BRITISH LIBRARY OF POLITICAL & ECONOMIC SaENCl M5S It < w ^ 1 8JUN1 99Q NEWSPAPER OF THE LSE STUDENTS' UNION No. 140 MARCH 4th, 1975 FREE VOTE f VOTE! THIS Friday is your chance to choose the 12 students who you wish to run your Students' Union. Voting will take place outside the Old Theatre on Friday, March 7th. All you need is your admission card plus some knowledge of the candidates, issues and who you think can handle them best. To help you, we have published a full list of the candidates. However, nothing can beat seeing the candidates in the flesh, so go along to the Hustings on Wednesday and Thursday (keep an eye out for the posters giving the details). There are 12 positions on the Executive : two posts are sabbatical. General Secretary and Senior Treasurer, and so have candidates standing directly for them. The other posts on the Executive are allotted amongst the other ten successful candidates. The posts are : Ordinary Treasurers (2), Academic Affairs, External Affairs, Welfare, Entertainments, Publications, the Bar. the Shop and Florries and finally Overseas Students. When you go along to the Hustings, a ques- tion you can ask the candidates is, what position on the Executive do you want ? If they don't know by then we suggest that you don't vote for them. Avid readers of "Beavei:" will know the tasks and issues facing the new Executive when they take power in August. For those who might have forgotten, the transfer to the LEA system, the Nursery, finance of the Union, Education Cuts and Grants, Staff/Student, Committees, no doubt you can add others to the list. The new Executive you vote into power will be leading and directing the campaigns and the administration of your Union. The Executive can only be effective with the help and support of all members of the Union. Voting is only the first step. Don't desert them afterwards for your academic ivory towers and perhaps they won't desert you. So, this is your big chance, a chance not often gained in the "big world outside," so don't pass up this opportunity not only to elect your leaders but to influence and contribute. Don't be shy, VOTE. GENERAL SECRETARY (Sabbatical) SUSAN COCKERILL: Member of the International Socialists (IS); Delegate to NUS Area and Student Representative Council (SRC); 3rd year BSc Econ. C. M. O'BRIEN; Independent Socialist; Executive Well are OfiBcer 1974/5; Member of the Trust for Handicapped Children; Co-producer of the Daily News-sheet. WENDY FORREST: Joint Revolutionary Slate; member International Marxist Group (IMG); Women's Liberation Group; LSE Troops Out Movement Branch. D. GLENYS THORNTON: Broad Left; Labour Party; Executive Member — External Affairs Officer, 1974-5; Delegate to NUS Conf., Area and SRC; Chairperson of Chile Committee; Member of Universities' National Committee; 2nd year BSc Econ. SENIOR TREASURER . (Sabbatical)' HOWARD FEATHER: Member IS; Ex Vice President of Middlesex Poly; MSc Industrial Relations. PETER TIMMINS: Chartered Accountant (Institute of Public Pi-nance and Accountancy); Present Editor of BEAVER, produced 14 BEAVERS since Feb 1974; Member of Finance Committee (in charge of publications) since Feb 1974; Philosophy Dept Representative on Undergraduate Studies Committee; Member of Ath Union; Independent Socialist; Happy family life — Dahrendorf knows my father! J. CRUSE: Member of Executive Committee 1974/5, Finance Committee 1974-5; Broad Left. ORDINARY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS JULIE KELLEMER: Joint Revolutionary Slate; Troops Out Movement. PHILIPPA LANGTON: Broad Left; Member of Union Council 1969/71 (at UCL); Union Rep on various College Committees (at UCL 1970 71); Member of Women's Movement; Member of Ents Committee 1969/70; Treasurer of Industrial Relations Soc LSE 1973/74. Communist Party member. SIMON BERESFORD: Broad Left; Labour Party member; Delegate to NUS Conf.; Member of LSE Chile Support Committee; BSc (Econ) 2nd year Government student. TESSA S. MARCUS: Broad Left activist; Anti-Apartheid Treasurer; Grants Campaign Activist. JAN SLING: Broad Left. SIMON CRABTREE: Member IS; President Passfield Hall Society; 1st year BSc (Econ) sociology student. ANDREW MILNER: IS candidate; Sociology postgraduate; Famous TV personality (see University Challenge — many years ago). JIM MONTGOMERY; IS member; Finance Committee; Troops Out Movement, LSE Branch. FELICITY- ROWE: Committee member of the Conservative Society; Former Secretai-y of Rosebery Hall. JAMES ROBERTSON: Chairman of the Conservative Society; Secretary ULU PEST. ANNE LEATHERBARROW: Committee member of the Conservative Society; Member of PEST, SUE and Law Society. STEPHEN KING: Conservative Society Treasurer; Member of ULU PEST, Wine and Food Soc, Sailing Club, Music Soc. DAVID ROBERTSON: Currently a member of the Constitution Committee; 1973/4 Government Dept Staff/Student Committee Secretary; 1973 '4 Member of the U/G Studies Committee; Independent Candidate. MUNGO DEANS: Independent; Vice-President Rosebery Hall Society. WYNN TOLLMAN: Independent; BSc (Econ); Overseas student; Student/staff Committee Economics. RICHARD SALES: Independent; no worse than anybody else; concern for student affairs and intending to do something positive to mirror the student body's true desires and aspirations. What do you think? The comments and qualifications are those supplied by the candidatesi themselves. BEAVER is not responsible for their truth or otherwise. Nine, kind comment FOUR lecturers in the Language Studies Dept. were speechless when asked to confirm a Times Higher Education Supplement report of February 21st that they are to be axecl, as an economy measure. They then all refused to comment in depth about the report, but regarded it as false, erroneous, wrong and misleading. Their tightlipped, tongue-tied horror at such cutting scurrilous intelligence as displayed in the THES, left them lost for words. Except in Swahili and behind closed doors—loses a bit in the translation, doesn't it ? PT/TG/GH/JB. Shop closed. Bar reeling THE Union Shop will most likely remain closed for the rest of "this term as the result of the auditor's report on the first term's trading. This reveals a loss of £526, growing to £601 if an account of £75, still under dispute, is included. The reason the continued closure is operative, is to let the auditor finalise this term's position, which he will do in conjunction with an independent stocktake. Sources close to the Finance Office are predicting, based upon crude calculations, no profit for the second term, 'add' to the unprecedented first term loss. Last year the Shop made a profit of £380. Also in difficulties is the Bar. Last year's trading profit of £2,552 represented a termly profit of £850. In the first term of this year, the profit has sunk to £100 on, if anything, an increased sales figure. When this was pointed out to the Bar Management Committee (BMC) of Wednesday, February 26th, by John Blundell (Executive, Bar), he was over-ruled by the massed drinkers. They voted to keep the markup on cost price at 35 per cent, disregarding last year's markup of 4& per cent, and a Finance Committee request of Monday, February 24th, to restore the old markup. The Finance Committee made this request in the knowledge of the deficit financing for this year, that the Annual Budget Meeting passed, on Thursday, January 16th. That budget was framed in the expectation of profits from the Shop, Bar and Florries staying at the same level as the previous year. Despite the urgency of the situation, it is reported that the Senior Treasurer (Mr Hoyland), Ordinary Treasurer 1 (Mr Roberts), Ordinary Treasurer 2 (Mr Cruse), and the Junior Treasurer for the Bar (Mr Coe), were not present at the BMC meeting. Because of this, the BMC is still running the Bar in contravention to its Standing Orders, that state, "The BMC shall be required to ensure a net profit of between five per cent and 12 per cent per annum on turnover." The profit of £100 represents 1.1 per cent on turnover, £500 being what the profit should have been given only a 40 per cent markup. No doubt, questions will be asked in the House. They should be! P.T. Profs drain away THE calm waters of Academic Life are being stirred by the Education Cuts. Big Fish are leaving rapidly evaporating pools. At present there are at least six vacant Chairs in Economics in the country. Two Manchester professors (Laid-ler and Parkin) have left for The Great Lakes of Western Ontario; three Chairs are now vacant at LSE, the last to leave was Prof Harry G. Johnson; Oxford is also missing one Prof. Current Economics department thinking reveals the sorry prospect of only one really worthy candidate for any of these Chairs — a Prof Atkinson. Maybe he'll benefit by becoming the only fish in the pool, but it seems certain that academic standards are suffering as a result of the Cuts; it must be a rumour that- academic standards are to be preserved, if so, where did it start? G.H. B1:AVI:K, March 4th, 1975—Pa^e Two LEA—an OS view RE: SOME REFLECTIONS ON A TRANSFER TO THE LEA SYSTEM; ITS IMPACT ON 1,500 SELF-FINANCING STUDENTS FOR so:r.e time the Union h^s been campaigning for a transfer to the Loc-"'.! Education Autiiority system or financing Unions which provides for a direct grant from those bodies to Union in place of a direct grant from individual colJeiiBs. Since the LSE School authorities are now in favour of such a transfer, in order to remove the financial burden of finnncing the Stvdents' Union this has be-cotne a real possibility. On one hand this would enhance the political independence of the Students' Union from the school authorities by removing their control of finance and increasing the financial resources available to the Union. On the other hand it would place additional and discriminatory financial burdens on the category of self-financing students including 1.000 of the 1,200 overseas students at the LSE who are not fortunate enough to receive a grant. The Senior Treasurer informs me that in his view such self-financing students \\ould end up being required to pay a sum of around £17 per annum to belong to the Students' Union. This v.'Ould mean a de facto increase ia overseas student fees from £250 to £267 which contravenes another Union policy on overseas student fees. When the government raised the base level of overseas students fees from £70 to £250 in 1967 it did not impose any legal requirement for individual colleges to implement such increases. However,' out