knotty Ash. VICTIMISATION r is not anticipated that individuals wilt be singled out for retribution while the present struggle continues since even Adams is not daft enough to invite escalation of such magnitude as to bring the School crashing down around his ears. This doesn't mean, however, that certain people won't be up for the "chop." Adams has always had a nice little line in dealing with refractory elements ever since he put the finger on unco-operative library staff in University College, Rhodesia (believed to be still in detention if not already having jumped out of eighth-storey windows during interrogation). He will probably bide his time, nursing his grievances, until the summer vacation and then quietly suspend, refuse to readmit, fail, injunct, or otherwise prosecute those whom he no longer loves. And students will return to a fait accompli; to an issue as dead as last year's mutton. These are the hard facts of life in a white-liberal society. They don't shoot you, they simply bury you alive. S.C.R. Principle or Tactic BEAVER, Feb. 3rd, 1972—Page Three the Sunday night of the occupation over 100 members of Union decided to hold a general assembly in the SCR. The SCR had been a focus of interest and discussion throughout the weekend. To many of us it represented, if only in a symbolic form, the hierarchy that exists in the school and the cla.ss nature of society. However, whether it was tactically correct to attempt to take it over was another matter. TABLES Having moved up there a long discu.ssion followed as to what our next move should be; should we "declare" the SCR open to all members of the ''community" ? Should we move the SCR tables downstairs into our refectoi-y in the hope of creating some interest in the student body ? Or should we withdraw our forces all together ? Eventually it was decided to sleep there on Sunday night and to move the tables downstairs but to hold the UGM there on Monday where the decision on future actions would be taken. GUARDED The UGM was the largest we have had this year. The SCR was obviously of interest to the students, and a motion was overwhelmingly carried to declare the SCR open to everyone. On Tuesday the dooi's were locked and guarded by two porters and enti-y was gained only by a firm assurance that one was a member of the Academic staff ; our assurance that we were members of the "community" was obviously not enough and our place was firmly ''Downstairs." We do not want to take over the SCR—we want to use it. Porters, refectory stalT. secretaries below a certain grade, library staff below a certain grade and all undergraduates are barred from using these facilities. This decision was taken by a "democratic" vole amongst the academic staff. What kind of a democracy is it which takes a decision to exclude a certain section of the community when this section's interest is not represented on the voting body ? AUTONOMY The issue of the SCR may appear to be a side-track from our main struggle—the light for an autonomous union, but this kind of analysis fails to recognise what the struggle of the constitution is about. Fighting for an autonomous students' union is not an end in itself but a means to an end. We are attempting to create a "space" for ourselves within the school in which to manoeuvre and attempt to foiTn a strong militant political union. Moving into the SCR is not a principle, it is not a question of moral rights or wrongs—it is a tactic. PRIVILEGES This is not to say that by moving into the SCR we are making inroads into the authority struc- ture. Forcing our way past porters and holding hostile discussions with the staff does not constitute an attack on the system but it is questioning this system in a concrete manner. By forcing the authorities to protect their privileges we are demystifying and exposing the "liberal" underpinnings of the school. In this sense the SCR is a tactic for an autonomous union. It is a concrete demonstration of our rejection of a system where the teacher and the taught are segregated, where large sections of the school have no democratic say in the running of the school. We are attempting to form an awareness and an understanding of the nature of the university and the role it plays in society. MARY BOS. THE END OF THE BEGINNING OF THE END ANY students see the struggle for an autonomous union as an end in itself, whereas it is in reality the means to an end. In themselves, autonomy, freedom, democracy, mean nothing, they only afford the means whereby people can express themselves fully ; they enable free development. The SocSoc "line" has always been that the role of students' unions (and of all other unions) is to act as an organised force in the interests of their members. We, as students, have certain aims not ^catered for by academic or administrative bodies and to some extent antipathic to them. These should be represented by Our own union. But the old LSE union cannot represent the interests of its members because it is created and controlled by those whom it most often opposes. It is rather analogous to a trade union which is controlled by the employers—and is every bit as useful. As long as Union owes alle.gi-ance to the Court of Governors it can never be more than a welfare organisation and this is one of the main causes of the apathy and frustration of its members. So it is obvious that Union must be autonomous. But what are we going to do with this autonomous union? Once we have our means, what are our ends? Among the ends is certainly the demand for better facilities for students. W^ know that present facilities are such that if more than 600 students turned up on any one day the system would break down. So it appears that it is in the interests of the School that the present situation alienates five-sixths of the students and keeps them away; The authorities tell us that they can't provide more facilities because of • shortage of space. Yet the only net gain to students from the opening up of Academic cought talking to peasants in the Senior Common Room. WILL THE REAL ENEMY PLEASE STAND UP j>ORTERS, cleaners and kitchen staff were understandably bemused by recent events in the School although they kept their cool despite much provocation. Efforts were made before the occupation to explain to the various stall' at the School what students were doing and why they thought it necessary. Reaction was generally good, particularly since the stafi' are usually the last to be consulted on any aspect "of School life. We did create a lot of extra work for them which donations, help, etc., cannot really repay, and we owe—particularly to the porters—a debt of gratitude for their forbearance and good humour. . In struggles for freedom, it is uniortunate that rarely does physical combat involve the oppressors and oppressed—those who wield power and those who wish to destroy it. The first line of defence for the oppressors is inevitably those who one would least wish to fight (in our case, the porters). Thus it isn't the senior academics, or even the lowly junior ones, who stand in line protecting the senior common room from being stormed by the rabble; they do not chance injury and abuse defending their own