NEWSPAPER OF THE LOHDON SCHOOL OF EOONOMtCS STUDENTS' ONJON
BRIIISf)ll8(lARyOFPOimCAl
S EMOMIC SQEVCE
A/S^
1 8Jyil 1990
Price 2ip No. 108 March 11, 1971
N.W. POLY OCCUPATION
The first twelve days
Since Tuesday, February the 23rd, the students of the North-Western Polytechnic have been in continuous occupation of their main administrative building at Kentish Town; they have had the active support both of members of their staff and of students from all over the country. The reason for this confrontation in an instiute whic has just under 40 per cent students and elected staff representation on academic boards and no previous history of student militancy can be found in the decision to merge the present Northern and North-Westeni Polytechnics into the proposed Polytechnic of North London.
On November 23rd last year, the Formation Committee, which included only two students (the S.U. Presidents of the two Polytechnics) and was chaired by Brian Roberts), editor of the Sunday Telegraph, selected Professor Terence Miller for the directorship of the new institution out of a short listed 56 applicants. General Meetings of the Student Unions of both Polytechnics expressed doubts over the selection. These doubts crystallised into opposition after Tim Matthews, lately a student at University College of Rhodesia, publish-
ed a report on Professor Miller's actions as Principal of U.C.R. between 1967 and 1969. This report highlights Professor Miller's incompetence and vacillation, and the opposition to Millers' appointment was on these grounds, rather than those of racialism as alleged in the national press. On January 26th, Professor Miller attended a Union General Meeting at N.W. to answer students' questions. At this meeting he showed ignorance of matters concerning the Polytechnic, failed to justify charges of deviousness in Rhodesia, and
insinuated his intention of cutting student representation.
The students then decided, by about 900 votes to 25, to occupy the Polytechnic indefinitely if the Principal did not call a meeting of staff and students within 28 days to reconsider Professor Miller's appointment. Northern Polytechnic students took roughly the same line. On Feb. 17th, one day after Prof. Miller addressed a mass meeting of staff, the N.W. Polytechnic Academic Board passed a resolution "not welcoming the appointment of Prof. Miller", and the Ladbroke House A.T.T.I. expressed grave concern at the appointment. This placed the staff squarely on the side of the students.
The 28 days passed without the N.W. Principal calling the meeting requested by the January 26th motion, and on February 23rd the occupation began. It is of the twelve days that followed that I intend to sketch a brief history.
Tuesday, February 23rd
A General Assembly was called for 4.00 p.m., at which the Occupation Preparation Committee were to present their proposals. The Assembly was attended by a large group of students and staff, Mike Hill, the S.U. President, handed the chair over to an elected Chairman, and a motion to the effect that only students and staff, academic and non academic, of the Northern and N.W. Polytechnics be allowed to vote at General Assemblies was passed immediately. The next item on the agenda, relations with the Press, was one which was to be brought up time and time again. There was an attempt to restrict entry to the occupied buildings to selected national papers only, but this was dropped after the press threatened to walk out in a body should discrimination be practised. It was
contd. Page 12
REFECTORY:
Critical Condition
There has recently been a meeting of the School's Refectory Advisory Committee (R.A.C.) in which the main item under consideration was the £9,500 loss on the Refectory account during the five months ending 31 December, 1970. The reasons given for the loss were mainly a large increase in the wages bill and the purchase of some new equipment. Some items of expense were unique to this period of 1970 but the situation nevertheless is critical.
Unfortunately the School is not permitted to subsidise the Refectory. This is a strict rule of the University Grants Authority from whom the LSE receives most of its income. The Refectory is thus obliged to break even.
School's solutions to the problem
At present the academics on the R.A.C. claim that the School is doing all it can to subsidise the Refectory by indirect means, e.g. by charging no rent or rate and by
paying the Catering Officer's salary from the School General Fund.
A study by management consultants will occur to see what can be done to improve efficiency. The students on the R.A.C. have obtained the guarantee of the Catering Officer and the academics that no workers will lose their jobs or be victimised as a result of this study. Just how valuable this assurance is remains to be seen. The only other constructive solution coming from the academics was the possibility of encouraging more mid-summer conferences to use the Refectory.
Action recommended by Catering Officer:
The Catering Officer predicted that if nothing was done the loss by the end of the session would be £17,000. To cut this loss he has taken and will continue to take certains steps.
(i) Prices of main meals went up by one new penny from February 22nd. (This was done without any con-contd. Page 2
Senior Common Room
Union Negotiating Committee Report
The last Union meeting elected four people who, along with the General Secretary, were to negotiate and discuss with the SCR committee about its abolition as a special privilege area. The chairman of this committee has demanded ten days notice before we can go and see them. (Who do they think they are?) Anyway, we have given them notice and hope to see them before the next Union meeting.
Clearly the rules of the SCR cannot be changed by this committee but need a two-thirds majority at a General Meeting. General meetings, however, can be convened at the discretion of this committee or by twelve ordinary members. We intend to
ask if this committee will call such a meeting and if it will support a motion altering the rules.
Meanwhile we are collecting as much information as possible so as to be able to present a solid hard-line case. We will not go to this committee begging for crumbs from their privileged table. Rather, we will demand the abolition of their privilege. These 'liberal academics' must expose themselves for what they are—either truly liberal, in which case they cannot object to all members of the School using its facilities, or sham liberal, ready to defend their own elite status. The ball is in your court, academics !
rasp
Be
mam-HAue
A L.rm-^SELP Co/vjrRoj_-You TH-ZN K WE All f-hH
THATT
D6NT

Page 2
BEAVER
11th March, 1971
REFECTORY
Continued from page 1
[ 'letters i
s	_____________k
\t mm	mm mm	mm	mm mm mkm —1
sultation with the students).