of the grant received by the LSE from London University a sum of £250 for every overseas student (1.200 X £250 = £300,000 > is deducted so that if the LSE charged Overseas Students only £70 it would have to make up the balance of around £220,000 itself. Therefore at present the LSE "^requires overseas students to pay £250 in fees, 34 times what home students are charged. A part of this £250 C£10) at present includes the money the school currently spends in financing the Union. Surely if the School were relieved of the burden of financing the Union by a transfer to the LEA System, "the overseas student fee could justifiably be lowered by £10 to £240 per annum. The LEA System, it seems to me, would only stand a chance of being accepted by over 1,500 self-financing students if Union succeeded in securing such a lowering. In this case the difference self-financing students would be required to make out of their own pockets could be limited to the difference between the present per capita paid by the School to the Union and the per capita Union would in future negotiate with the LEA; a maximum of £10. Union would have to peg the fee at this level, regardless of inflation, because incomes of self-financing students are fixed. Even then a discriminatory situation would persist where over 2,000 home students would have their membership fee paid by the LEA while over 1,000 self-financing and overseas students would be required to go through the positive action of taking £10 out of their own pockets. This can only be appreciated by students on grants if they ask themselves: "How-would you feel if you had to pay £10 to join the Union?" Transferal to the LEA System would also place considerable financial burdens on the less well off overseas students. For overseas students on incomes of less than around £2.00 per day to cover rent, food, travel, Union would have to make exemptions considering that their fixed and meagre resources are already being strained to breaking point by soaring hall fees, refectory prices, London transport fares and inflation in general. To satisfy the remaining self-financing students. Union must commit itself to using the extra funds it obtains by a transfer to the LEA for improved welfare services such as a nursery and a much higher overseas students' fund. A minimum of £3,000-£4,000 is required to ensure that no poor overseas student will have to leave LSE on the basis of being unable to pay discriminatory overseas student fees, despite the incomes strenuously earned from working in the evening after study hours. Several colleges which have transferred to the LEA System have at the same time i-aised discriminatory fees for overseas students from £250 to £300. Union is committed both to opposing the present level LEA poll results UNFORTUNATELY the number of replies to the poll was hardly sufficient for any useful conclusions to b« drawn — the person who answered about 50 forms can rest assured that his eltorts did NOT boost the number of replies. Although only a very small number of Postgraduate and Overseas students sent in replies it is obvious that many are self-financed and ore not too haupy at the prospect of finding more money (especially OS who already have an extra burden — fees of £250'. The idea of exemption facilities got a relatively favourable response. I atjologise to whoever it was who cried out in the wilderness "I don't understand this poll" (suggestion — read last "Beaver"). Most people did understand the questions — and in particular question 7 — which drew most comment — both angry and ill-informed for the most part. It should be made clear on-'e and for all that the Students' Union cannot (under its constitution), and does not give funds to political societies — if they are Associate Societies of Union they can book rooms but do not receive funds. Perhaps I should also add that the only reason Union is "dominated by politicos" is that no-one else seems to want to dominate it. The Question (4) Given the size of your fees already, would an increase of £10-£20 be significant to you? (5) If there were such an increase to cover Union fees would you find difficulty in affording it? (6) If you would find difficulty in paying would you like to see exemption facilities (on a confidential basis)? (7ji In principle, would you mind paying this extra sum to improve the Union's ability to provide facilities for its members? political activities of societies which cannot raise any student support" "Depends what you propose to do with it." NO — (OS) "I feel the benefits of LEA funding would far outweigh the effects of an increase of the proposed proportions". "What sort of facilities?" YES — "Union funds are at present inadequately supervised ". NO — "but not to finance silly political frivolities". NO — "might at least increase participation in Union activities and ensure democratic (i.e. non-elitist) decisions to be reached". NO — "note — this does not mention grant for living on". YES — "Union fails to provide facilities for normal students and is a vehicle for second-rate people to express third-rate political ideas". YES — "I have no confidence in the ability of Union officials to manage finances effectively". YES — "If and only if the money is spent oa the student and not on useless student politics". YES — "the Union is unrepresentative. undemocratic, childish, and does not interest me AT ALL". Question 6 NO — "exemption from Union means divide and, rule". Qu«stton 4 NO — "IjSE is a bargain compared to my honie university and that includes transatlantic transportation !" Addencfa "Reluctant mother supports me if I am very nice to her." Tmiocla zviulur kwazwo Makudo! Tipe yi nyika yeclu Makurwe! — would the author care to translate? Comments Facts and Figures of discriminatory fees and any increases but in addition should seek assurances from the School that the transfer to LEA would not be used as an opportunity to raise OS fees. Eyei-j* self-financing student, after Union has decided whether or not it can undertake these commitments would then have to make a personal decision on whether to accept the proposed transfer to the LEA System or not based on: (a) the higher cost to him/herself (b) the value s he places on a more independent^ Union with greater financial t'esources. The importance of this transfer should not be underestimated. No less than 1,500 or 40 per cent of Union members are self-financing students. Unless the transfer is well handled a situation may anse where hundreds of self-financing students may refuse to pay the addition of £17 to their fees. We must be careful not to divide ourselves when all of us are faced with soaring hall/refectory prices. Careful judgment is required. No resolution passed at a Union meeting will commit any individual self-financing student to forking otit £10-£17 out of his/her own pocket if the transfer takes place but perhaps the above letter will lead to a more informed judgement when it has to be made. My personal view is that if Union can give these commitments, the transfer should be supported. Fraternally yours, S. K. Adaija Red rag DEAR SIR, — I was very interested to read the back page article on the Radical Action Group in youP February 4th edition. Some of the content of the article was grossly inaccurate and deliberately misleading. Firstly, I am not now and never have beea a member of the Liberal Party for any other political party. It is true that I used to be a Liberal supporter but, since they have taken, to following a narrow dogmatio political line both nationally and within the NUS, I have lost interesti. As far as Ian Pickton and the Federation of Conservative Students are concerned, these facts are just blatant lies. Pickton has not been near RAG for over a year, we have never had backing from FCS and, ¦ don't wish to be tied to any of the present NUS groupings. These smear tactics which the Broad Left and others persist in using might work in a nursery school but, luckily, most of the students in this country do not have a mental age of 4 and so will presumably ignore these silly little slanders. Yours sincerely, Andy-Vallance Owen RAG Question 7 YES — "the Union wastes so much money on paying for the Postgraduates Both home and overseas students. Total number of replies — 38. Self-financing — 63 per cent of total. Their answers to questions 4, 5 and 6: 4. YES — 83 per cent. NO — 17 per cent. 5. YES — 79 per cent. NO — 21 per cent. 6. YES — 87.5 per cent. NO — 12.5 per cent. Answers to question 7 (all postgrads) ; 7. YES— 56.5 per cent. No answer — 8.5 per cent. NO — 35 per cent. Overseas Students Both post and undergraduate: Total number of replies — 55. Selfrfinancing — 83 per cent of total. Their answers to questions 4, 5 and 6: 4. YES — 63 per cent. NO — 37 per cent. 5. YES — 41.3 per cent. NO — 58.7 per cent. 6. YES — 59.2 per cent. No answer — 21,8 per cent. NO — 18 per cent. Answers to question 7 (all overseas students); 7. YES — 52.7 per cent. No answer — 7.3 per cent. NO — 40 per cent. Home Undergraduate Students Total number of replies — 120. Self-financing — 20 per cent of total. Their answers to questions 4, 5 and 6: 4. YES — 70.7 per cent, NO — 29.3 per cent. 5. YES — 54 per cent NO — 46 per cent 6. YES — 62.5 per cent. No answer — 8.5 per cent. NO — 29 per cent Answers to question 7 (all home undergrads): 7. YES — 30 per cent. No answer — 28.3 per cent NO — 26.7 per cent. Answers to question 7 from all replies: Total number of replies — 199. 7. YES — 42.5 per cent. NO — 37 per cent No answer — 20.5 per cent G.H. CROSSWORD ACROSS 1. Admire St. Perce. 7. Go and paddle your own. 8. Tidy attendant. 9. Sanguine swearword 11. The saint behind the meadow-is smallest. 13. A chest pain. 14. Delphinoid cetacean found in the Arctic. 15. Point out the circle is a measure of liquid. 16- Old hag sounds like Scandinavian money. 17. Revolutionai-y; no marks for not getting him! 21. Son behind the unkempt vine is eating deer-meat. 22. Put together a piece of magic. 23. Dismissed the poor-smelling footballer (2 w^ords). DUWN 2. Quick particle is just a turn of phrase. 3. The French serf is nice. 4. — the tune or make a phone —. 5. Sounds a bourgeois watec-activity. 6. No stereo in the moon. 9. Geographical or knot, there's one near Benin. 10. H^'s hard on Fred but then he's boss. 12. Buns to the revolutionaries. 13. Do-gooder has rust in his tail. 18. Gee that baboon makes one gawk! 19. 300 surround you? Pause. 