BRITISH LIBMRY OF POLITICAL S ECONOMIC SQENCE BEAVER SPECIAL 10th February 1970 BEAVER N5t> Page 1 1 SJyd 1990 .iSHLIb. SECOV PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION EDITION 1970 BREAK THE MALE HOLD ON L.S.E. — VOTE FOR A WOMAN PRESIDENT At Friend's House last year the largest Union meeting in the history of L.S.E. voted overwhelmingly for "No Victimisation". This is again a major issuse facing Union, since students have been asked to sit in judgement on their fellow students. They are being asked to apply rules and regulations that have been rejected by the Union. Any President elected now must be prepared to join in the struggle against Victimisation especially after the events at Oration Day. It is Union Policy to reject membership of the Rules and Regulations Committee, just as it is Union Policy to reject the representation on School Committees that has been offered so far. Students have been justifiably insulted by offers of minority representation on School Committees. I feel that we must re-open negotiations for real representation. V^at we are aiming for is genuine participation in our School. We must work together with all sections of the L.S.E. Community to obtain, by equality on committees, a fair representation of the views of all interested parties in L.S.E. Many students feel, as I do, that the minority representation offered on the Court of Governors, with little hope of being selected for the Standing Committee, is merely a sop to divert any real interest in the structure of our school. However we must not neglect the issue of reform within the Union itself. Every opportunity must be given to discuss the role of Union and its officers. Whether the constitution changes or not I see the President as being much more responsive to the feelings of Union and much more open in describing communications with the School. [Angela (^reatlep In recent years the role of the Presidency has not been discussed during elections, but I believe that this time it should be an issue. In most elections, candidates have each represented one political group in the college. After his election the president has seen his task as one of furthering the aims of his group. This has led to the President becoming a faction leader, distrusted and opposed by other groups. It is the role of Union to make policy and it is the duty of j®luntl)#tter£fcn the President and Council to execute it. I see the President not as a faction leader, but as an officer trying to serve the best interests of all LSE students. I don't mean by this a passive President without vieiws of his own, but a President with a more moderate view of his own importance and role. The President should present his views to Union, but his loyalty must lie with Union's policies and not his own. On Representation, we should accept the School's offer. This offer is less than we want, but refusing it and holding out for improbable demands, is not the best way to get more. To achieve this, we should accept what has been offered and from this basis, go on to press for more. On all discipline including Oration Day, the School's new regulations have no legitimacy, since they are not based on the consent of the governed. Union, therefore should resist all disciplinary measures taken under these regulations, but should avoid the temptation of self-defeating tactics beyond our strength, which will only weaken our cause. These policies I propose, but I will always consider Union as the sovereign body. I,tonarb Harris! Few would doubt that the L.S.E. has during the past 2/3 years experienced a period of tension and crisis. Last year the problem reached its height, but despite the activity by all students, no satisfactory progress was made. The main reason was that different groups of students were pulling in different directions. The aims and strategies of the various activists were hastily prepared with little rational thought and consequently they often served to aggravate the situation rather than alleviate it. This year, whilst a quieter atmosphere has prevailed. the basic problems of the L.S.E. still exist. Most students are now beginning to look at these problems in a rational way, and seek and formulate policies which are directly related to the problems, rather than being derived from totally irrelevant ideologies. A great opportunity exists, therefore, for progress during the next few months. The students must settle their petty differences, and argue their case as responsible adults. In short a solidarity for common sense rather than "small group solidarity" for revolution is needed. I believe that the implementation of a meaningful system of student representation in the administration of the school would go a long way towards bringing about the end to the faults and problems of the L.S.E. It is important to stress that such representation must also be participation; the .students representatives must be directly involved in the decision making process, even though they should not necessarily be in a majority on all committees. If elected President I would strive, wholeheartedly and energetically to achieve these ends. There are many important questions to be asked. Such as when? How? Where? and even who? The answers to these question's are not easily obtained but only after months of toil, striving, and careful study. I feel that the man to answer these questions must have breadth of vision, foresight and ceaseless energy. Such a man is me who builds his life on honesty integrity and seven card stud. The president must not be merely a figurehead but a man of action, a rouser of the masses, with boundless enthusiasm for the task to which he has been elected. For instance look at the first of the prc-mentioned questions. When? who amongst us at one time or other has not asked themselves this searching and all important question? Who amongst us has not .sought advice and found it lacking? 1 alone know the true answer to this question. But 1 cannot reveal it until elected, I always remember one of the most famous historical quotations and use it as my by word. "In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility but when the blast of war blows on your ears — run like hell!" Friends and supporters the time for decision is at hand. I ask you as level headed students to vote me into office as the right man for the job. There are Pros 3Jan Camlett and Cons concerned with this election and some of them are even standing. So friends take care to use your democratic right wisely, i.e. vote for me, Schmocks! BEAVER SPECIAL 10th February 1970 Page 2 BEAVER PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION EDITION 1970 The fundamental issue still remains the integration into University structure of a generation of students no longer prepared to accept a traditional passive role. Militancy has been our reflection of this change and it may be that the ensuing disruption was an inevitable first step. Hopefully, such disruption will