(ii)	The Refectory is to be closed in the evenings from the end of the summer term 1971 to the beginning of the Michaelmas term.
(iii)	The Robinson Room is to be shut in the evenings from the end of the Lent term 1971 to the Michaelmas term and possibly at nights during the term time also.
(iv)	The Snack Bar will close at 5 p.m. from two weeks before the end of the Summer term until the beginning of the Michaelmas term.
(v)	In the Staff dining room there will be a reduction in staff.
Even after these cuts in services and the increase in prices the Refectory will still lose £10,000 by the end of the session, hence the schools feel the need for management consultants.
Student proposals— short term
The students at the R.A.C. stressed:
(i)	that any price increases would be counter-productive and make the situation worse. Also that considering the level of student incomes price increases would be unreasonable.
(ii)	that savings could be made on the cost side but not at the expense of the canteen workers. (We were sceptical of the value of the study by management consultants feeling that the consumer side of the problem would be completely ignored).
(iii)	that steps should be taken to decrease the overcrowding at one o'clock by having fewer twelve o'clock lectures.
(iv)	if the quality of food was higher more people would use the Refectory (the menu may be too ambitious trying to supply food which cannot be cooked well on a large scale. Perhaps a smaller variety of simple and well cooked food would be appreciated).
(v)	In addition the surroundings of the Refectory could be improved in the short time to create a better atmosphere.
(vi)	Also it was remarked that the overcrowding could be eased if students were permitted to cat in the senior common room.
Student proposals— long term
Steps must be taken to encourage more people to eat in the canteen. Not enough space exists around the Third floor area to create the type of atmosphere necessary to attract substantial quantities of new customers. The eating area should be split up into several rooms (three to five) each small enough to create the right atmosphere. Each
room should be decorated out with seating on the same lines as Florries or the Orange Room. Tables should be a shape which enables groups or clusters of students to sit together. The emphasis is on manipulating the general furnishings and appearance of the eating area to encourage more people to use it. As mentioned above there is not sufficient room on the third floor to do this and thus it becomes necessary to move the Refectory. Perhaps a part of the area now occupied by the Library could be taken up when the latter moves into the existing W. H. Smiths premises.
It is possible that the existing Library premises will be given to the Student Union in which case the Bar and Florries may be moved there. This will create an area in constant use by the students which is bound to increase numbers using the Refectory if it is sited there. Any programme of rebuilding would give us the opportunity of creating an ideally designed serving area avoiding overcrowding and time consuming lines of people waiting to be served or to pay.
This long term action together with restricting the menu to food that can be cooked well and cheaply must increase greatly the numbers using the Refectory. The evidence of the value of constructing the right type of atmosphere in an eating area is the vast increase in the use of Florries since that was rebuilt.
Comments
If anyone has any comments on the proposals they would be much appreciated.
In summary we are fighting to keep prices stable and to turn the existing canteen into a good place to eat, which cover its cost and provides good cheap food.
Wider implications
Having served on the R.A.C. one wonders how much we the students benefit from having representation. One gets the feeling that decisions and discussion have been worked out beforehand by the academic staff and the Catering Oflicer. On the committee many students feel powerless and insignificant. There is much said but little actually decided and one feels that power lies elsewhere. Students seem to be used as a 'certificate of respectability' for these committees, to legitimise their existence. None of the canteen 'manual' workers are represented on the committee and the whole set up makes one question the value and morality of representation.
JOHN E. FISK
Dear Liz,
I should be grateful if you would allow me a little space to reply to some of the points made by Mr. Goddfrey in his attack on my article. Toward the Right Revolution.
To take the historical question of the relationship of the Action Francaise to the German occupiers first. Here Mr. Goddfrey repeats the old lies about collaboration, against which I should, on any occasion, be prepared to give him a full answer: for the moment I should merely like to make a few brief points. Firstly the leaders of collaborationist French Fascism came largely not from the Maurrassian movement but from other political groups both left and right, thus Deat was before his fascist conversion, a high ranking socialist, and Doriot had been the Communist mayor of St. Denis. Joseph Darn-and, the head of the brutal milice, had been a member of Action Francaise but had had no connection with the movement after the mid 30s; like Mitterand, Malraux, and many other respected members of the present French establishment, his later actions can in no way be attributed to the Action Francaise. My second point is that the Action Francaise element in Vichy was precisely the element that most strenuously opposed the opportunist dealings of Laval which so played into the hands of the Germans. And finally, I must remind Mr. Goddfrey that the Action Francaise was banned by the Germans in occupied France, hardly the normal reward meted out to collaborationist groups.
Having said this, it is possible to move on to the main body of questions which Mr.
Every year students are faced with the problem of finding somewhere to live. Halls of residence are few expensive hidebound bound by rules and petty restrictions. The opprobrium attached to the word "student", plus its anti-racialist rating, has caused the supply of lodgings to the ULU Lodgings Bureau to be reduced to a mere trickle. And indeed "digs" were never satisfactory for for the average student after combining irksome restrictions, acute loneliness and non of the comforts of home. In the private markets for flats, one is competing for scarce accomodation in the fwilight areas of the city who have no alternative, with the lowest paid workers.
The acquisition by the school of the flats in Fitzroy Street was a move applauded by few and yet a step forward in the provision of ac-
Goddfrey quite rightly raises. His first point concerns the fact that i argue for a view which suggests that the general standard of Western culture has been lowered by what he caUs "the cheap and shallow values of commercialism". His objection to this view is that, whatever the faults of the present day, the life of the majority (at least in the west) is no longer "Nasty, brutish and short", and that therefore it is inadmissible to talk of a society which will rehumanise the lives of its component members. In arguing this. Mr. Goddfrey confuses the technical progress of the last two centuries with the politico-social order which has developed alongside it; an abandonment of the present Western democratic order does not imply in any sense a return to the past, least of all in the technological field. What traditionalists aim to do is to provide a social context within which such progress as has been achieved can be consolidated and developed in such a way that its political dynamic will not destroy the immediate social groupings which arise naturally in human societies. This implies placing political power outside the reach of the technocrats themselves, and this can only be done by removing the political centre from the democratic arena.