20. Venerable historian. Answer on page 10. STUDENT MOTHERS Is looking after your child a problem whilst you are studying? We run a Children's Home specifically to cope with your problems. INTERESTED ? . . . Contact us at UNITED RESPONSE 12 Abing:don Rd., London, \V.8 Tel. 01-937 7745. NIGHTLINE Do you know what NIGHTLINE is? Do you want to help us help. | others? Come to our SPECIAL NIGHTLINE MEETING WED., MARCH 5th 1 p.m. in ROOM S175 We shall be discussing; Policy : Recruitment : Training NIGHTLINE 580 - 5745. Sunshine time WELL, folks, here I am again— though now 1 m out in the big wide ¦world and have become detached from the petty, incestuous daily grind of the LSE. I definitely think (and I occasionally do) that everyone should take a year off; it's done wonders for me, I can tell you. However, one day when Jupiter was in Mars, I popped into the LSE and picked up a copy of Beaver. I was horrified to see the depths to which my bit had sunk. Hurrying off to see the PETE "TlMMINS, I was greeted with ail the restrained passion of his LEO/ VIRGO cusp. Reluctantly he parted his long flowing hair and ventured a smile at me, at the same time I could see his teeth rapidly grinding together. "You can do it," he mumbled (I think he said that), "but astrology must stay in." Upon leaving the comforting womb of the LSE, albeit temporarily, I decided that I would take a job as a cub reporter. I saw an advert for some rag called SW, which I thought was a bit like Tatler as it came out once a week is fairly tabloid in nature. 1 read my stars for the day (Leo/ Pisces rising) and saw that they were good for new ventures, so off I trotted to SW and was interviewed by a very handsome man galled PAUJj FEET.. Still swooning, I went to my first ^ignment—an interview with the new leader of the Tory Party ANTHONY WEDGWOOD-BENN. However, he isn't and he couldn't we had tea together. He directed me to MAGGIE THATCHER, an ^Id school chum of my mother's, ^d we had a jolly chat about %ing above our parents' shops. AXJN'HE MAG<3IE was born upder the sign of LIBRA, where the Sun ^d Mercury are in conjunction; Ubrans are generally companionable and diplomatic, but are in need of constant reassurance from other people. So I reassured her like mad and then went out to a party with her personal aide, Mr Baldry (or is it Pinetuck?), who told me many funny stories about her, which I can't repeat, but will. Did you know that, unlike PRINCESS ANNE (Leo and likes horses), she doesn't buy her under-pinnings from M & S, but through the post from "Glamor-nite". She has tremendously radical ideas about education and especially believes in people working their own way through college. Who should also be at the party but JOHN BLUNDELL and new girl-friend. They are regular visitors, I got the impression, to the Thatcher household but both of them were so drunk, I couldn't pick up any juicy gossip. JOHN is also LIBRAN and was definitely being reassured! I thought he was looking paler and droopier than ever; it must be the effect of being on the LSE Students' Union Executive. While we are on the subject of LIBRAS, here's the first half of March for you! Don't neglect your health and diet, stop nourishing an inferiority complex and look d^ply into the eyes of someone you admire, because you can't lose, the Sun is in your solar sixth house! To S.D. (^on. 1) born sun sign 27 Libra, moon sign 28° Pisces and two strong planetary influences in Virgo. This should make you into a very difBcult person to understand, beware of being used too much by others, you are delicate and sensitive and extremely likeable and very good at writing letters! The next morning I got up as early as I could, i.e. 11.30 a.m. and hurried off to SW offices to give in my piece on MAGGIE THATCHER, some guy called CHRIS HARLOT read it through and explained to me that he didn't think the piece was quite suitable for his paper (only he didn't put it that politely). To cut a long story short I got the sack and no redundancy pay, which seems strange since they had been picketing the Industrial Relations Court for years! I left a sweet note for CHRIS with his SCORPIO prediction for March; Avoid stress in the oEBce (that's true, honestly!) and home, do not pursue pleasure too vigorously and greatest success will be achieved by promoting interests of dear ones and strengthening bonds of affec-tion(!) BACK TO THE LS.E. I went to tell the story of my explpitation to old comrades at the LSR They weren't terribly interested, it's strange how sopn new faces can replace old lays, like MICHELLE WHITE, new go-ahead chairman of the LAW SOCIETY. I passed a student I went to bed with once, but he didn't even smile. He wasn't very good anyway! Still, better tli^ JAMES MITCHELL, who unfortunately did remember me but I'm not caught like that again! All the old faces were still there in the THREE TUNS BAR; I gathered that there had been some crisis or another, as CHRIS HOY- LAND (VIRGO) was sober today. These petty trifles of internal strife are no longer my concern! I decided to follow other people's example and go to bed with a Chilean. After chasing one around for about three hours, I gave up and went off for a drink with (The Queen Mother likes me) STEVE LUMBY. Fortunately his course of tablets finally seem to have come to fruition. Halls of Residence breakfasts are embarrassing at the best of times but when one is hungover and isolated they are sheer torture, still it was nice to see ANTONIO CORTES with six women, even though they did seem to be chained to him by some method or another. Made a mental note to write to my M.P. about Women's Lib. Spent the rest of my day either asleep or awake (I think). I There is a definite need now for a bit more astrology. You try and write this column? Browsing through my balls, I find that CANCER people are going to do well with money in the first half of March and will be making long-term plans, GEMINIANS will also be thinking ahead to holidays and what to do when they grow up. ARIANS must avoid romance and pass lovers over to Librans for a while, as the stars ^are not well aspected and you will be feeling very irritated. EXPOSE OF BIRTH CONTROL CLINIC! After my brief sojourn into journalism, I decided to do .something more socially useful and I went to work at that BIRTH CONTROL clinic in Mortimer Street. On my first day I bumped into several desperate members of the IMG, who obviously do something else apart from putting out leaflets about getting all the troops out of Ireland. They all seem to recoil from the sound of the TOM TOMS (sorry, that's an "in" joke). PREDICTION FOR LONDON STUDENT TOM TOM. 'You will have a national demonstration on the 6th April, the weather will be showery and four million troops all over the world will lay down their arms but will retain their legs. As I knew so many people coming into the birth control part of the clinic, I was moved to the male sterilisation unit, where my stay proved to be very short. I treated one person. It took me five hours and he proved to be far from sterile. Still EDWARD doesn't get many chances nowadays to play with his organ. PiSCEANS, THIS IS YOUR MONTH You are the gentle, beautiful people of this world, you literally swim with the tide and often get caught up in whirlpools of other people's emotional entanglements. This is mainly because you are so sympathetic and intuitive and it is easy for your friends to lean upon you. You are inclined to be vague and careless and easily led. CAREERS Actor, social worker, writer fishmonger (!), hypnotUt, photographer and priest. FAMOyS PISCEANS: JOHNNY CASH, NI-JINSKY, RALPH NADER and ALASTAIR COE. THOUGHT OF THE MONTH I thought cunnilingus was an Irish airline, until I discovered SMIRNOFF. Covent Garden Proms "50p: pay at the doo^ take your friends and sit on the flooc" Four performances by The Royai Opera: Monday 7th April at 7.30 pm II barbiere di Siviglia (Rossini) Thursday 10th April at 7.00 pm Eugene Onegin ( Tchaikovsky) Friday 11th April at 7.30 pm Wozzeck (Berg) Saturday 12th April (Evening) at 7.30 pm La Boheme (Puccini) Three performances by The Royal Ballet: Tuesday 8th April at 7.30 pm Scenes de Ballet (StravinskyIAshton) Four Schumann pieces (Schumannlvan Manen) Song of the Earth (Mahler)MacMillan) Wednesday 9^th April at 7.30 pm The Four Seasons (VerdilMacMillan) Daphnis and Chloe (Ravel!Ashton) The Concert (ChopinjRohhins) Saturday 12th April (Matinee) at 2.00 pm Dances at a Gathering (ChopinIRobbins) Monotones (SatielAshton) Raymonda Act III (GlazunovjPetipa) 700 Stalls Promenade places available on the day of performance one hour before curtain up. 50p each, including VAT: Seats: £1-00 to £5-00. Further details: 01-240 1911 (24-hour information service) mm .-tSlv Royal Opera House in association with Midlanil Bank The Royal Opera House Covent Garden Limited receives iinancial assistance from The Arts Council of Great Britain. BEAVER. March 4th, 1975—Page Four «!0H Cf SuREAUCRAcy n w£ ocTOBEK ^eyot-vnchi OF ISh/'T sexisT, IT'S NAri>P.AL ¦¦¦ VON'T Pir/Nt HUMAN . t^ATfjKB DIFF£RBNTT.y)l FfiOM Me ,... / I ¦7 The POINT IS NOT Tue DiAiecncAL Oi/QQUNS- OF -J^ycoNcvn »vT gf—77Wf ^sptNd OF - ' ' real HdJCItONi. HEAAU>S V4£ eeqiNN'N/ow< WHAT S IT 7D fio WITH THS" UNION IS THe SHOP ^ THE- ?WR£T*C.RftOj SeBM VEfrV SHUT SHUT acoM w C«»»5 LIKE* MMER cATc; r Manager hatters Brown IN this article, I would like to reply to seven major points raised by Tony Brown in "Beaver". February 18th: (1) The lack of grounds, for anticipating a loss, without an audit for 2nd term being completed. (2) The inaccuracy of estimating loss on the basis of sales against cost of sales (and reduced turnover). (3) Management practice (a) what is present practice? (bi security. (4) Interest of Union Executive members in the shop was very scant until the Finance Committee meeting of February 4th. (5) Is the role of the shop to boost reserves by maximising profits or to provide a cheap service to students? (Or both, somehow?) (6) What is the proper division of responsibilities between the Union and management in the absence of any contract or guidelines? (7) Why was the shop closed in a rather arbitrary fashion -without consulting students? And, why has it remained closed for over two weeks? 