bastion of privilege. Instead they call in the porters to do the dii'ty work and to i-isk the unpopularity of students. And porters are forced to fight off invaders into sacred terri-toi'y which they are themselves not otherwise allowed in. No matter how sympathetic they may personally be, the porters have to obey the commands of their class-enemies. So in most other instances (as in Ireland) a working-class army fights a working-class populace in defence of the privileges of tho.se who sit back and pull the strings. The lily-white puppet-masters have nothing to lose, one side is played against the other, and nobody wins. So stand up, administrators, academics, governors and Ministers, we'd like to take on the real enemy. Whose questions? MNION SHOP have available a large number of essays for those who are only prepared to give standard answers to standard questions. All such essays are freely distributed, but it would be appreciated if people would also contribute their own efforts to the essay library. Participating in this exchange seems to us a useful way of protesting at the present educational system and of releasing time and energy to studying more important matters -—after all, why should we waste our eflorts answering questions already answered ad nauseum by other students ? If, as is possible, your tutor challenges the essay as not YOUR answer, simply respond by telling him it is not your question either. St. Clements Extension and the Clare Market buildings was Florrie's coffee bar! Similarly, the School is negotiating for the Smith building, not to increase student facilities but to build a better library ! They are doing this so that they can proudly boast the best social science library in the world (but what about the worst student accommodation ditto?). Nor will the .space released help us very much. Students are fifth on the list of priorities for this extra space ! So it is clear that the union will have its hands full fighting for the rights of students and that, as the title to this piece suggests, autonomy is not the beginning of the end but the end of the beginning. NEASDEN SOC. IJNIVERSITIES have deve-loped as centres of political activity not because of the 'social conscience' of students but largely because of the opportunities that they provide for political debate and practice. All political tendencies are represented in students' unions, in varying strengths, and union meetings are arenas for political activists to sound off against each other. No other institution (apart from trade unions to some extent) provides such a forum for debate and activity. There are many people in society apart from students who are interested in politics and whose outlet at present is within certain well-defined tendencies such as the three big political parties and a host of small ones. But membership of these tends to stifle debate rather than to encourage it. Lines have already been worked out and criticisms of theory lead to splits and expulsions. But why can't local organisations be set up on an inter-party basis with members whose only qualification is an interest in politics, a concern for society, no matter how conventional or weird ? Then perhaps LSE and UCS would be joined by Neasden and Knotty Ash. VICTIMISATION r is not anticipated that individuals wilt be singled out for retribution while the present struggle continues since even Adams is not daft enough to invite escalation of such magnitude as to bring the School crashing down around his ears. This doesn't mean, however, that certain people won't be up for the "chop." Adams has always had a nice little line in dealing with refractory elements ever since he put the finger on unco-operative library staff in University College, Rhodesia (believed to be still in detention if not already having jumped out of eighth-storey windows during interrogation). He will probably bide his time, nursing his grievances, until the summer vacation and then quietly suspend, refuse to readmit, fail, injunct, or otherwise prosecute those whom he no longer loves. And students will return to a fait accompli; to an issue as dead as last year's mutton. These are the hard facts of life in a white-liberal society. They don't shoot you, they simply bury you alive. HEAVER. Feb. 3id. 1972—Page Four STUDENTS, KNOWLEDGE and STRIKERS 'THE present miners' strike is the first national coal strike since 1926. Then, students provided scab labour, today, however, they are playing a supportive, albeit minimal, role by donating" cash, joining pickets, providing accommodation and expi'essing solidarity. But how is the change in our practice towards workers' struggles reflected in our understanding of them ? How are we to relate the knowledge of other people's struggles to our own and vice-versa ? To ask such questions is to implicitly challenge the academic concept of knowledge where learning is divorced from the need to know and knowledge itself is to be absorbed rather than used. As students we should be concerned to understand our own inadequacies produced by living and working \\ ithin a system of "education" which manufactures distorted consciousness and represses true understanding of historical events. The follov/ing is the first half of an essay originally entitled ¦The General Strike : Some Preliminary Remarks." It attempts to grapple with these problems. observer. The historian's job is to unearth exactly what happened and let the facts "speak for themselves." But which facts do we choose? For instance, do we emphasise, as most commentaries on the general strike do, that during the strike police and strikers at Plymouth played football together, or do we ascribe more significance to an incident which occurred in Poplar when police drove a van through a line of pickets, injuring several people? What, then, gives a fact historical significance? What allows us to place more importance upon some facts than upon others? Clearly, it is the perspective one takes. And that is determined by one's own subjective view of what "is" and what "ought" to be. For example, "the pictures of medieval man as devoutly religious, whether true or not, are indestructible, because nearly all the known facts about him were pre-selected for us by people who believed it, and wanted others to believe it." (E. H. Carr: "What is History"). A different perspective on the same phenomena will produce a different analysis. How can this be? Consider a slave society. Looking through the eyes of the slave masters, from above, what is seen as a prbtaiRm is how to keep the slaves In order, how to extract the most profitable amount of labour from them, etc. These "social problems" are defined as society's problems, but in fact they are the problems of only one section of society, the ruling section. Looking through the eyes of the slaves, however, the problem lies in the domination of the slave-masters over the slaves. From the slave's perspective, the very institution of slavery is questioned whereas slavery itself is not a problematic from the point of view of the slave owner. Hence, what is important is not so much the question of value-free or value-laden study as the question of what is the constituency