This brings me on to Mr. Goddfrey's final two points which both concern the nature of this political centre and the reasons why it will be more capable of main-
commodation for students.
However, like the halls, they were provided by the administration and parallel the paternalistic hierachical structure of the institution. The administration will not allow students a say in the running both of Passfield and Carr-Saunders Halls and of the Fitzroy Street flats.
However, cannot the students themselves tackle this question. A lodgings bureau run by the union has been but this would suffer from the rejects of the ULU Bureau and would offer no real solution. The OSCA scheme of student co-operative housing appear to be impracticable because of its exorbitant cost.
However, the idea of a students' co-operative in housing is more suitable than present arrangements because they are run by stu-
taining a pluralist society than present demo-liberalism. The main point to note here is that democracy is by nature centralising and thus ultimately totalitarian. For a brief statement of the underlying reasons for this I refer Mr. Goddfrey to the extended quotation from Maur-ras in my article, beginning "Between social statism and social individualism there is no contradiction to resolve. . . . " Perhaps more important is the fact that, by putting the centre of political authority in doubt through the democratic process, the demo-liberal state is forced to acquire an ever greater control over the socialising mechanisms of society (education, communications, etc.) in order to consolidate its legitimacy. The traditionalist answer to this problem is a form of government which is free from this necessity and therefore wholly lacking in a totalitarian dynamic.
If Britain is to be preserved from a totalitarian stupor, promised alike by both the status quo and the Marxist revolutionaries, the only answer is an arbitrating, anti-parliamentary, authoritarian centre, strong enough to allow the free development of society, and counterbalanced by the regional, professional and religious groupings which will arise in such a situation. In a phrase, a revitalised Monarchy.
Yours sincerely,
DAVID LEVY.
Dear Editor,
With the storm arising in
dents for themselves. Private communes exist already and the Swedish idea of adopting the co-operative principle in a (privately rented) flat has also attracted interest.
However, if we could raise the money—we—^through the union—could set up a housing association to buy property, convert it into flats for students and run it on the co-operative principle. The school might find a grant to such a scheme a cheaper and more effective way of providing accommodation than a new hall or more leasehold flats. A housing association has various rates rebates and is a charitable organisation. It was suggested Danny Le Rue might donate something towards such a scheme in his capacity as Hon. Pres.
We can at least investigate this possibihty but action cannot long be delayed.
the country over the Industrial Relations Bill and the Post OfiSce Workers' strike, one thing above all others dominates discussion amongst Florrie's season ticket holders—how Chelsea will come from behind to win the Football League Championship.
True they are ten points behind the leaders; true they have only eleven matches left to play; true their entire team is either disabled or su-pended. But by scientific method I have discovered that the championship is there for the tal^g.
Their success depends on three factors none of which are impossible. Firstly, the entire Leeds team contracting the clap; secondly, the entire Arsenal team turning queer, and thirdly the entire Chelsea team rising from their death-beds and scoring twenty-four goals without reply for each of the next nine weeks.
I do not blame you if you think that these three events occurring simultaneously are improbable but look at the historical evidence that suggests their occurrence. They have never happened before so they must occur sooner or later.
Besides if Stoke City get their team of paraplegics into the quarter-finals of the F.A. Cup; if Martin Chivers can be the leading scorer in the first division; if Alex Duffy can get an erection, then anything is possible.
I leave you with one last thought. Do not write off Chelsea's chances of winning the F.A. Cup this year. True they were knocked out in the fourth round but anything is possible.
Yours sincerely, IAN CAMLETT.
BEAVER
produced by
Lis Faulkner, Joseph Sydnor John Mair, John Andrews, John Stathatos
Theatre:
Diana Villiers
Business Manager:
Martha Greenyer
Sales:
John Andrews
A.dyertising Agents:
J.E.P. & Associates 107/111 Fleet Street, E.C.4.
Beaver Address:
LSE Student's Union
Clare Market,
London, W.C.2 2AE Tel. 01-405 4872
Printer:
F. Bailey & Son Ltd., ' Dursley, Glos.
Thanks to Nick Spurrier for organising the anti-racialism supplement.
Houses for Students
March 11,1971
BEAVER
Page 3
Is a Race War Moble in Soulliern Africa ?
Is racial war in Southern Africa inevitable? This is a question that few people in the Republic can bear to face; but it lies at the back of their minds none the less. The possibility of war with Black Africa undergirds their extensive military preparations, an escalating expenditure on armaments that inflicts an ever more crippling burden on the South African taxpayer. Young whites drafted for military service find that the 'enemy' is clearly understood—it is Frelimo, guerilla forces from the North, Mailer's "Armies of the Night". Many of these young conscripts vigorously question this assumption, but it is there.
A racc war is, however, too distant and apocalyptic a prospect for the majority. There are, after all, far more immediate problems. The wheels of Apartheid grind on and grind exceedingly small. The appalling weight of hum-man misery resulting from the forcible removal of whole populations under the Group Areas Act evokes considerable protest from many quarters. The English-speaking Press keeps up a running battle with the Government, and not a day passes but some new iniquity is exposed. True, this may only result in some alleviation of human suffering; the hideous process inexorably continues and families established for generations on farms and freehold property find themselves dispossess^ and evicted almost overnight.