1. A Loss? A Premature Judgment? There was already a loss according to Chris Hoyland of "at least £300" between June 1974 and October 21, 1974. Chris Hoyland and others were operating the shop, intermittently, during September and early October and were selling paper pads below cost price, partly because they had not taken into account price rises. The loss in this period, Hoyland admits, could have been £300. Since I took over. I have been aiming steadily to wipe out this loss. For the last ten weeks, at least, we have grossed an average of from £300 to £350 a week. This Should leave a minimum profit per week of £15 to £25 a week, based on a 171 per cent mark-up. (On the day the shop was shut dovm, takings were £117 for that day alone!) Should students be obliged to make up this loss, anyway? It is. moreover, very difficult to know when, or how, any hypothetical losses were made since there has been no independent audit/stock-take for more than six months. 2. Trading Deficit? Brown's figures are based on the net annual profit of last year which was made in the first term of that year. However, the shop this year has been making a steady profit for at least the last ten weeks. This is despite (a), the price of paper (which is our biggest seller) going up 30 per cent; (b) paper shortage and supply difiaculties; and (c) the real value of grants declining (up to the beginning of second term). Given this it is remarkable that business this year is still in money terms 75 per cent of last year's (based on Brown's figures for January 1975). , Naturally while sales are down, so too are the figures for cost of sales; the gap for Christmas term was £186, but this was a trading deficit not a loss as Brown claimed. His estimate of the trading deficit is not the same as a loss, since stock already paid for. such as scarves, will continue to sell slowly and steadily. The auditor has given an interim loss of £500-£600 for Christmas term, but given that there has been no independent stocktake for over six months this is not conclusive evidence of mismanagement. Given the loss of £300 by Executive members, the loss of three weeks' trading in October, and now^ the arbitrary closedown which will continue probably until the holidays (a total of nine weeks lost this year) it will indeed be a surprise if the shop doesn't lose. Whoever heard of outside businesses • shutting down for such periods? At least, sales of present stock could have continued till they were gone. 3. iVIanagement (A) Practice First, it has been practice to file delivery notes. Second, it has been practice to produce regular banking records. And third, in a small shop, maximum and minimum levels are a matter of common-sense and observation. (The problem with stock, if anything, has been the small amounts of money allocated for shopping.) Finally, the till discrepancy was caused by a casual assistant who marked up £100 on the till for an item which should have been only £10. This will, hopefully, be cleared up by the audit. (B) Security The shop needs a security gate, a proper arrangement of shelves to allow overseeing of customers. It is especially important when the shop is running on maybe as little as £3 profit a day. I have asked constantly for these. 4. The Executive Members Union Executive members have not paid the shop any attention until recently — I was only invited to one Finance Committee meeting (February 4th). Before then, I had not seen the Finance Secretary's report of a projected "loss". There has only been one Shop Management Committee meeting this year. 5. Shop Policy Maximum profits? Or ciieap service? (Or somehow, both?) Shop policy last year was to provide as cheap as possible a service to students and to realise a mini mum profit. If the shop is supposed to be "a major method of boosting reserves", why, then, has it run on this basis for the previous year? Union policy on this must be clear since it affects students' welfare. 6. Division of responsibilities Who is responsible for security and the installation of equipment for this purpose? Who should check on assistants? Who should be responsible for periodic auditing by independent individuals? Who should arrange discounts through the Student Unions' Consortium and check out wholesalers? Why have present shop staff never been invited to the Shop Management Committee meetings and only one Finance Committee meet ing? 7. Shop Shut-up — Why? Finally, why was the shop rather arbitrarily shut down two weeks ago? There could have been an immediate, independent stock-take and then the shop could have continued business with proper financial supervision by the auditor for the last two weeks. That way no business would have been lost and students would not have been forced to buy elsewhere — and dearer. As it is at present, however, the shop has now been inoperative for at least five weeks when it should have been open, due to the Executive's lack of interest in the shop. Conclusion: The whole question still revolves around an accurate stocktake by independent individuals. More importantly, the pi'esent measure of closing the shop is not necessary; Union Executive should have kept contact with management (and staff). If this account is detailed, it is in response to the detailed and incorrect surmises of Tony Brown. Christopher Stivens (Manager) The Shop^ The Officials speak REPLY to the request of Union Executive, that the Finance Committee express an attitude to the "situation" in the Shop (February 19th, 1975). 'f- At a meeting o{, the Finance Committee held on Monday, 24th February, the following proposal was accepted: (1) Finance Committee accepts prime responsibility as a whole for the mismanagement in the Shop. (2) Some criticism can be made of Jim Montgomery and Antonio Corles that they did not come to Finance Committee for advice. (3) The Finance Committee will consider the whole question of responsibility and tasks of individual members of Finance Committee in a general review. Finance Committee agreed that accompanying the above proposal there should be an explanation of the reasoning behind it. All members of the Committee agreed that the blame could be laid collectively, on the whole Committee, and individually, on the member of the Committee that was responsible for the Shop in particular, Jim Montgomery. It was, however, felt by the majority of the Committee that blame on one individual member would be in order only if the Committee had fulfilled its collective responsibility in making that member aware, in a very specific way, what his duty should be. Given the following information;- (1) The Committee was. not. elected until the 25th Novem-, ber. (2) No attempt had been made by the Committee to define the duties of the Junior Treasurer. * (3) The Committee, because of its infrequent meetings, had failed to open up passages of, communication between its members and thus had not functioned in a collective' manner. It was decided that primary responsibility should lay with the' committee as a whole, although It was generally accepted that criti-.. cism could be levelled against Jim Montgomery for not coming to the Committee for advice if he was. unsure of what his duties were. It may, however, be true that Jim Montgomery had a clear but incorrect idea about the nature of' his job: either way it can be argued that he should have sought clarification. As a result of previous discussions and of the discussion held in: the meeting of this Monday it was decided that there was the need for a general review of the financial procedures which would include both short and long term plahs for Union financing systems and, help to formulate policy on thei future developments of the Union.. This review would, of necessity, incorporate a detailed account of present and expected responsibility, of members of the Finance Committee. C. Hoyland , (pp. Finance Committee) With a dissenting voice I VOTED against the motion passed by the Finance Committee (FC) and was asked by it to produce a minority report to explain why. . During the discussion on the Shop a fundamental difference arose between the Committee and myself. They held that the Collective was the first to take responsibility and then the individual. I held that it was the individual first, then the Collective, and finally the individual. On this basis I find four people on the FC open to criticism. They are the Senior Treasurer, Mr Hoyland (also on the Executive) who has overall responsibility for the Union's finances, his helpers, Finance 1 and 2, Mr Roberts and Mr Cruse (also on the Executive), and the Junior Treasurer for the Shop, Mr Montgomerj-. Because the FC has met infrequently, I fail to see how it can confidently call itself a Collective. For this matter I charge, in particular, Mr Hoyland, Mr Cruse and Mr Roberts, who have not caused frequent meetings, despite some requests to. I charge Mr Montgomery with casualness towards his office, because he assumed what his job was, and did not ask for guidance from the Collective. If the Collective did not meet frequently he should have called for such meetings, which I believe he did not do. I charge all four with not keeping sufficient control over their areas to inform the Collective of the Shop's difficulties, so the Collective could act as a Collective on this matter. I do not believe it is the job of the FC to criticise Mr Cortes — he ¦ is the responsibility of the Execu--tive. I do believe that more than' one person on the PC is open to' criticism. I believe the final point of the, resolution is misleading. At least; two FCs previously, the Senior Treasurer was asked to prepare "General Review of Finances'' document. Before the Shop item arose, questions were asked about the progress of the document, which was nil. Discussion then took place and it was agreed that the first: priority was the Shop, then a general review of day-to-day procedures, followed by a 3-5-year plan' of the Union's aims, expressed in financial terms. I believe included in the above, were all the issues' raised in the final point. The final point should read, "The Finance Committee had already decided to consider the whole question of responsibility and tasks of the individual members of the Finance Committee in a General Review, which will now be done in conjunction with Executive help." The addition is important because it would delineate clearly' between the four Junior Treasurers' responsibilities (for Shop and Florries, Entertainments, Publications, and the Bar) and the four ¦ members on the Executive vi'ho are responsible for those functions. The FC cannot act in isolation. My last point is that I believe, the motion is very limited, and does not propose very