for one's study, i.e. for what purpose and in whose interests are we acquiring this knowledge. The positivist school would reject the notion that history is a question of which vision of reality we are to accept, rather it maintains there is only one "Past and future do not stand, however, as abstract dimensions of time. They are respectively remembered and hoped for from and for the sake of a concrete historical present. It is only when man feels the pains and contradictions of the present and is committed to its liberation that his past acquires the determination for-the-sake-of-the-present and brings to it, therefore, a new dimension of negation and a new possibility of hope." Rubem Alvez; "Theology of Human Hope." Little is known about the British General Strike of 1926. Few books have been written about it. Little attention is paid to it. The event appears like a gap in British social history. Yet it brought the entire workings of British society to a halt for over a week. What were the causes of this event ? How did it evolve ? What were its effects ? These are the questions which the orthodox historians usually ask. Yet they haven't asked them about this event. Of all the material published on the General Strike, only two books have been written since the 1920's. The problem of information is a major one. But before we enquire into that it is necessary to ask what are the purposes and methods of historical study in the first place ? THE BUSINESS OF KNOWLEDGE The academic historian is a member of a profession. Like all academics, knowledge is his "business." The business rules state that one must apply the values of "objectivity" in one's study. The method involves treating history as a series of causes, the results, the whys and the hows of an event. It matters little what one studies as long as these questions are answered. Orthodox history adheres to the positivist school. It upholds the " cult of facts." There is a strict separation between subject (the historian) and object (history). History exists independent of the Philosophy'Sociology "HNDER the banner of "The Poverty of LSE Philosophy," and with an introduction from members of the Radical Philosophy Group, a protracted critique of the academic teaching of philosophy took up most of Occupation-Day-Two. Though no new systems were erected, nor any analytic breakthroughs achieved, a valuable synthesis of department and inter-university criticism was made. Not the least valuable aspect was the comparison of undergraduate with graduate and teaching experiences. It is hoped to further erode these structural divisions by the initiation of a London based discussion group, centred on LSE. Watch for notices or eavesdrop on suspected 'philosophers.' DEPARTMENTS reality which exists independent of the historian. It maintains that, although the historian is personally prejudiced, he ean. by an objective method of analysis, arrive at the truth. But, we may ask. where is it that we are outside our own existence? Where is it that we can think sub specie aeternitatis? There is no such place. Even the very language we use betrays us. THE SITUATION OF 'INTELLECTUALS' Just as the historian sees himself has aspirations and interests, so the object of study, i.e. human behaviour, embodies the subjective aspirations and interests of the historical participants. But these are rarely studied. This is partly because of the lack of source material (ordinary people, especially when they are in conflict situations, do not usually have the future historian in mind. They have not the time nor the opportunity to construct essays, write letters, publish newspapers, etc.). But the cause also lies partly with the historians themselves. Historians (especially those in a position to get their works published widely), being part of the establishment, are inevitably somewhat influenced by the establishment, its methods and values (cf Annatol Rappaport: "Do the Intellectuals have a Class Interest?" in "Recent Sociology" ed. Carl Oglesby). Any activity directed against the establishment is rarely understood by it. It is not in a position to totally comprehend what is going on. Nor is it in a position to understand the subjective point of view of the rebels/insurgents, etc. This is important because • the subjective and objective are •. inextricably linked, e.g. that hundreds of people stormed the Bastille on July 14th, 1789 is a fact. But that objective fact contains within itself the subjective hopes, fears, prejudices, etc. of those people. And these subjective factors, in movement, become an objective factor of history itself. Hence to truly comprehend an objective fact we have to comprehend these subjective elements. Because of its inability to totally comprehend mass-movements, orthodox history either tends to treat the mass of people as an irrational mob or accepts the dictum of what is considered to be the movements' leaders. Indeed a movement must, according to the orthodox schema, have leaders. We have only to single out these leaders, analyse what they I said and did, and it is supposed we have analysed the movement. Such has been the historical fate of histories of the Russian Revolution and every period when thie spontaneous creative activities of the masses has played a major role. Indeed, this mass-creative activity is what orthodox history, almost by definition, suppresses. (For an account of this type of distortion with respect to the Spanish Civil War see Noam Chomsky, "Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship" in his "American Power and the New Mandarins."). Orthodox history tends to define history as the actions of a few individuals who rule the world by quotations. It tends to be diplomatic orientated, it ignores the lives of the mass of the people (for a telling example, note that among all the social science and history courses at L.S.E., there are very few in social history given at the school). However, socialist historians are usually similarly inclined. Revolutions are mapped out through party meetings, congress resolutions, faction splits, writings of revolutionary leaders. Again the masses are ignored. Socialist history turns out to be a mirror image of "bourgeois" history, only this time it is left-wing individuals who rule the world by left-wing quotations! BOB DENT. m m 'Man Cannot Live By Bread Alone Soc. Admin. ^OC. ADMIN. COOP, held its first public meeting during the occupation, 17 people turned up. Further action to expose the prevalent ideology of the department and the fundamental contradictions is already happening. Watch this space. GA Y LIB/WOMEN'S LIB \ S you already know the Women's Liberation group, together with the GLF, were in the vanguard of the occupation when they took over the Orange Room on Friday evening. Later we moved to more comfortable quarters ; Women's Lib. in 210 and the GLF PARTICIPATION 'JpHE occupation itself resembled a three-day energy marathon. For once students were talking to each other instead of simply attending meetings and either making or listening to speeches. They were acting together and doing things, not just planning "events." Maybe the most frequent comment I heard those days, from