Moreover, the policy of making the Bantustans economically sound has brought fresh problems. The dilemma here, writes Stanley Uys from Cape Town, is 'genuine and fundamental without the investment of private white capital the homelands will never reach even the economic launching pad; and yet with the help of private white capital the homelands and the white sector will become so intertwined economically that the lines dividing them will become blurred to a point where they will eventually disappear—and bang goes the whole concept of 'separate development".
Many Christians, while supporting both violent and non-violent movements for social and political change in South Africa, believe that the much-maligned 'Dialogue' must still continue. Hence the opposition of Archbishop Ramsey to the World Council support for Freedom Fighters. He believes that the absurdities and contradictions as well as the iniquities of Apartheid must be exposed to whites themselves: the evident rifts within Afrika-aner Churches, the opposition of leading academics, economics and businessmen must be exploited.
Even Michael Scott, a lifelong Anglican opponent of Apartheid, champion of the Namibian (S.W.A.) cause at the U.N. and member of the Committee of 100, is one of those who still believes we must contmue the 'Dialogue' while giving full support to
the Freedom Fighters. When I called on Lawrence Gander, at that time standing trial for his part in exposing (through the "Rand Daily Mail) prison conditions and police tortures in Johannesburg, I asked him for his attitude to such 'dialogue'.
Was it conceivable that some leading business men, academics and economists who saw the self-defeating contradictions within Apartheid might be persuaded to come out and discuss these with their opposite members from Independent Africa? He was not very optimistic. "Malawi was something of a coup for the Government," he said: "and the co-operation of the newly independent territories, Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland, is being held up to show that it is possible to coexist with Black Africa." The mood, in fact, is that of Kruschev's Russia, disowning the "verkrampte" policies of Stalinism and saying, in effect, "you may not like us, but you'll have sooner or later to accept us, co-exist with us".
And what of the future?
No great hopes are derived from the recent unrest in the white Universities. We have seen it all before—young idealists whose ardent liberalism crumbles as soon as the harsh realities of life, 'shades of the prison-house begin to close upon the growing boy'. And yet there are many teaching on these Campuses who are determined to prove the pessimists wrong. The University Christian Movement, for instance, is a new multi-racial student movement that has shown a phenomenal surge of popularity in the past year. It has much of the idealism, revolutionary fervour and passion for martyrdom that characterises "Student Power" throughout the world. But it has yet to withstand the full weight of Government suppression. Its influence is marginal and it will probably be banned anyway this year, only to be replaced by another and another . . .
Nor does the Dutch Reformed Church give rise to great hopes of change. It has recently been made to question seriously the scriptural basis for its support of Apartheid. The "Message to the People of South Africa", sent out by the Council of Churches, accompanied by a biblical commentary, has been widely
read and not yet answered. One of the major tragedies here is the sharp cleavage between the English- and Afrikaans-speaking Christians. The cultural and linguistic obstacles to ' dialogue leave the Dutch Reformed firmly entrenched behind their lawyers, and no smoke-bombs from other communities can winkle them out.
As long as the South African economy remains buoyant and enjoys the benefits of outside investment on the present-day scale, there is no great incentive for the Government to modify its policies. If, however, there is a crack in the edifice—and evidence seems to point to a failure in the Bantustan policies providing it—then we may see some alternatives being canvassed—Partition, a return to naked White Supremacy, or even some form of integration. But the spectre of a race-war is there, and for those who persist in ignoring winds of change sweeping down from the North may well see a re-enactment of last Century's American tragedy—their future and their children's "gone with the wind".
Graham Dowell.
Racism and the Toiy Immigration Bill
Since 1962 there has been a series of acts passed aimed to make it more diflicult for Commonwealth citizens to enter the U.K. The Tory Immigration bill not only imposes further restrictions on entry, but also removes the political and social rights of immigrants after they have entered the country, and gives wide scale arbitrary powers to the immigration ollicials, police and tne Home Secretary. It thus confirms and institutionalises the existing harassment and humiliation received by inmiigrants, and in particular black immigrants, at the hands of officialdom.
In future all immigrants will be subject to the same laws. They will be divided into "patrials" and "non pat-rials": the former group has the right to come and go freely, whereas these rights arc denied to non patrials. A clause classing as patrials those Commonwealth citizens with a parent or grandparent born in the U.K. operates in favour of White Commonwealth. The restrictions on non patrials will heighten the insecurity already felt by black people in this country. This can only lead to their isolation as a group, and give credence to the idea that they "don't belong" here.
The restrictions are as follows: In the first place non patrials will not normally be able to enter the country
"Noxious Weed and LSE"
The recent report on smok- drop, but soon the report is ing has once again highligh- forgotten (or rather, buried) ted the dangers to health that and sales creep up unnoticed result from smoking cigar- to a new peak. We all know ettes. No doubt you will, by the real enemy—addiction, now have either read or There are so many people heard about it in some way who would like to give up or another, so I do not want smoking, but just cannot to dwell on a load of gory break the habit—especially facts and figures here. Every- when kind friends keep in-one should have some idea of sistently offering them a cig-the risk they run when they arette, and people nonchal-smoke.	antly smoking the damn
We have problems enough things around them. In fact, with pollution, so why add to most people are defeated be-our own troubles with our fore they start, own convenient form of con- Here, however, is a mes-centrated internal pollution, sage of hope. There are ways guaranteed to undermine of winning the battle—and health? The cigarette manu- one of the more successful facturcrs admitted that sales has been group therapy. The of cigarettes dropped signi- Student Health members in-ficantly after the report was tend to set up a society to publicised. But they were help those who earnestly highly confident that, given a want to try and break the few weeks, sales would not habit. It will be a smoking only have resumed their nor- equivalent of the "weight-mal level but reach a new watchers", utilising a group peak. Unfortunately events as a means to aid will-power, seem to have shown that they If it is to have any success it were right. And why must have members. So will shouldn't they be? After all, all those even vaguely inter-they are only speaking from ested (non-smokers, too) the past experience of pre- please contact John Fisk vious reports. It's always the (Welfare V.P.) or myself, same, people are first shocked	Tony Williams
into giving up cigarettes, sales	Student Health Officer
without a work voucher for a specific job. for a defined length of time. Official permission will be required for any change of job. They will also have to register with the police on arrival and again with any change of residence. The powers of deportation have also been widened: in future a person will be liable to deportation simply because a member of his family has been deported and not because he has broken any law. Although restricted appeal against deportation remains, there will be no appeal where the Home Secretary deems deportation to be in the "public good". Finally, non patrials will be able to apply for citizenship after five years, btu this will only be granted where they can show evidence of "good character".