much. I would like to thank the FO for allowing me to make this minority report. Peter Timmins, Junior Treasurer, Publications BEAVER, March 4tli, 1975—Page Five WHEN (as "Beaver" put it with an unexpected streak of good humour) I recently "defected" to the Soviet Union for a few days, I was not strictly on LSE business. To be sure 1 did visit the new Library for Social Science Information, which our Librarian Mr Clarke had asked me to do. It is situated in a part of Moscow in which a number of new Soviet Academy Institutes have recently been erected, among them a glass and steel tower for mathematical economists. . The. Library is distinguished not only by a generous and fimctional layout, but also by impressive services to scholars all over the country; it is of course not open to students (I say "of course" because I have found the Soviet XJnion to be a country of organised privilege throughout). I also talked to leading "academicians", that is scholars and scientists freed from teaching duties to take part in what is probably an enormous research effort. Interest in and familiarity with western social science is considerable and I was struck by a curious schizophrenia between professions of Marxism, leninism and the detailed discussion of, say, Talcot Parsons or Raymond Aron or my own work. But as I said, I did not go strictly on LSE business. Many of thC' contacts which the German "delegation" (Russia is not a LSE and the outside world strainraE to IN November 1973 the first seven Chilean Refugees arrived in Britain, four of whom had applied for places at the L.S.E. and one of whom is still here. A blaze of publicity surrounded their consequent struggle to remain in Britain. Prior to arriving here the Chileans were advised to obtain tourist visas so that their Chilean nationality would not be affected, however, on arrival at Heathrow Airport they were detained and refused entry as they did not have refugee status. Robert Carr, the Home Secretary at the time, ignored appeals from Labour M.P.s and the N.C.C.L. that the refugees should be allowed to stay in Britain, although the group were released for a limited period whilst their case was being considered. After a week of freedom, the Chileans were requested to go back to Heathrow to collect their luggage, and were once more placed under detention prior to being deported to Paris on Boxing Day. The Chileans, then advised to ask for political asylum, had to take the unusual step of issuing a High Court writ against the Home Secretary. Following hearings in the High Court the seven were allowed to stay on producing evidence of places of study and British citizens willing to sponsor them. With the election of the Labour Government in this country in February 1974, the position of seven refugees was made secure and seemed to open the way for the arrival of many more refugees following the attacks made on the previous Tory Government when Labour was in opposition. It is, however, interesting to note that even now, in March 1975, Britain has accepted relatively few Chilean refugees: thefe are only 700 in the country at the moment, with another 1,500 awaiting replies about their visa applications, whereas the rest of Western Europe has already taken in almost 15,000 refugees. The majority of the Chilean refugees who have either come to Britain or hope to enter the country do not come directly from Chile. Most have come from Argentina or Peru, where many have had to wait up to twelve months in U.N. refugee centres for permission to enter the country. The situation . for refugees fleeing the neo-fascist regime in Chile can only be described as desperate. Since the shift of political power in, Peru, the position of the refugees is far more insecure : they are only allowed transit visas, are not officially allowed to work, and are crowded 8-10 people into grimy hotel rooms. During the recent visit of General Pinochet to Lima, the Peruvian capital, the refugees were forced out of their hotels artd into squalid detention camps orT the outskirts of the city for the duration of his visit. Now, more than ever, these people need to be got out of Peru as quickly as possible. In Argentina the situation is, if anything, worse. The government has established a number of zones prohibited _ to refugees, and these include both the capital and all areas adjacent to the Chilean frontier. Despite strong complaints lodged by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees about these prohibited areas and the general conditions, the situation of the refugees in Argentina has got worse. Alianza Anticomunista Argentina, a very powerful para-mili-tary organisation which has police support, is often allowed a free hand in the control of "undesirable foreign elements" within the country. Their right-wing and xenophobic influence has infiltrated virtually all walks of life: for example if you are a Chilean and apply for a job, you are immediately labelled either a robber or a communist. Many Chileans are now afraid to admit their nationality and continually live in fear of arrest by either D.I.N.A. (the Chilean secret police) or the Argentinian police. With this sort of welcome in the countries of Latin America, it is not surprising that the Chileans are anxious to le/Ve and trj' to settle in another continent. In the long term, the economic and social implications of this mass exodus of people from the continent are very serious: especially as traditionally the area has always been a haven for refugees. For example, in Chile, at the time of the coup in September 1973, there were an estimated 13,000 exiles; mainly from Argentina, BoUvia, Brazil, and Uniguay, who had fled their homelands for some reason. Many of these people have been forced to find alternative places in which to stay, and their flight has been followed by thousands of Chileans forced into exile. The only positive side effect of this enforced exodus could be that the members of the indiginous population who have moved to the countries of the Western world will overcome their chauvinistic conceptions and patriotic prejudices, which in the past have so often been used by various dictatorships to create an artificial sense of internal unity and nationalistic feeling. Chilean refugees arriving in this country are initially taken to one of the two London hotels rented by the Joint Working Party on Refugees. Their immediate needs are catered for, and elementary English lessons are given. However, as the number of refugees coming into the country increases, moving from 30 a month in June 1974 to approximately 100 a month in December 1974, their stay at the London hotels is short. The refugees are moved as soon as possible to one of the reception centres run by the locally organised Chile Solidarity Committees. The majority of the refugees are currently centred around Liverpool, Southampton, Oxford, Bristol, Bradford, Leeds, Cambridge and Edinburgh; but it is urgently hoped that other centres will be opened in other areas of Britain. It is far from easy for many Chileans to settle in the United Kingdom. A major part of their thinking is that they are not here to settle, but are only in transit, either from one city to another, or from one country to another. Their main desire is to return to their homes in Chile, and they fervently hope that their stay here will be short, and this makes the job of getting them settled and happy in this country all the more difficult. For students, once the initial period of learning the language is over, the situation is nominally better, as they have a set course of study to undertake in a specified period of time, and this tends to give some form and Mcurity to their stay in this country. Although the majority of the initial rush of refugees were students, they now number 200 in this country, the remainder are taken from all walks of life. Among the refugees here there are dockers, skilled artisans, professors, doctors, actors and even peasants. It takes very little effort of the imagination to put oneself in their place, as a stranger in a cold Britain, faced with the difficulty of learning a new and difficult language, whilst often having to adjust to a new trade as well. Working for the Chilean refugees is often compared to the work done by charities such as Oxfam, but the political impUcation of this humane work is important also. The presence of many refugees in countries all over the world is a direct juxtapK)sition of the image p»or-trayed by the Junta. Why should so many people flee a "benign and liberal" regime, whose sole aim is to right the terrible things that were done by the "communist" regime of Allende? The stories that the refugees tell of the oppression and murder that is the "benign" method of control used by the Junta are now common knowledge throughout many countries and can only help to ' isolate and overthrow the present government in Chile. It must not be forgotten that not all have fled from Chile. Many remain in the country today, actively resisting the Junta, sometMnes fighting for their families who have escaped. They are suffering more than any refugee in Britain, and that is why we must do all in our power to ensure that the Resistance movement in Chile has all our support, so that the refugees we look after today can return to their homes as free men and women. URGENTLY NEEDED FOR THE CHILEAN REFUGEES: China : Clothing Saucepans : Cutlery Kitchen Utensils •MI contributions to Emma SIOO .