someone who had just written a leaflet . . . learnt silk-screening . . . given a press interview ... organised a mass meeting, or a mass meal . . . just had a new idea about learning ... or simply had a four-hour session u'ith real discussion, was "Wow, this is the first time I've ever participated in anything at this school!" or "I never thought I could do that!" centre in the Graduate Common Room. On Saturday an anti-sexist leaflet was produced in conjunction with the GLP, and despite the general confusion due to changes of programme / people getting lost / being asleep/stoned etc., there were several useful discussions about the mysterious concept of "sexism" between the Women's Lib, the Gay Libs, and people who happened to be passing. Plans to continue the occupation of 210 after the weekend were abandoned due to lack of sufficient militant support. However, Saturday night brought a success with the "invasion" of ¦ the disco by hordes of Women's Lib. and Gay Lib. supporters determined to actually dance and enjoy themselves in spite of the general apathetic scene. We encouraged and invited everyone else to join us. and although most were indifferent or too stoned or afraid they might be enticed into an orgy, there was some response. A contingent of Women's Libera-tionists took part in the march on Sunday; they destroyed a sexist placard, which insulted Maggie Thatcher for being a woman rather than for her obnoxious ideas, and confirmed their solidarity with anti-sexist students from other colleges, ignoring taunts of "reformists" and "female -chauvinists" from a few LSE neurotics. Looking back over the weekend, it seems as if nothing very concrete was achieved (but we didn't break any windows either) but we did make a great leap forward in increasing solidarity with Gay brothers and sisters, and reached some new people managing to plant the seeds of anti-sexist discontent in several previously hostile, apathetic (or innocent !) hearts. ANITA WISNIEWSKA 0KAVER, Feb. 3rd, 1972—Page Six SYMBIOSIS A LOT of music freaks were stoned out of their tits on Saturday night and its wasn't o«ty good dope. Why the evening started with mellow sounds and ended • with some of the most ear-splitting rock the Old Theatre has heard, Christ knews. However perhaps there was an iniHcation of the difference between the 12 hours of "free" music we heard and the normal pay-for>-en}oyins-it music that is mostfy avaiktble. Ralph McTel} appeared de.spite lais manager and the evening had the big name we had hoped for, but even if the Captain had appeared, few people would have got higher. For me Symbiosis put the same ¦soi-t of warm, rruignificent anarchy into music that the Moonrack kids Jiad injected into the buildings a few hours earlier. For an hour they tuned up their instruments, raced ahead; fell behind, plucked and blew and thumped in an anarchic fashion tbat defies. de.scription. If you heard it you knew what was happening, and if you felt left behind then you can't have been listening. Listening, we felt what other occupiers had felt and learned in other situations, that structure, precedent, tonality and control are not necessary to understanding and enjoyment. Vou don't have to be well-known lo make good mii.sic. or have an audience thiit is wide-awake and bopping in the aisles. Ask Pete Hardens about that. He's received fiome shitty reviews in his time from friends. Anyone who can play •"Bomage" for so long and still enjoy making it .sound so good for us out there is a fucking nice guy. And what about that unpronounceable group who were so insanely heavy that even the people looking at the dirty pics couldn't find their rhythm. ... M.F. MOTHERS UNION Extract from minutes of rr>eeting 28-1-72 Mrs. Furfietow : It's disgraceful that in this liberal-democratic society students should be allowed to run riot over their universities Mrs. Barstowe: You're referring to recent events at L.S.E., of course. I quite agree with you. Why did we vote Tory if it wasn't to put a stop to such revolutionary nonsense? Mrs. Tempest = We, the taxpayers, already overburdened with supertax, death duties, capital gains, and such iniquities, should not be forced to finance intellectual hooligans whose only aim is the destruction of all that is British and which we hold most dear. It's too much. That part of my hard-won profit should go towards supporting lazy layabouts ! 1 think the time has come when all decent caring people . . . Madam Quite, Mrs. Tempest. But actually, my son is at Chairman : L.S.E. and he assures me that they are not protesting about revolution but about the lack of facilities the students have. Occupation Balance-Sheet —A Personal View JJRESUMABLY a few people will be drawing out some lessons from the Occupation pro and con. My own personal balance-sheet comes out as follows : CREDIT (1) The humanising effect; instead of the stampede up and downstairs there were groups of people talking in animated tones on anything that could conceivably be described as 'Liberated'. Some of the talk was even focussed on certain objectives. THE CHOICE FOR UNION REALITY OR FAILURE? occupation which was going . ' to bring Autonomy to the ! Union has, like its predece.s.sors, ut-terly failed. It degenerated into an • attempt to occupy the Senior Common Room. Even that has failed, i The re.sult of the Occupation ? It i provided accommodation for stu- j dents from outside London who : bad come to a rally about a genuine | grievance—the Con.sultative Docu- ! ment. It also left an immense i amount of damage. An expensive i projection screen, various doors, | glass panels and kitchens were ; wrecked. Food and drink were ; stolen from the kitchens. The i whole School was smeared with : paint and left in a filthy condition ¦ for the Porters to clear up. | Oiu- Students' Union remains in ¦ an impossible position. Soc. Soc. ; are .split between a faction who ¦ would go on to WTeck anything in ; sight, and a faction who would like I to salvage the New Constitution. | They still insist that the New Con- I stitution is operative. In law the : Old Constitution is the one that ! operates. The Union Secretaries, \ the Societies, and all facilities ; operate imder the Old Constitution. : The funds due lo our Union, are ; only available under the Old Con- ¦ stitution. ; We in CON SOC have always ac- ; cepted that the Old Constitution | was a faulty document, and want to i see a new revised Constitution. The ' N€w Constitution was ru.shed upon the Union, and adopted. ¦WE THEREFORE PROPOSE : THE FOLLOWING POLICY ! Union Council, consisting of the ; Acting Officers, should immediately ; call new elections under the Old ; Constitution. New Officers would i then appoint a full Constitutional i Committee. They would then, on ; the b;isis of the f.'icts, rule the ; "UDI Motion" unconstitutional. This would leave us with the New Constitution as the basic draft. Amendments could then be considered. A number have already been tabled. CON SOC will be bringing some forward. Union should consider them all. The final draft should then be submitted j to a REFERENDUM OF ALL MEMBERS OF UNION. If ap- ! proved it could then be brought into force according to Constitutional