These proposals constitute a blatant attack on the livelihood and security of immigrants and the black community in general. It is imperative that wide scale protest be launched against them to show a militant stand against political intimidation of this kind, and to counterbalance the growing power of the right which would like further victimisation. In October of last year the Black Defence Committee was formed to initiate solidarity actions with victims of racism after mounting police harassment in Notting Hill (the Mangrove Restaurant
demonstration) and other examples of police brutality. The committee sponsored a meeting at the LSE on the immigration bill, which was attended by students, trade unionists and others who formed themselves into an ad hoc group to initiate a campaign against the bill. It was decided that March 17th be declared a day of protest against the. bill; already a motion has been passed through the union to the effect that on that day students will be urged to boycott their normal activities in order to take part in protest activities —namely, a picket of the Home Office Immigration Department, 276 High Holborn, in the morning and a Teach In in the afternoon. It is hoped that other student unions will follow this lead. There will also be pickets at the Home Office Immigration Department between 10 a.m. and 4.30 p.m. on the intervening two Wednesdays, and a public meeting has been arranged in the Conway Hall for March 11 th at 7.30.
All students are urged to take part in these activities. Further information on the Black Defence Committee may be obtained from 182 Pentonville Road (tel. 837-6954), and on the campaign in LSE from the ad hoc committee against the immigration bill c/o the union office.
Jennifer Dale
A comedy about life,
death and freedom
AL RUBAN and SAM SHAW present
Folk

Husbanbs.
Produced by AL RUBAN Assodate FVoducer SAM SHAW Written and Directed by JOHN CASSAVETES FROM COLUMBIA PICTURES COLOUR
FROM THURSDAY APRIL 1
COLUMBIA
SHAFTESBURY AVENUE-734 5414
Page 4
BEAVER
11th March, 1971
WHY SO PALE AND SICKLY, GSA?
The Graduate Student's Association (GSA) folded over two years ago. From the session 1969-70 to date there has been no body functioning specifically for graduates students at the schooL
the goodly news was spread about by word of mouth as far as was possible, though no really thorough circulation of news was possible as the duplicating facilities of the GSA were no longer available. The response was as low as the degree of apathy amongst graduates permitted; a mere eighty turned up at the outset of the meeting (out of a total of 1500 graduates). That meeting decided that a representative from each department of the graduate school should go foirward on to an adhoc committee to draw up a constitution to be submitted to a later, and hopefully better attended meeting. Fourteen people constituted this committee, one from almost every department. The committee worked hard, forming discussion groups and drafted a constitution.
Another meeting was caUed for Thursday, December 10. This time every effort was made to give the meeting advance publicity; leaflets were left on tables, large notices posted, copies of the constitution stood in one corner of that hive of activity and bonhomie, the GCR. Perhaps the timing was not right and people had gone home for Christmas—at the start of the meeting 10
Shock Therapy
The present attempt to revive the patient was begun by Sylvia Mylroie and Sandy Wynn, two girls concerned at the lack of amenity for graduates and their lack of contact with one another. Apparently no-one knew that the GSA had folded until these two began inquiring into the situation at the beginning of the session. The GSA had collapsed with many questions left hanging in the air: what improvements were to be made in facilities for graduates, who was to further their interests, how were they to be represented on the academic committees dealing with them, what were to be 'the relations between GSA and Union. All of these you might think were of sufficient weight for graduates to maintain an organised inter-esit. But, no.
The First Revival Meeting
Having established that /he GSA was quite dead, Sandy and Sylvia called a meeting for Wednesday, November 4th, to discuss its future. Fourteen posters were put up about the School and
people attended, at the end 60.
The main point at issue was the form of representation and election the proposed committee should have as outlined by sections 4 and 5 of the proposed constitution. Differences of opinion recurred on the following points: the size of the council was thought by some to be too large (under the terms of the constitution there was to be a President, 13 representatives to be elected by departmental constituency and one each for M.Sc. and research students), also three different modes of election were advocated. This meeting floundered about on these points and in order to avoid stalemate went on to agree on the remaining sections. The meeting was adjourned until next term to discuss the representation proposals in detail.
Agreement in Desperation
It may be thought that this concern with legality was rather laughable in view of the poor response shown by graduate students so far, though it is clear that some representative form had to be worked out. So the saga continued at the next general meeting on February 3rd. It was a boring meeting, enlivened only by the
underlying sense of absurdity that a handful should decide for the mass. It was ultimately decided that the departmental form of representation should prevail (rather than direct elections) in the hope that elections should arouse interest in the fate of the GSA.