not reoccur for, if last year we first appreciated our collective strength, we saw also its limits. Direct action gained no lasting advantage and, as the sackings and suspensions of last year testify, the ability of the authorities to retaliate can be massive. Ultimately, we must achieve our aims by negotiation and persuasion to achieve a permanent place in the government of the School. The existing representation proposals are inadequate; in particular, we must have representation on the Standing Committee. However, the composite offer is not negligible. It entails student membership df several important committees including the increasin^y powerful G.P.C. and the Acadamic Board. It seems self-defeating to deny ourselves these opportunities when we can still press for further representation while simultaneously increasing our chances of obtaining it by demonstrating that staff, prejudices are groundless. If the offer is mere 'tokenism', we can more easily expose and change it by first trying it out. The need for extensive representation is illustrated by the resentment felt at the New Regulations. Not only were they introduced without full consultation, but they are also vague and inexplicit. Too much is left to the arbitory discretion of the Director while the derisory role allocated to students increases distrust of the Administration. This makes it impossible to regard them, or proceedings instituted under them, as at all legitimate. It would be unwise to underestimate these problems simply because the School hasn't ground to a standstill lately. The hardliners among both governors and students must take rasponsibility if the current pause is not used wisely. (garetl) ^rptc^ ADMIN. V.P. 1 am standing as a first year, because I feel that I can shed some fresh light on to the position. I am not yet bogged down in the LSE clicheism and mutual backbiting which exists. I have read a draft of the new constitution, under which the president is ridded of most of his present powers. This idea is a good one — indeed there is a strong case for the abolition of the presidency. If elected, I shall press for acceptance of the new constitution, and resign if it is not passed. There is, at the moment, an examination statement campaign, whereby the lads in B.Sc. Econ. (Part I) are planning to rid themselves of an utterly useless and irrelevant exam., by direct action if necessary. I thoroughly support this cause. Freedom of discussion is essential to a community such as ours. This does not at present exist in union meetings, because of the present rules; nor in general assemblies, because of academic (and otherwise) spies. I have not yet seen the draft standing orders, but I would like to see union meetings organised along the more informal lines of general meetings to open up discussion to all. The present system puts the virgin speaker off, by Sfoljn ifJlorton fears (maybe subconscious) of being ruled out of order, irrelevant, etc. — in short, of tyranny from the chairman. Who should run LSE?-— a vexed question. Should we have governors, participation, revolution, what? My answer is that all who have business here should have a say in the running of the place. Logical enough, but how does one persuade those with power but no business here to yield it?. It has proved difficult in the past, and will no doubt continue to do so. However, I shall use every opportunity to press for users' control of LSE. JOHN MORTON FOR FREEDOM WHy will you aegiaTN? This is Leslie. You won't find her name on the ballot sheet because as far as politics are concerned she's just not interested. If, like Leslie, politics are not to your taste fill in the space below and return your answers to ' BEAVER LSE, as you will know by now, has an hierarchlal and bureaucratic structure totally contemptuous of the concept of democracy. That structure mirrors that of the whole society of which LSE is a part and is mirrored again in the Students' Union's present organisation. The justification is always the same; those at the top know best (i.e. better than you yourself), how your affairs should be conducted. But since it is now obvious that those at the bottom no longer concur with their view, some adjustments are necessary. So the platform now is Participation. Ironically it comes from those who not so long ago derided participation as Utopian, unnecessary, unreasonable, and so on; the popular cause has been adopted by the candidates (moderately, of course), but they still ask for your vote. But a moment's reflection will show that the candidate has nothing at all to offer you. Policy decisions are made by the Union, not by the bureaucrats. This exposes completely the pretence that to vote in this election is to vote for a particular policy; it is to vote for an individual (or is it a 'personality') who, by a process of self-selection, is especially worthy to be your leader. Thus it is you who has something to offer to the candidate. His desire for personal aggrandisement is probably one of the most important stimuli, but the post of President also carries a unique political influence. Since he is not recallable by the Union, he can use this influence for a year— with or without your approval — and every issue, whether or not the issue was discussed in the election campaign. Since the President cannot dicate policy, the influence he has is that of being able to manipulate the Union. Walter Adams likes to work on the Union through the President, and in every case in recent years Adams has been able to use the President as an agent i* the Union. (There have been very obvious instances of this and it is quite possible that other instances have gone unnoticed). Such co-operation between bureaucrats should cause no surprise. The President is also able to attend meetings closed to students, and collect information with which he may do as he will Unlike other students, he can call a Union meeting at a moment's notice, or delay for up to ten days a Union meeting requested by others. He also has special privileges in bringing motions to Union. All of these powers have been used by Presidents to further their own policies against the wishes of the Union. This interference cannot be justified if the issue was not an election issue, nor can it be if it were, as student opinion may have shifted significantly. It is not necessary for the President to be ill-intentioned for this to occur. No President in the past has been able to resist using his power of manipulation. Perhaps it would be unnatural to expect him to, no matter what his protestations when a candidate. There is an alternative. Instead of supporting undemocratic manipulation, don't vote for any candidate in this election, which will lend a spurious credibility to the "Winner". Support instead the reform of the Union outlined in the last Beaver (for the details of which there is no space here), a reform which will prevent the manipulation of the Union by individuals and small cliques. ALAN GILLIE