procedure. SOC. SOC. HAS FAILED UNION They have been chasing a very pleasant myth of complete autonomy. We are inevitably a part of the Society-at-large, and we receive Public Funds. As such we cannot achieve total independence, much as we might care for it. If members of Union want a totally independent Union, free from any control, and consequently free from any funds, they can join an enlarged Soc. Soc. (or preferably CON SOC!) If members of Union want a Union that provides a Forum of Discussion, represents all Students of the School, and provides a wide range of services, they must accept Public Accoimtability for fimds received from the public. The most amusing, but also disappointing, point to emerge from recent events, is the primitive approach to politics of some Members of Soc. Soc. They see things in teiTOs of enemy or friend. Politics for them must be clear-cut—People have political labels stuck to them, and the disparity of views, which enable one to disagree or agree on different points with a person, are too confusing to consider. This poverty in approach lead them to accept anything produced under a Socialist label, and to discard anything produced under any other label. Of course the latter must be destroyed! The frequent removal of posters from CON SOC noticeboards is evidence of this. There was even a ridiculous attempt to produce a fake CON SOC poster. This amusing document, rather similar in production to the original, talked of "Communists, professional agitators, etc., leadership by genetically capable leaders, class. Subversion, etc." It was a .splendid piece of work, but showed a remarkable narrow-mindedness. Union has tried its hand at power, and has failed. Let us now face reality and work on revising a Union that will have the resoin-ces to serve its pui-pose: To represent all its members, and to administer our collective student amenities. JACQUES ARNOLD, Chairman, LSE Conservative Society (2) The infiltration from other Campuses helped this along. The atmosphere was a mixture of London Airport and Henry Moore's dra'wings of Underground Shelters in the London Blilz. A Honeymoon atmosphere with differences forgotten and not a cannibal in sight (until the aftermath of "WHAT NOW ?"). (3) Excellent discussion in some depth of the educational issues lying behind the NUS Demo, with relationship to "Solidarity" elsewhere: but without discounting the importance of what's happening here. (4) No visible manipulation by outside groups for their own ends. In fact, there seemed to be little 'missionary' activity by IS/Spartacus/CP etc. and concern to make converts to 'Their' Cause. (5) No attempt by some charismatic group of self-appointed leaders to pull the whole enterprise their way. In tact, for a change there seemed to be more clarity than charisma once the underlying issues had become dear. DEBIT (1) The destructive aspects of anarchist activity. MOONROCK seemed to me an almost total disaster—except for one fresco on the Refectory wall which had gone by Monday morning— and except to show how negative merely undirected activity can be. Not even the kids looked happy. (2) The unnecessary proliferation of graffiti (squalor is unlikely to impress anyone with any emotion beyond nausea). What purpose, e.g.. is served by 'decorating' the Graduates' Common Room (case of penis-envy. perhaps?). Are Graduates likely to root harder for Union autonomy or to vow never again to attend a Union meeting ? This, in view of signs that they are lifting their heads and noticing the world around them, seems a pity. (3) There was general incomprehension of the objects of the operation. OK, numbers aren't everything: but the message hadn't got through to the great S----tM----y. No real thought had been given to 'Monday Morning' and the impact on Departments and LSE 'Normalcy'. The gut-reaction to 'Occupy Connaught House' (which nearly succeeded) was a sign of the poverty of strategy —there was no other reaction conceivable. Graham Dowell. Mrs. Tempest: Mrs. Furbelow Then 1 must have misunderstood the situation, Madam Chairman. I didn't realise it was about privileges. The poor dear things must be suffering so much. Isn't it about time that we the decent caring members of the great British public do something to alleviate their lot ? After all, it's not as though they were workers or anything of that sort. My daughter. Prunella, tells me .. . 1 have a suggestion! Why don't we knit them all socks and blankets ? The poor dears are, after ail, the sons and daughters of the respectable classes. We could hold a sale-of-work for their fighting fund (Cheques care of Paul Philo, please). 'The Colonei'' mops up after operottons. IMG-LSE? r HE first evidence that IMG were centring their action for support at LSE emerged on Friday night, with the arrival of some of their members from outside London at the sit-in meeting. By Saturday night their verbal strength became dominant at the meeting to decide march tactics for Sunday. Before continuing I must defend myself against possible sioganised criticism such as "Traitor to the working class or (more topically) miners" by stating that the miners' and generally workers' struggle is more important than the student struggle. This means that their struggle should dominate strategy, but it does not mean that the student struggle is unimportant. Achievement of political consciousness is the aim for all groups and classes, although for the working class it forms a necessary condition for major social change. Support for the miners' struggle comes first, then, but the students' struggle should not be ignored. If the miners ask for funds or pickets they should be given by students. Btit does the same argument imply that the student march should have gone "via"' the NCB head offices (I write "via" since the pui-pose of the diversion was surely to take militant action against the building, and not just shout "Victory to the Miners'' at it), to show that students really do support the miners and put the miners' strike first on the students' own day of protest? The answer to this question lies in posing some others. Where were the miners at the meeting in LSE on Saturday night or anywhere else in the country at any other time asking students to march on the NCB head offices next day or any other day? Further, where were the miners marching on NCB on Sunday or any other day? Finally, would we be .supporting the miners by marching on the NCB? Of course it is possible that the miners themselves have been using incorrect tactics, in which case the students would be doing them a service by "revolutionising" their tactics by militant action. This relies heavily and exclusively on consciousness through militancy, but more fundamentally contradicts the emphasis on worker before student by having the latter dominate the former's struggle. M is possible that militant action against the NCB would have radicalised some participants, but they would have been students not workers; student consciousness at the expense of miners' strategy. The IMG through domination of the LCDSU has posed the important task of checking on CP controlled NUS executive policy. There is no doubt that what they aie doing