The Future
Why is the GSA so moribund and what can be done to change the situation—a question in itself presupposing there is a desire for change. Various explanations spring to mind. That the School is a buzzing hive of apathy and discontent cannot be much disputed. We have but to see the delight with which the Houghton St. Show was greeted last term to realise that a crush of bodies, a "cause" and an excuse to get out of the fetid hothouse are sound indicators of how oppressive the physical circumstances are. Overcrowding at mealtimes, frustration at poor hbrary facilities and the generally rather impersonal atmosphere of the School must all contribute to keeping people away. The size and complexity of the institution makes chance encounters with acquaintances and friends fairly imlikely. For graduates on courses the im-personaUty is somewhat reduced by being thrown in the
same boat as others, although sometimes courses don't sitart for a term by which time. For research students it is worse; some people never come into the building and others, who do, know practically no-one. There can be said to be no sense of community while such a deplorable situation exists. One encouraging sign of self-help is the Research Sociologists Seminar, where a group of a dozen or so sociologists discuss research problems and see how their fellows are getting on. This is perhaps a useful model for others.
It is clear that the problem of graduate isolation is most acute in the large departments and does not seem to affect physically self-contained departments such as Social Administration and Social Psychology where apparently staff and students know each other. The lackadaisical attitude of many supervisors is a frequently articulated complaint, too.
That the School is htde more ithan a commuter college seems unarguable, thou^ this seems to be a feature of university life in general. To counter this disturbing situation, efforts have been made to set up a GSA, but do people want it?
It may well be that graduates find sufficiently supportive relationships outside the School for an organization of
this sort to be unnecessary for their social needs. It would certainly be strange if there were people with a thwarted social impulse who did not chooise to take advantage of the possibilities afforded by this organization. K the GCR—which looks like a timber-yard with small piles of logs piled around here and there, with the odd squeak issuing from each—is an indication of the general level of interest, then we must despair. There is no organizational nexus there, no expansive social glow. As far as the graduates are concerned, so far the only organised means of meeting they have had, are party held at the beginning of the session, and the departmental get togethers which some departments in genial imbecility have waited to hold until this term!).
As present, there exists a Little good will on the part of some people to get a GSA on the move, despite the very evident difficulties and discouragements so far faced. No-one can impose such a body on the graduates: it would then be a mere shell, devoid of life. If more enthusiasm is not generated amongst the atomis&d graduates of the school, all tlie work will be wasted, the goodwill turn to indifference, and the much-labored-over constitution turn to dust.
PHIL SCHLESINGER
CHANGING REALITY
Georg Lukacs, History and Class Consciousness
—Merlin, £2.50 Lenin—New Left Books £1.50
Today, as ever, the increasing rationalisation of capitalism goes hand in hand with a growing susceptibility to crisis. Gigantic concentrations of men, money and machines breed inflation and discontent.
Nothing appears to be so much at the mercy of the disruptive forces as the rational organisation of society.
It was in a period of crisis such as this that Georg Lukacs wrote his greatest works. A product of the intelligentsia (he was a pupil of Max Weber) and of Marxism, his work became in a revolutionary epoch part of "the intellectual expression of the revolution process itself". His experiences in practical politics have tended to be of a rather unfortunate nature.
Paradoxically, his theoretical work is only surpassed by that of the great revolutionary leaders of the age.
The comparative "rationalisation" of capitalism seems far more striking in the years
before 1914 even than today. When the war came, and with it a whole rash of crises and revolutions, there were many who could only interpret it as an epidemic of social insanity which completely contradicted the whole tenor and direction of historical development.
For Lukacs, on the contrary, wars, crises and revolutions respectively open up and indicate the only possible resolution to the great cracks and chasms which lie beneath what is immediately visible in capitafist society.
He claims that apparent rationalisation, is in fact, a product and essential component of the competitive process. Within a single unit, whether it be directly competitive like a business corporation, or indirectly, such as a part of the state bureaucracy, the unit's functions and development appear perfectly rational.
But when seen as part of the social whole, its irrationality becomes clear. Society is fragmented. What appears rational within any particular fragment is actually the result of compulsion from outside. It is "evident that the whole structure of capitalist production rests on the interaction between a necessity
subject to strict laws in all isolated phenomenon and the relative irrationality of the whole process."
It is in this context that Lenin's pamphlet on Imperialism becomes truly important. No great work of economics, it seeks rather to capture the essential features of a particular stage in the development of capitafism. For Lukacs, the pamphlet is a part of the revolutionary process, one of the means through which men try to break through the fatally irrational fragmentation of consciousness and society.
To do this, it is not enough to understand the general nature of the system. What made Lenin so important was his ability to analyse and pose possible solutions in practical terms to specific crises. His genius was not for crude Realpolitik but the concretisation of theory, "the dialectically correct fusion of the general and the specific, the recognition of the general (in the sense of historical tendencies) in the specific (in the concrete situation)".
Despite certain faults — both these books are well worth having a go at.
HARRY ROBERTS
GREEN TORY ?
"EAMON DE VALERA" The Earl of Longford and Thomas P. O'Neill
Hutchinson £4.00 In some ways it is a pity that Eamon de Valera did not receive a sniper's bullet in 1923. Up to then his life had been dedicated to the fight for Irish freedom, from this time, with the Irish nation only partially free, his career mainly consists of equivocation with the central facts of the Irish situation. He was drawn into the nationalist cause from the Gaelic League and he was the only leading member of the Easter Rising (1916) to survive.
From then to 1^22 as leader his aims were clear — a free Ireland independent and united, north and south; his views have not changed since, but the vigour with which he has persued them has diminished. Not even Lloyd George, probably one of the ablest negotiators of all time, was able to shake him from his course by his bullying over the conference table (lune-Sept., 1921).
At this time however de Valera made the first of a number of crucial mistakes. Foolishly, he did not lead a further mission to see Lloyd George, allowing it to be
under Collins (even though he knew Collins to be less of a republican). Loyd George twisted the more pliable deputation around his finger and the ensuing 'treaty' fell well short of any claim for true independence. If de Valera had gone himself this need not have happened. At a time when Irish solidarity, always capable of fragmentation, was most important they turned on themselves with tragic consequences. De Valera fought hard for the anti-Treaty faction but he was outdone and by May 1923 the 'moderates' with British support won.