\lso anyone who can speak Spanish and is willing to act as an interpreter for a few hours a week, please contact_ Emma, SIOO as soon as possible. BEEN ON A TOUR '/WEYOU SIR, ? mUiw BEAVER. March 4th, 1975—-Page Thirteen Gaston Gnome is back, with dreams! WITH the "concord" signed between, Ralf and Brezhnev, I have pleasure in informing people that Gaston has finally been released from "Coldishes". Henceforth, the popular television series of BBC 1 has been scrapped. This scrapping is not unconnected with "cuts" being made in the film of Gaston's life. That erstwhile dishwasher, T. Venables, has been seen floating in a small vat of "Chilli con Came" off the west coast of Elngland. Though Gaston's release is timely, it also coincides with an impending increase in food prices in our eating establishments. What is even more perturbing is the fact that Gaston does seem to have recanted. This could only be due to the fact that Brezhnev has taken a fond liking to "Pish and Chips" or, to put it in Russian, "Debri-viskaya Tovarichina Kipskaya". The Psychology Department has been made aware of this "sudden" change on the part of Gaston, and we hope that we will be able to induce him to undergo a battery of tests to ascertain the exact cause of his change of attitude towards the food (sic) being served up in our eating places. We include Gaston's first impression of refectory food since his release. "It is with joy that I once more enter the 'Dorchester' of London University. It is like walking into a hall where many silent conversations are taking place. All about people are experiencing an existential rapport with dishes of 'Chilli con Came', 'Spsighetti Provinciale', 'Golden Fried Cod and French Pries', and sundry vegetable dishes, neatly arranged on pure white dishes enhancing the fragrance and colour of pure sustenance. "Knives and forks silently are affected by the overwhelming consciousness that hangs like a sensuous mist over the clientele, only broken by nj-mph-like figures silently gathering up "Wedgewood" that had once been vibrant with life; that had communicated in an ethereal sense with the fragile, yet hard, beings whose life depended so much, and yet so little, on the refectory. "I wrenched myself away from this scene of pure sensuality and walked slowly towards the "Gentleman's Club". The Senior Common Room has changed little since I last saw it save for a slight touch of gaiety. Here the men and women who cradle in their gentle hands the fate of mankind were amiably debating the impending flight of capital from themselves. I listened intently, hoping to feel rather than hear what was being said. Like most genteel debates, this one about the impending rise in fees to £18 per aimum for the philosopher kings, and lesser sums for aspiring dons, seemed totally at variance with the true nature of the Club. "And yet these titanic minds were using this genteel debate to chew the cud, so to speak. One can only marvel at the depth with which these issues were being debated without the slightest hint of undue concern. As my eyes slowly drank in this scene I espied the barwoman and the waitresses wait- Hypocritical Henry Jackson— the prism of convictions,.. IT was a bold move, but then he needed a bold move after what he had done. Just over a fortnight go. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson threw his proverbial hat into the Presidential ring with an unprecedented fanfare. His 30-minute prime-time television presentation represented the ultimate in sophisticated media packaging. Designed with the utmost skill (and expense), the show portrayed Jackson the Patriot, Jackson the Potent Legislator, Jackson the Voice of All the People; in effect — it portrayed all but the real Henry M. Jackson — Senator from Boeing . . . Even if this profile is incomplete, it is sufficient as a departure point ing patiently for the change which joined them, so to speak, with these titariic minds. Now they seemed lost, as though adrift in a sea of helplessness. "I tried to tear myself away from this scene but. like any lesser mortal, my head was spinning with the wine of knowledge. Here I was, gazing up at the dizzy heights of pure consciousness, a mere mortal before the Gods of Knowledge. "I managed to cast myself adrift by slow stages. And now I sit alone, contemplating the universe in which we live." for examining the Senator's policies. The Senator's record, during a 35-year political career, has not mirrored those qualities desirable in a President — honesty," objectivity, and concem for the well-being of the American people. This is not to imply that the sole requirements of a President are only the aforementioned, rather'- theSe are basic attitudes sorely lacking in Jackson's previous actions. The recent Soviet rejection of the U.S. tmde bill typifies Jackson's cockeyed approach to international politics. He is a cold warrior who has not grown up to the realities of the detente he so boldly espouses. The U.S. extension of Most Favoured Nation status to the Soviet Union was conceived as a step toward practical reciprocal trade; to Jackson however, it was an opportunity. If a basic alteration in the Soviet domestic structure could be hinged on to the trade bill, namely elimination of emigration quotas, then the U.S. would not only reap the economic benefits which accompany expansion in world trade, but it would be exalted as the preserver of liberty. And who but the Champion of the cause would claim victory? There can certainly be no question as to the inherent value in achieving such a goal, but it is simply not something the United States can force upon a sovereign state like the U^R. Moreover, given the U.S. obsession with the integrity of its own policies as well as its commitments to safeguard the integrity of its allies vis-a-vis the Monroe Doctrine, it is surprising that Jackson would advocate such blatant interference with the Soviet system. t Why was Henry Jackson unaware of such elementary political concepts? And if he was conscious of such factors, what were his other motivations in pursuing the emigration clause? We would suggest that Jackson's motives were influenced by at least two main factors: (1) Misinterpretations of Russian thinking and misperception of Soviet flexibility. (2) Jackson the Senator could not divorce himself from Jackson, the Presidential Candidate, and therefore could not ignore the political and economic support which would be forthcoming from an American Jewish communitji pleased with Jackson's efforts on-their brethren's behalf. We question whether these motivations truly reflect personal honesty. Can any man sincerely believe that a nation as powerful as the Soviet Union would allow itself to be coerced by its principal rival and thereby demean itself in the world arena? And if he can, is that a worthy of the Presidency? We question whether these motivations truly demonstrate an objective approach. Can one appropriately evaluate a policy through the prism of unshakable convictions? Finally, we question whether Jackson's amendment rests on an overriding concem for the well-being of the American people, the American way of life, or even the improvement of human conditions, or whether it is more reflective of a calculated gesture designed to gamer the support of a specific ethnic group. AF & MR Read page 10? Well, this is the reply to it.. . 1. THE article that fell into "Beaver" hands, appeared as a photostat, betwe^ 9.30-10 p.m., and has at the bottom of it the signature, "IS/CP etc." Thus the description of its source, given the information available, was correct. Mr Muller later admitted he should not have signed the document as he did. We did not question the person who brought the photostat in, how he obtained it. 2. Why were no IS or CP confronted? When the decision was taken to make a reply, it was 11 p.m., and the paper had to leave that night. There were no IS or CP to confront. Further, why is it up to others to do the confronting? If one is trying to be democratic, then as many people should be involved in the debate as possible. The original document contained errors of undisputable fact (a paper can be produced in a week) that could have been easily avoided if consultation had taken place. The problem with conspiratorial theories is that they can't be falsified or substantiated. The "pact" I'eferred to was reported by three non-"Beaver" people to us. Some Broad Left members were disturbed by the "pact". The fact that Mr Muller stopped turning up to these meetings and then started writing criticisms signed "IS/CP etc.", far away from the open "Beaver" meetings "(which, after all, is one of the major reasons for such meetings)", is some sort of evidence. 4. I agree that fruitful discussion of the proposed, and note, proposed (i.e. liable to change) Constitution should take place, but there were five members who thought that discussion could take place there and then, the six who voted that it be deferred all belonged to the Broad Left. The important part of that section was the meeting afterwards, which Mr Cockerell in denying that there had been a caucus meeting, also said he was a bad liar, i.e. there had been a caucus meeting. Proof enough? 5. The Mitchell Affair. The letter by James Mitchell w-as written on Thursday, January 14th, two days before the front page of the issue Mr Roberts referred to, was sent off. One can't help it if the Executive does not tell each other what is going on, but the Librarian did ring "Beaver" up on the Wednesday to put his case, which was heard on the Thursday. The part of the letter quoted in the article, "Mr Mitchell registers 'in the strongest terms, my disgust'," were the non-contentious parts of the letter that Mr Mitchell was not censured over. As for the censuring, I saw it as an internal Executive issue, not worth printing, just as I did not print the Finance Committee's censure on the Senior Treasurer for not turning up to a meeting he arranged, and he's in the Broad Left! 6. Like the Broad Left, "Beaver"' cannot campaign too far ahead of its readership — that is called posturing. Anyway, what is "editorial content"? There has only been one editorial in "Beaver" this academic year. If what is meant is that the content of the newspaper should be heavily Union-orientated, it is when there is the material. Perhaps the Week of Action was not given enough prominence, but at the time, it seemed right. Why have we had to wait until now for the complaints? 7. Censorship — of course the paper's content is limited by those who formulate it — that is why the "Beaver" meetings that decide what goes into the paper are open — the censorship is in people not walking through the door with their suggestions and written articles. Even with specific allocation of pages to issue "X". this fact will not change. I can't think of anything more democratic than an open meeting! What makes Timmins so special is that he was elected f democratically) to be Editor. If the job he is doing is bad, then he can be made un-special by electing him out of that job. "They" don't know best, nor would "they" claim to (see article in previous issue' that mentions "the grave deficiencies" of the paper). 