needs to be done (but that they are the people to do it?). Through LCDSU, IMG must not be allowed credibility for all their proposals because of credibility in one. More generally, whilst di.scussing the situation in LSE, piopo.scd action must not be based on what will appear lo be confrontation politics or militancy for militancy's sake—perhaps far too simple a description of possible forthcoming arguments and proposals. BEN FINE BEAVER, Feb. 3rd, 1972—fage Seven THE ATHLETIC PAGE SQUASH *|*HE Squash Club continues to bear out Solow's contention that there are no free goods. The early rising, frustration and general inconvenience necessary to book the court is a cost which vast numbers of members seem only too willing to pay. Ultimately, if the new library is acquired and accommodation made available in the old building, it is hoped that the School will provide additional courts. But this seems a very long-run solution to the chronic disequilibrium. The Ciufe runs two teams in the top divisions of the London University Squash League. The First Team provides an excellent example of student participation in staff affairs, for not only does an undergraduate actually play, but is also the captain (perhaps that is why he plays). We are having a fairly successful season so far, being about mid-way in the League. The Second Team has been doing rather less well, narrowly escaping relegation to the Third Division last season. But in the last match they had their first win of the new term, convincingly getting maximum points (although to some extent this was due to their opponents failing to turn up, and hence conceding the match). JOHN CHAPMAN Captain. Never mind IT is the best of times. It is the worst of times. While the first eleven regain their true form, the second team fail to recapture last season's peak. The firsts, faced with relegation, have won their last two games in fine style; beating UC and Chelsea. Undoubtedly the inclusion of Ian Reekie, ex-Hibernian star, has added some steel to a previously sluggish midfield. The 4-1 defeat of Chelsea was masterminded by LSE Football Club patriarch Andy Tremayne. UNHAPPY Rieanwhile the second eleven have had an unhappy start to the new year. After losing 3-1 in the Cup against Goldsmith's first eleven, and 3-0 to Imperial, some impetus was picked up on Wednesday, January 26th in a 4-4 thriller with Chelsea in a veritable quagmire at Maiden. Due to injuries to several key players and the loss of some players to the second eleven, the third eleven have been somewhat weakened but still play very well and have lost their last few games quite narrowly. PROMOTION The fourth eleven, playing very well, are in with a chance Just singing and dancing in the rain Last Wednesday afternoon, L.S.E. 1st XV emerged from a rainsoaked New Maiden mud bath, as worthy winners by 37 pts. to 9 pts. over Bedford College in the quarter-final of the Gutteridge (U.L.U.) Cup, and will go on to meet either City of London Poly or Queen Elizabeth College in the semifinal on February 16th. ATROCIOUS Playing superb, open rugby in atrocious conditions on a surface which made movements appear more like an excerpt from the Nutcracker Suite, LSE went into a 14-3 lead at half-time, with tries from Bill Winter, Rob Webb, and Tony (the Manx) Hoi'sthuis, the latter being presented with the ball by the opposition whilst standing on their try-line. MUSTER The second half saw the scoring machine rattle up another 23 pts., while Bedford could only muster a somewhat dubious penalty try adding another 6 pts. to their score; Phil Day, at outside-haif, pirouetted time and time again to baffle the opposition, and set up scoring movements. WONDER Our Welsh wonder second row Martin S. Lewis had the distinction of scoring two tries by attaching himself to the end of the three-quarter line at the appropriate moments, much to the disgust of "Flyer" Webb. PISS-UP The match was followed by an excellent piss-up, the referee winning quite easily followed by "Reg" Varley, Star Hooker, who passed out in Tottenham Court Road, and Iwan Morgan, unfortunately playing his last game for the club, whom rumour has it, has not yet regained consciousness and is lost in Carr Saunders Flats. BOYOS Other successes this term have been in the mini-international played at Maiden against Aberaman, an excellent load of boyos from the Valleys, who drank their ate in the true Welsh tradition ; against Royal Vetinary College, and Wasp Wanderers, a side only beaten twice previously this season. The 1st XV has had a number of very good players to call on from the 2nd XV which has been extremely strong this season, being defeated only a couple of times. Unfortunately as players in the 1st XV begin to drop out, they may be unable to continue this performance, but under the captaincy of Welsh Wanker Ian Oavies, they will probably surprise us all, as they have many a referee this season. As a last word, all supporters will be most welcome at the next cup match, which will take us to the Final if we win—we can guarantee a good afternoon's entertainment and most of all, a bloody good piss-up afterwards. DAVE CLARKE Members of the Occupation Security Committee, escorting undesirables from a Union meeting. Classified Ads CASSETTES FOR SALE Best of Cream Wheels of Fire This Was Jethro Tull Moody Blues—Threshold of a Dream — £1.50 EACH fs Ike & Tina Turner—River Deep, Mountain High — £1 Spencer Davis—Antenna 66 if 75p > Apply: ^ TaR, Athletic Union ^ t ELECTRIC BLANKETS HEATERS COFFEE PERCOLATORS IRONS ELECTRIC DRILLS KETTLES — SHAVERS RADIOS — TOASTERS now available, upon order from : THE UNION SHOP at GREAT reductions. VACUUM CLEANERS TV.s — RADIOGRAMS RECORD PLAYERS TAPE RECORDERS. Mini PRICES. Mountaineering Club rpHE tragedy in the Cairngorms ¦ last November illustrates the nature of the sport where the penalties are high and the risks can be great. DEATHS A weekend rarely goes by without news of another death somewhere in the British Isles either climbing or walking and for the top grade climbers accidents are virtually inevitable. Figures show that for climbers in the Himalayas, one in ten are killed in each expedition. The history of the Eiger is infamous for its toll recounted with great fervour—"The White Spider." Longi survived six days on a ledge before perishing although all deaths are not so prolonged. JOIN The LSE Club regularly hold trips and four members returned safely from Scotland at Christmas. Anyone wishing to join, go to the Athletic Union. These people z ^ I worked on this issue^ of BEAVER : Robin Widdison Louise Jacob Maggie Wellings Alison Quick Rosie Hurst Jacques Arnold Bob Dent George Foy Phillipa Duggan Trev. Joe Sydnor Soc/Admin Co-op. Ben Fine f i % t >1 yl i. >7 I ^ Printed by Ripley Printers Ltd., k X Ripley, Derby. Published by S X L.S.E. Students' Union, St. K Clement's Building, Clare-market, London, W.C.2A 2AE. ^ of promotion if they can string a few wins together in the coming weeks. The Dynamos recently strengthened by the ageing Camlett in goal stormed to a great 7-9 victory over Davies Tutorial College in the mud of Maiden- and look forward to a few good matches in forthcoming weeks (Double page pin-up next