A splendid record of national resistance is reduced by his tacit acceptance of the terms of creation of the Irish Free State.
With the defeat of the anti-Treaty faction in 1923 only two paths have remained open for Ireland if she wishes to be a united nation — revolution or the creation of an advanced, radical, secular and independent state. De Valera has never tried to create, in opposition or in power, either; and today the cause of true Irish independence looks as far away as it ever did.
The cause of revolution is not practicable in the short term in Ireland. Easter 1916 only 'succeeded' through Bri-
tish incompetence under General Maxwell and the distraction of a major world conflict. The second alternative is practicle and realisable but has never been tried.
Censorship of the arts and the theatre is one of the most severe in any democratic society. Ireland is still not cconomicaUy independent; Britam stUl controls indirectly much of her industry and commerce and other countries have also stepped in.
Some enonomic development has been made but de Valera has not pioneered this leaving it to men like Sean Lemass. Even though it has to be compared to an Ulster corrupt and bigoted, Eire does not always emerge in a favourable light. Once the South can put across positive values of freedom, equality and security, then partition can be broken.
Dc Valera it is true has done something to help this but too often he has preferred pious words to action. Where the book is at its best is in bringmg out the strange and unique character of de Valera himself, a curious mixture of Catholic, mathematician and politician.
john g. kirkaldy
11th March, 1971
BEAVER
Page 5
THE LIBERATION STRUGGLE IN THE PORTUGUESE COLONIES
Portugal, the oldest established policc state and the most underdeveloped country in Europe, has also the dubious distinction of being the last directly colonialist power.
As a result of the great power intrigues of the 1880s, Portugal found herself in control of two massive chunks of Southern Africa, Angola and Mozambique, as well as a small territory in West Africa, Guin^-Bissau. The 'civilising mission' which Portugal has extended to her African territories is arguably the most benighted and obscurantist of all the various forms of European colonialism. Among its triumphs is the establishment of the world record for illiteracy — in Guin6 running at something like 99%.
All peaceful movements for reform in the colonies were brutally crushed by the Salazar regime, with the result that the peoples in all three territories have taken up arms — and now 150,000 soldiers and 50% of Portugal's budget are not enough to block their path to freedom.
The first shots were fired in Angola on 4 February, 1961. In the following months 30,000 Africans were massacred by the Portuguese authorities. These hideous reprisals even drew the attention of the international
press, and the Portuguese found themselves unable to draw the customary cloak of distortion and censorship over their activities. Subsequently, the People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) was able to regroup its forces and to relaunch the fight as a protracted guerrilla struggle. Linked with intensive educational and organisational programmes the struggle has expanded steadily.
The MPLA now controls over one-third of the country in liberated zones, and since 1968 has maintained its headquarters inside the country.
In Guine the PAIGC (African Independence Party of Guin^ and the Cape Yerdes) took up arms against the Portuguese in 1963, after some seven years of preparation.
Despite the sophisticated armoury of Portuguese fascism (including napalm and phosphorous bombing) and despite the Portuguese policy of indiscriminate burning of villages and murder of civilians, the people of Guin^ have stood firm and begun to reclaim their nation. In 1968 a PAIGC unit was able to attack the airfield of the capital, Bissau, and Portugal now controls only l/3rd of the country. The work of elimlinating the remaining bases, and freeing the people
from 'protected villages,' continues.
FRELIMO, the Mozambique Liberation Front, launched their armed struggle on 25 September 1964.
Since then they have gained control of the northern fifth of the country and are making new advances in the western, and strategically crucial, province of Tete (site of the Cabora Bassa dam). In the liberated areas the first steps towards national reconstruction have begun. Land which had belonged to foreign-owned concession companies has been redistributed and agriculture is being reorganised on a co-operative system. Though short of supplies and equipment, bush primary schools have been set up; 20,000 children are beginning their education. First aid posts and medical centres care for the sick and wounded, and preventive medicine campaigns are in operation.
During the past year the Portuguese have shown increasing signs of desperation. Their massive offensive in Mozambique, now seem to have failed: their use for the first time of chemical weapons and herbicides in Angola—the weapons that are now being 'phased out' in Vietnam because of their dangers; the abortive inva-
sion of the Republic of Guinea, all tell the same story.
Portuguese colonialism is largely maintained not by Portugal herself, but by her allies. South Africa, in particular, needs Angola and Mozambique to act as buffer states against independent Africa and to provide valuable investment opportunities for her expanding economy.
South African troops fight alongside the Portuguese army in both these territories, and her military support includes the supply of weapons and aircraft (South African helicopters are used to transport troops).
At the same time the air-base on Sal, one of the Cape Verde Islands, provides a convenient staging post for the South African airlines, who are refused facilities on the African mainland. It was financed by South Africa.
Without economic support from her Western allies, Portugal simply could not afford her African wars. Without NATO weapons, without NATO-trained soldiers, Portugal could not maintain her army; without the economic concessions gained through EFTA her economy would be even weaker than it is. Portugal depends on external aid and is vulnerable to external pressure.
All the three liberation
movements are aware that their struggle is not merely for formal independence — which might simply substitute one exploiter for another — but for a total revolution in both town and country, which will place power firmly in the hands of the people.
Thdir battle even within their own countries, is as much political as military — educating the people of Angola, Mozambique and Guine so that they will have control over their own destinies.
The battle must be fought on all possible fronts, including Britain. It is up to us to oppose racialism and minority rule in the Portuguese colonics, in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia, and to join that fight to the fight against oppression and exploitation in this country.