8. Editors — the proposed constitution says, "Candidacy for the position of Editor is open to any registered LSE student. An Editor will be chosen by the EB from the nominations received. Their recommendations will be passed by the Executive to a Union Meeting (UM), who wiU approve it (or not). Pull explanation of the EB's choice must be given to the Executive and the UM. If the EB cannot arrive at a recommendation, the Executive is empowered to adjudicate and recommend to the UM. Full explanations by the EB and the Executive must be given at the UM." This is just one way of electing an Editor and was proposed because of the following advantages. The EB has to work with the Editor and may be the best judge of his/her capabilities. But the Union Meeting, with the "full explanations" of the EB's recommendation,- can turn down the candidacy and elect another of the applicants because it does not think the EB's reasons are good enough. All the EB does is grade the applicants on technical merit. Obviously this section needs clarification. 9. The problem of the Editorial Board. Up to now the Editor has had the complete say and the EB was an attemot to limit his powers. But how was it to be chosen? Given that people drift into the newSDaper, and then leave, some method had to be devised to allow these people to have their say, whilst protectmg the paper from being temporarily flooded by the cuiTent "in" political group, be it Left or Right. That's how the deliberately vague "recognised members of staff" was constructed. Around the Union, it is apparent who "works" on the paper, and who just contributes articles. Again if the device is being abused tlw Editor can be removed, - or one can scrap the whole attempt to limit the Editor and with it the EB. This section is open to any suggestions on the subject. 10. As for the Senior Treasurer, perhaps the" loss on the Shop bears out the need to have the candidates graded on technical merit! 11. The matter of taste still stands. Although Mr Roberts does not like Snidelines, etc., others do-. Sorry about this. And as for morals, Mr Roberts, as a member of the CP, should be fully aware that they are a device of the ruling class to maintain social control; and if there is some substance in the le°al slander allegation, for heaven's sake SUE! 12. What Mr Roberts has not commented upon is how the independence of the Editor paper is to be maintained so that it can remain a watchdog on whoever is"* in power. One memljer of the CP has proposed that the Editor should be a member of the Executive, not an arrangement that would ensure independence. Mr Roberts has also just rehearsed the usual criticisms of a student newspaper, and has produced no new ideas. If the paper is to become something of standing, it will have to be essential reading for all the School's inhabitants. Only in this way will it have the influence that, in part, Mr Roberts seeks. I think it is with this idea that the discussion must proceed. PT HEAVKR, March 4th, 19*5—Page Fourteen [^iWJdWS__ Social sciences as sorcery Stanislav Andreski: Pelican 45p PROFESSOR ANDRESKI'S judgement, on the cuiTent state of the Eocial sciences is that, "Pretentious and nebulous' verbosity, interminable repetition of platitudes and (Jisguised propaganda are the order of the day, while at least 95 per certt of research is indeed re-search Jor things that have been found long ago and many times since." He goes on to document these claims. His argument is not unsophisticated, for although he attacks the work of many famous individual EOcial scientists, he recognises that their failings arise from nothing *- more reprehensible than limited intelligence. It is at the lower levels that the social sciences are "infested by charlatans". He lays iporal blame squarely upon the institutional conditions which surround academic life nowadays, which positively select for shoddy work to be produced and then ac-cfctimed. He lambasts the situation in which it is possible to find DESPITE the fact that homosexuality is deemed "the love that dare Dot speak its name" gays have been remarkably (and rightly) vociferous since the passing of the Sexual Offences Act 1967. The latest development in this process is the running of three plays produced, written and acted by members of "Gay Sweatshop", a group of gay actors, producers, and "interested people who came along and got involved.',' The first of the three plays, which can be seen at the Almost Free Theatre every lunch-hour at • i.J5- (not Sundays) is called "Limitations", by John Roman Baker, and is both interesting and (I iound), thought-provoking. The play concerns two gays who fcave been living together for four years, and the desires of the elder, Mark, to have a son. He will not however accept that the idea of sharing their life with Ana (the iijitehded mother) and the baby, as ^ sort of commune, imposes intolerable strains as far as Stephen, his partner, is concerned. The ways in which human bi;iiigs oppress each other and themselves ^e exhaustively dealt with in the Boy, what an ego! Professor-) in America who^are not only not verj' knowledgeable, but also semi-literate! Although he demonstrates that he does not suffer from the same disabilities, the results are not always fortunate. When we find the word "tenebrous" (dark, gloomy) used once this may be reasonable, but when it is repeated we feel that the author is revelling in his command of English: the effect is to leave the reader punch-drunk with the rhetoric. In addition, the book's pages are littered w'ith the names of so many social scientists (and others) that few readers will be able to judge whether Andreski's opinions of them are fair even in half the cases. I suppose he does not want to appear as another John Baker Theatre 45 minutes of the play, and it leaves one with several questions, not to mention quite acute depression. The major question the play asks is: Who is truly liberated? Is it Mark, in wanting both a gay relationship, yet wanting to be a father and have his relationship with Steve blessed by a gay priest? Is it Steve who, when the strain becomes too much, lambasts his lover as a "straight romantic" arid then goes off to have a liaison in a public toilet, resulting in arrest and consequent painful publicity (as far as Mark is concerned)? The woman in the play incidentally comes over as a self-seeking, rather cold little bitch who is blamed by both parties as the cause of the break-up, and I feel that the part has not been written well at all for she is certainly more central to the plot than she appears in this production. It is an extremely difficult part to play and Margaret Ford makes the best of it—the two gays are played consummately by Jeremy Arnold and William (no relation) Hoyland. I shall certainly be going to see the next plays in the series, and suggest that you make an effort to go and see this company who will certainly provide more than average lunchtime entertainment, and hopefully get you thinking as weU. A.C. THIS is not a film for ecotogists, car-lovers, Goldie Hawn lovers, ego-haters or film fans. It's a vehicle in the worst sense of the word— Fonda swapping his motorbike for two cars, which he pilots across America with the "nice" police keeping him company. There's no fuel crisis in Fonda's heaven, only Susan George doing a bad imitation of Ms Mawn and Fonda laughing inanely when he is short of a line to ego. In Fonda's heaven there are Just fast cars, money to fuel them and Fonda to half-baked radical. As far as I can tell, his opinions on sociology are correct: although he should allow that some of his pet hates, such as ethnomethodology, do hide some meaning behind their alienating (or clique-forming) terminology, even if it could oft^n be said more concisely in plain English. His suggested rewordings of obfuscating terminology (e.g. he suggests that Merton's terms " 'manifest' and •latent' function" could be called "proclaimed and real purpose or reason") will appear to professional sociologists to miss the nuances of meaning in the original. The book centres on sociology and* psychology, and (because it is only haljja social science?) economics gets comparatively little mention: we find that it has not sunk to the depths of other social sciences because its data are meaningfully quantifiable, and because the results of applying the wrong economic policy are enough to provide some check on economic theorising. The book makes much of the fact that, while the profes-sionahsation of the social sciences 1910-24 THE British Labour Party, the largest of European Labour or Social Democratic parties, took its place as one of the two major British parties in the early 1920s. Like its European equivalents, the British Laboiur Party emerged with the express aim of changing the reward structure to the advantage of the working classes. The formation of a new partisan alignment after the Great War reflects the co-optation by capitalism of new social forces challenging a previous hierarchy of rewards. Ross McKibbon's The Evolution of the Labour Party 1910-1924 presents a detailed account of the formation of the Party organisation as it emerged from a fourth party (behind the Irish Nationalists) to the party of government in 1924. Playing down the significance of World War I as a factor in the Party's development, McKibbon ai^ues that the Labour Party growth exhibited continuity of leadership, policy and organisation. It was political allegiance determined more and more by a class star in them, in Fonda's heaven there is escape from the police but, whoops, he runs into a railway train. How dishonest. The only worthy part of the epic is the clash between the police chief and his deputy over whether police cars should be used for public relations, in order to ensure adequate funds next year, or for catching criminals. But this interest was buried by Fonda's ego, travelling at high speed in slow motion, thataway. P.T. has made them into a means of extracting a living from society, there is no good way of judging the value of an academic's output. If a car-plant manager fails to produce cars which work, this is clear for all to see. But the attempt to apply such criteria to sociology leads to the situation where the chairman of a department literally weighs the publications of candidates f<3r promotion— so as to choose fairly! The social sciencies badly need a "little red book" of thirty pages or so which every student and teacher has to read at the beginning of every term; it would warn against cliquism, jargon, scientism, laziness in writing or reading, intellectual oneupmanship, and a host of other temptations besetting one as one reads or writes sociology, psychology or economics. Professor