edition I). Besides football, on February 18th we have the Annual Club Dinner in the Lord Raglan when it is hoped that a celebrity guest speaker will appear and that there shall be as good an evening as that night in dark December when we entertained the HEC of Paris. Come along to the dinner, and remember, you can't play football and drink—or you'll spill your beer. SAM HAZLEY BEAVER DIARY Thursday & Friday, February 3rd & 4th : ULU, starting at 7.30 p.m. "SORRY, I'LL READ THAT DEGREE AGAIN" Debate on Education and Politics ; What is a University for. etc., conducted by students, academics, members of NUS. etc. Wednesday, February 9th : 1 p.m. in GRAHAM WALLAS ROOM PROFESSOR DONALD MacRAE on "SOCIOLOGY AND THE DEATH OF GOD." Wednesday, February 16th : 1 p.m. in G.W.R.: DR. HUGH MONTEFIORE discusses his Rutherford Lecture : "CAN WE AFFORD TO BE RICH ?" Thursday, February 3rd : 1 p.m. in COUNCIL ROOM, LSE. ARCHBISHOP ANTHONY BLOOM (Leader of the Russian Orthodox Church in Europe) on "THE CRISJS OF BELIEF." JUSTICE FOR RHODESIA/ZIMBABWE Support the big LONDON DEMONSTRATION Sunday, February 13th HYDE PARK — TRAFALGAR SQUARE Timed to mobilise public opinion before the report of the Pearce Commission. BEAVER, Feb. 3rd, 19*2—Page Eight MURDER OR MISCHANCE? July 4Lh, 1943, General Sikor-ski, his daughter, his staff, two M.P.s, and several crew members died when their plane "crashed' in the sea shortly after take-off from Gibralter. The 1st Pilot, Prchal. is allegedly the only survivor. A secret inquiry was ordered and the official verdict was that it was an 'accident'. However, the court record is still classified. Why? In 1968, Rolf Hochhuth's play, Soldiers, was published by Andre Deutsch Ltd. in Penguin books, and was produced in the West End by Kenneth Tynan. This play alleged, inter alia, that Sikorski was murdered on the orders of Churchill. Prchal, the 1st Pilot, sued for libel. Deutsch Ltd were offered evidence as to the murder, they accepted it, but then settled out of court when the publicity had died down. They had admitted libel. Why? IMPOSSIBLE Prchal's statements as to what caused the 'accident' ai-e aero-nautically impossible. Any pilot will state that if an elevator jams (unprecedented before Prchal claimed it), the effect is to take the plane up, not dowTi, And even if something had caused the plane to go down, thereby increasing its speed, it would have hit the water at over 200 m,p.h., arid there would be nothing to see ten seconds later. The known facts of the case are that the plane was still floating when Prchal was picked up six minutee later by some pilots who saw the crash from the beach; the pilot's straps were not broken, there was no hole where he was allegedly thrown out, he had his Mae West on—despite later claiming that he had suffered concussion; and the medical report referred to shock, laceration, and a broken ankle! A plane is very delicate. The only way it can land with its undercarriage up without breaking open is when executing a belly landing. Prchal's injuries are typical of those generally occurred during belly landings. This operation requires complete control and precise manoeuvres to be successful. The slightest mistake, and the whole plane breaks up. A belly landing does not happen by 'accident'! NO CHANGE A plane breaking from its minimum flying speed of 110 m.p.h. to zero in approximately ten sees, is similar to a car hitting a brick wall at 40 m.p.h.—anyone not strapped in and prepared for it has little chance of sui-viving; and when there is loose baggage (2.2 tons of it) flying around—no chance. Prchal allegedly shouted 'crash landing' only a second or two before the plane hit the water. The only persons strapped in other than the two pilots was Col. Cazalett, M.P., who was identified by the suede shoe on the one foot left! A belly landing does not happen by accident, it has to be deliberate. WE NEED IT MORE THAN THEY DO "J^'HOSE of us who were in the common room on the Monday morning of the occupation felt it was one of the best parts of the weekend. About 100 people were sitting in earnest clusters round the room talking about the occupation. politics, music, the previous evening's meetings; how we should relate to the miners' struggle, and almost everything else. Women's Lib had produced tea— the men didn't seem to feel an obligation to help—and appreciative drinkers started dropping money in an empty saucer. Music had appeared. Posters were being made and about ten people were writing a leaflet together. A few people were talking to the SCR waitresses. As people wandered in they were drawn into one discussion or another. Pew people went out again. Someone was wandering disconsolately up and down saying: "But this is supposed to be a proper meeting." In Turin in '67 students, suffering from a system of higher education that is even more alienating and passive than ours, occupied one building for a month. This was not a tactic to forward their demands—they had no demands, and couldn't have until students worked out together what they wanted. Under 'normal' university conditions this was impossible, and students saw an occupation as necessary before discussions could even begin. Italy may be an extreme situation, but LSE is not all that far from it. With no SU building, no common rooms, where do students meet? Florries? Usually packed, and no good for small meetings. The concourse area? Clinical, unbearably hot, and people glare at anything louder than a whisper. LSE is not a student community. It is an easy place to be very isolated and lonely in, and the opportunity to work and talk things out together is precisely what we do not have. Common room wouldn't solve this, but as Monday morning indicated, it could provide an important starting-point. But this is only the beginning, there is a growing realisation that in challenging what we are taught, we should challenge not just the content of the syllabus but the whole form of our so-called 'education'. This has been carried further at Brunei and Keele, but is growing here. The education study group and alternative classes in political sociology, philosophy, religion, the Soc. Admin Co-op, the UTflCI' ^ ¦ I Wail of Life : Extending the Extension. Marxist study group. Women's Lib groups, already meet regularly. The Cheating Campaign is under way. And the weekend showed the ways in which this has become a widely recognised issue. Students called meetings for the history, sociology, government, soc. admin, depts. Meetings were organised not only on the basis of speeches followed by questions to the source of knowledge, but with students presenting their ideas to other students to be argued out—a group had been working on Reich's pamphlet What is Class Consciousness for example. The discussioiLs returned to the same issues again and again—how can we maintain a critical attitude to knowledge when it is um-elated to our practice or to what we perceive as our problems? How can we discuss in a room designed for one to impart 'knowledge' and 100 to receive it?—The first act of every meeting was to rearrange the chairs in a circle. Should we meet in large or small groups? How does one encourage more people to talk at meetings? And when we all (?) return to classes, how should we continue the challenge? A veteran from '68 said these issues had hardly been discussed then—now everyone considered them. As the number of alternative classes and activities grows, the SCR could provide a valuable focus for them. Getting the SCR open is an issue which is realistic, providing us with a centre we really need and a focus for a, hopefully, increasing challenge to the way we are taught. It attacks the hierarchic nature of the school at one of its most obvious points. Even many of the younger staff are made uncomfortable in there, and 70 of them voted to let us in. As a tactic in the battle over the constitution, opening the SCR is of limited value. But they are both part of the same wider issue, that of autonomy and control within the university. Any pilot knows the effect of it, and Prchal was an experienced pilot. Was Sikorski's and the others' deaths an accident, or murder? ASSURANCES This is the basis of the evidence given by Dr. Thome to Deutsch's solicitors, which they did not contest, but which- they did not use despite assurances., that if it was conclusive it would be used and he would be remunerated. Dr. Thorne is now suing Andre Deutsch Ltd. and Penguin Books Ltd, for deceit, and the case is to be heard on Februaiy 7th, 1972. The action is curious, interesting, and potentially devastating. The facts of the crash are not contested, the calculations are possible for any pUot, but the secret inquii-y by the RAP proclaiming it as an accident, is still classified. Why? Harold Wilson stated in Parliament that he had read the court record and had found nothing wrong with the verdict—why is he resisting a subpoena to appear in court? Sir John Slessor, Marshall of the RAF, ordered the inquiry, and he wants his subpoena set aside why? Similarly, Vice Air Marshall Elton, president of the court of inquiry? AMNESIA Professor Gilogher, who treated Prchal for his injuries after the crash, states that he remembers nothing. Who suffered from retrograde amnesia, Prchal or his doctor? Why does Sir John Martin, private secretary to Churchill, not wish to defend his old boss? Danny Gillmore, head of UPI, was making enquiries as to whether Prchal received a pension from anybody—not having worked anywhere long enough to earn one. Why is he now resisting a subpoena to disclose his findings? Why did Prchal refuse to answer Dr, Thome's questions on the grounds that they were 'incriminatory'? CLASSIFIED The implications widen as the names build up. When so many do not want to answer questions on this matter, there is obviously something to hide. The very fact that the i-ecord of the inquiry is still classified is surely admission by conduct that it was not an accident. If it was not an accident, it was murder. Why did Herring become 2nd Pilot at Gibl-alter (when another had flown all the way to Teheran, Cairo, Washington and back to Gibralter with Prchal)? Why was there no trace of Herring's body? If it was a belly landing. Herring, like Prchal, would be strapped in and prepared—the straps were not broken! Why was a slow lauhch sent out to search for sui-vivors, taking nine minutes to reach the place of the crash, when a launch needing only six minutes was also standing by? If it was murder—and there had been two previous attempts concerning a plane, did Prchal do it alone? Was he forced to do it? Or who ordered him to do it? If it was murder, who is the court of inquiry protecting? The whole structure of the establishment of this country is threatened if the answers to these questions come out in open court. COVER-UP The establishment will of course • resist this attack by any means available—and especially through its faithful servant, the judicial system. The subpoena of David Irving has already been set aside by a Master in Chambers. Very interesting. Irving was Hochhuth's main collaborator for the play Soldaten; he then published a book called Accident, quoting from the secret inquiry (i.e. he had Whitehall's blessing, if not its backing) and attempting to absolve Prchal from blame! The Mast«' said that he did not see bow he had any relevance to the case! Whatever happened to British Justice? Or was there ever such a thing? Repeat something often enough and people start to believe it! Why does Andre Deutsch claim that his correspondence between Prchal and Hochhuth has no relevance to the case? What kind of justice is it when the defendant can ask for his subpoena to be set aside? Does Deutsch know things that Whitehall would rather he didn't, and which anyway they don't want generally known? Where does Dicey's much praised Rule of Law-go now—in the 'rubbish' bin? UNDERGROUND PRESS The Press, including Ink, Red Mole, and the Morning Star, have refused to handle the story. Are they scared of the establishment? Some of them are certainly its minions! Conversely, two LSE students asked Master Lubbock, who has heard the subpoena requests so far, if they could listen to the proceedings on January 26th, and he agreed. When he discovered that five of us were there Lubbock said: "There seems to be more here than meets the eye. I'm afraid I'll have to ask you all to leave." Why? Is he afraid of witnesses? Why? Is he a character in Whitehall's play? The Government attacked students' unions. We at LSE tried to bring out the wider issues involved. The Government represses the working-class in Ireland, and again the wider issues have to be discussed. In this case there is a strong implication that Sikorski and several innocent people were murdered, but it strikes at the heart of world establishmentocracy, and Whitehall is scared! NIGEL WILKIE. TALK TO US! TZ R. MINOGUE, Dean of ' Undergraduate Studies, sends every student a letter at the start of his first term which states : "Your tutor should make every effort to deal with individual problems should you wish to bring this to his notice. You should feel you can turn to him for advice if you so wish." This is a duty on all tutors which is apparently known to them before they take an appointment; the staff manual states that staff should make themselves aware of student activities and involve themselves with the life of the school. This duty and statement of intent raises fundamental issues. Few students feel able to communicate with the staff, in particular their tutor, as is their right according to Mr. Minogue's letter. It is a direct result of the attitude of many staff to students. They do not see students as important — research has priority and they certainly do not wish to involve themselves to a level at which students feel able to discuss individual problems. The majority of staff isolate themselves from the mass of students by remaining closeted away in their private rooms or in the SCR. They will only commimicate in a teaching situation; they cannot communicate as individuals to students as individuals, only as the privileged to the less privileged (i.e. less knowledgeable). How many staff come to the Orange Room and Refectory, go to meetings of union societies or bother to read "Beaver"? One-sided contact is not involvement. They are not even prepared to allow us into their common room. S.A.C.