Andreski's book does not quite fill the bill: too many of his ideas, though interesting, are not central to his argument. I would have b^h happier if he had first set out the evidence for the decline in the quality of social scientific work over the last Evolution Party £5.75 self-awareness that promoted the increasing centralisation of the Party organisation and, simultaneously, undercut the middle-class Liberal Party. The increasing predominance of the trade unions within the Labour Party resulted in class loyalty winning out over socialist doctrine. In the end, it was a commitment to the "movement" rather than to socialism that drove the party forward. While this study is by far the most scholarly account of the emergence of the British Labour Party yet written, its contribution is flawed by a failure to understand the role of ideology or values in the Party's organisational development. The class-conscious-ness fostering Party growth involved the desire of a class to improve its relative social, economic, and political standing as a whole within the society as much as a loyalty to the Labour movement. As Samuel Beer has argued in his seminal Modern British Politics, the rise of the Labour Party involved a new set of demands, a new theoiy of representation, and a new organisational form. Because McKibbon ignores the role of class-demands, he is uncertain whether the Labour Party is an end-in-itself or a means to Trade Union ends. McKibbon's own documentation of Labour's increasing submission to Trade Union interests contradicts his claim that Labour's organisational growth represented an end in itself. This means-ends inconsistency runs throughout his work and results from his neglect of the genesis and role of Socialism within the Party. This is an unfortunate oversight which mars his impressive effort to explain the growth of Britain's working-class Party. JOEL WOLFE half-century, and then done a straight sociological analysis of the reasons for this. Finally, a warning to the book's readers: the sections where Andreski traces the history of sociological thought country by country are heavy with pathos, and may succeed in inspiring not moral indignation, but a sense of weariness w^hich makes one feel it's not worth botherjftg with the social sciences at all. The "few hints" on how to improve the situation, which Andreski promises us, scarcely materialise. People are by all means free to abandon the social sciences in disgust, but if they want to continue studying it, be warned that a general disdain for nearly all social scientists is unlikely to be of use to anybody! One of the most difficult things in the world is to criticise competently and fairly an author whose work you judge on first impressions and probably correctly, to be useless: for this requires you to read the rubbish he has produced, understand it, and then explain to yourself and others where precisely he goes wrong. "Social Sciences as Sorcery" is hardly likely to give anyone the heart for such detailed analysis! But all in aU, a thought-provoking book with many interesting and wen-stated arguments, and. since it is a Pelican, if you have time to read its 240 pages, the money should be no problem. D.G. -/'lev DAVIDOVICH AI.IA% LEON TAoT^Ky, THIS — . ¦ —-\ YCl/g Llf£,— Trotsky lives ! SOMETIMES Trotsky actually sounds like a Trot in his six-hundred page autobiography, appropriately entitled, "My Life" (Pelican, £1.25). And sometimes he doesn't, e.g. "But I must say that, by natural inclination, I have nothing in common with seekers after adventure. I am rather pedantic and conservative in my habits. I like and appreciate discipline and system." Indeed one ends up, many visions and revisions later, wondering just what Trotsky was. It's a nicely-written book, apart from the odd excursion into cloudy obscurantesei and Lev Davidovich's views on his removal are fascinating. Rather than give us anything even vaguely approaching a Marxist account of the post-Lenin years, he showers us with psychology; the leaders were mentally corrupt, the officials were smug, etc., etc. On the other hand, "Stalinism is above all else the automatic work of the impersonal apparatus on the decline of the revolution." On the one hand Stalin was just a mediocrity propelled by the apparatus, on the other hand Lenin's "Testament" said what a nasty man he was. MacDiarmid once wrote something like "Trotsky — Christ — no wi' a crown o' thorns But a wreath o' paper roses." But didn't he write well! S.S. "ig) London School of Economics and Political Science Students' Union, 1975." Limitations— Almost Free R. McKibbon: of the Labour Dirty Mary, crazy Larry BEAVER, March 4th, 1975—Page Fifteen SPORT The parting of the mists The psychopathology of everyday life Sigmund Freud Pelican 90p FREUO'S book on the Psychopatiio-logy of Everyday Life is a fitting reminder of the way in which he tried to counteract the dehumanisation of neuroticism at the turn of the century. First published in 1901, it is a classic study of the way in which unconscious repressions manifest themselves in a behavioural manner. Reading the book one becomes acutely aware of the problems facing a psychoanalyst in trying to "prove" the existence of the un-eonscious. One sometimes gets the feeling that Freud himself induces its existence "tongue-in-cheek". As it is, he almost relegates it into the eategory of a faith. And indeed, one finds oneself m a "Catch 22"-like situation in trying to substantiate the existence of the unconscious. Notwithstanding this empirical problem, the book epens up a vast sphere of behaviours to scrutiny in the sense that everyday actions are viewed in a new light. Eccentricity dissolves in the hazy mists of psychoanalj'^is until we are left with the bare bones of unconscious repressions. Pelican published this book in 1935 and its re-publication is part of the building up of a Pelican Freud Library. At present-day prices it is quite cheap which should bring it within the range of many students. For those interested in Freud, this book is a must, A. Oppel ENTSNEWS AFTER a fairly quiet spell early in the term, Ents is now putting on quite a lot of events and we are glad to report that our midterm activities all went well. The Isotope concert was a great success with a vei7 large crowd, and a great performance by the baud. The concert was reviewed in the "Guardian" on the following Monday and the reviewer was full of praise for what was an exceptionally fine concert The Snafu con-eert however was rather poorly attended and Ents lost £40. The show itself was a great success as the band played exceptionally well and we had one of the best crowd reactions we've had for many days, probably the best since the legendary lOcc concert a year and a half ago. This concert was also re-iriewed in the "New Musical Express", and again it was a verj-good review. The last remaining concert of this term is on March 8th and featuring MIKE HERON'S REPUTA-nON and THE SHORTWAVE BAND. This concert will be only the second London aM>ear-ance of Reputation the previous one having been at Imperial College a month ago. At that concert fchey turned in a remarkably fine perfoi-mance though they did seem to be a little rough at the edges at times. However they come to LSE after a month's solid gigging with the new album in the shops and a tour with the new Andy Praser band scheduled to begin just a few days after the appearance at LSE. As most of you probably Ibnow, four of the members of Reputation are former members of the Incredible String Band. Apart from Mike Heron himself there's Graham Forbes, Malcolm le Maistre and John Gilston, the band being Heartwarming ? The intelligent radical's guide to economic policy J. E. Meade Alien & Unwin MEADE'S latest book is one which should warm the cockles of undergraduate hearts as well as those living in the more cocktail party belt of Hampstead and various garden cities around the country. Basically the book tries to give ah intelligent (sic) person some sort of understanding between the vicissitudes of economic problems, e.g, prices and wages, and the individual; the individual being, of course, our intelligent person. The style is almost banal in its apologetic attitude towards the mixed economy in Great Britain, To put it in the words of Meade himself, "... He, like others, will be much concerned with the encouragement of economic efficiency and with individual security and participation in decisionmaking. But above all, he will dislike policies which lead to large concentrations of power which threaten personal independence, or too large concentrations of income and wealth which perpetuate class distinctions . . " p.13. Yet the book does have its topical points. The section of locating in- flation within some international framework is a most welcome breath of fresh air from pedantic Keyne-sian nationalism. One wonders, however, whether it is Meade's parochial outlook which makes him completely ignore the socialist countries at this level or whether he is trying to wish them away by speculating, as per usual, about some mythical country, in this case, Ruritania. But then one must almost inevitably expect an upholder of this "free" economic system to constantly plague the reader with what Smith wrote-about sometime in the distant past viz. personal economic freedom, personal morality, and personal wealth. A. OPPEL BANNER BOOKS CRAFTS for Progressive Literature— Marx, Engels. Stalin, Lenin and Mao with books from Vietnam and Albania — and stationery and crafts, 90 C AMDEN HIGH ST., NVVl Tel. 387-5488. formed just after the demise of the String Band last autumn. Mike takes up the story, "We dissolved the String Band not because of any personal dispute, but because we mutually decided the group in that form no longer served the individual purposes of each member". The fact that Heron should form his own band after the demise of the String Band came as no surprise to those who had followed the SB through their 10-year life span, for it was Heron who seemed to take an unofficial leadership assuming the role of producer for the last three albums, while guiding their stage act towards the current more rock style. His first solo album was released in 1971, "Smiling men with bad reputations" and it indicated that under the folkie exterior there lurked a strong vocalist and writer. The album received a great deal of acclaim from the critics and did very well in America. It seemed crazy that Her