The liberation movements also need practical support— money, clothing, medical and educational supplies are all in urgent demand.
Contributions can be channelled through: Committee for Freedom in Mozambique, Angola and Guine,
531 Caledonian Road, London, N7.
'Phone 01-607 2170.
Polly Gaster Noel Pauvet
TWO PEAS
FROM THE SAME POD ?
It is clear that the present British and South African governments are united in their efforts to maintain and increase the links between the two countries.
Trading links, first engaged when South Africa was a British colony, now amount to traffic in £300m. worth of British exports, and a similar amount in South African imports into this country. Direct British investment amounts to £l,600m., which is 2/3rd of the total foreign investment in South Africa. It is not an exaggeration to believe that British big business has a vested interest in maintaining South Africa's apartheid system. The lobbying done by U.K.-S.A. Trade Association, and the South Africa Foundation, the work of Conservative Party members, especially the Monday Club, and the propaganda efforts of the S.A. Embassy, amounting to close on £2.5m., show the need felt for creating British support The sport and cultural links are all part of S.A.'s struggle to hold on to a "friendly" relationship with Britain, and to thwart U.N. and commonwealth disapproval. S.A.'s fight to maintain the job reservation system, and the poverty level wages offered to Africans is propped up by the emigration of white British workers, in 1970 over .23,000, who are recruited from offices that exist in 8 major British cities. The military links back this collaboration — the Foreign Secretary's announcement that the British Government will go ahead and supply Westland WASP helicopters tics the knot more firmly and makes sure that Britain sloops into deeper involv-ment with the racist practices of the S.A. Nationalist Party Government.
The action taken to sever these links involves not only a strict consumer boycott of S.A. goods, but also the harassment of those firms who arc willing to play their part in strengthening the S.A. regime. Where recruitment centres exist, the Trade Union Movement is playing its part in exposing the realities behind the incentives offered by the S.A. government to white British workers. Feeling is increasing in the labour movement that its work now lies in preventing the delivery of the British arms for apartheid. This is where the struggle in the arms campaign now rests.
At the Westland helicopter factory in Hayes, a march and rally, organised by the Trade Union Group in Anti-Aparthcid, is to be held on March 20th. March 21st, 1960, Sharpeville,. . . British arms were used to kUl 69 unarmed Africans.
Jean Chandler
Page 6
BEAVER
March 11, 1971
I'M AGAINST APARTHEID BUT...
Everybody is a liberal about South Africa. Tory MPs, industriahsts, LSE Governors will all give a verbal denouiiccinent of South Africa on request. Pushed further, however, the usual response becomes "I'm against apartheid but . . followed by any of three arguments, (a) we have no power to change anything in South Africa, (b) by supporting capitalism in South Africa we are fostering social change, (c) how can we justify concrete action against S. Africa when the Russians invade Czechoslovakia, persecute Jews, etc. An economic analysis shows up all these arguments as whitewash: practical acquiescence of South African policies is based on vested economic interests.
South Africa is the most blatant form of Imperialism: that is, a world economic system in which large companies with control over vast amounts of capital and a monopsony over primary products can gear production over wide areas of the Earth's surface to the production of their own profits. Classical economics forecast a falling rate of profit in an expanding economy—it was on this that Marx based his ideas of the collapse of capitalism. Imperialism solved the problem. As wage rates rose manufacturers cut costs by finding cheaper raw materials and innovating with labour-saving techniques. The Third World as a whole still supports this system. By paying only subsistence prices for primary products western industry can producc finished manufactur-
es with enough profit to allow a real increase in the living standards of their workers. The independent countries however do have some bargaining power. The oil producing countries, the Nationalist Governments of South America have all been able to improve their economic terms of trade. This power is still weak: the economic nationalism of Cuba and Egypt was crushed by the western powers. Even these countries found a way out—\the industrial countries of the East.
Southern Africa represents an area under complete imperialist control with no political opposition. Imperialism has been shorn of its colonial structure, but it still manifests itself through the powerful force of racialism. Internally the political passions of the working class can be diverted against a distinctively separate cultural group even lower on the social scale. Badly organised and educated they also represent a form of cheap labour. It is mainly in racialism abroad, though, that racialism plays the economic role and especially in the greatest racialist state. South Africa.
There are 3.6 m. whites and 15.5 m. coloured Asian and blacks in South Africa. Whites own over 70 per cent of the land, all of it the most fertile. In the industries where African labour is used, wage rates vary between 8 per cent —15 per cent of the white wage. The most important economic asset to the whites is complete direction of labour—Trades Unions are illegal, and every African must have a pass book, which he
must carry at all times, and live in a native area. Under these conditions almost pure Marxian characteristics arc shown. Labour is paid only a subsistence wage and the surplus is appropriated and distributed amongst the whites. With strong Trades Unions the whites can raise their standard of living, but the greatest benefits still go to capitalists in enormous profits.
Not suprisingly, British capitalists, faced with growing competition and increasing structural dilTiculties, have looked for easy profits in S. Africa. At the height of the overseas investment restrictions in 1968 a record £43 m. went to South Africa. 1/lOth of all overseas investment now goes there. 77 of the 100 largest U.K. companies invest there, and their profits rose from £28.5 m. in 1961 to £76 m. in 1968. Many a black balance sheed depends on South African profits. From 1966-1970 imports from South Africa doubled to £320 m. Most of this was made up of primary products (£6-7 m. of oranges, £3.8 nv of tobacco, £4.3 m. of asbestos) all of which could be bought from underdeveloped countries, but which arc cheaper when produced by slave labour.
Why do the Tory Government want to make South Africa respectable and protect her? Quintin Hogg, Robert Carr, Antony Barber, Lord Carrington, Earl Jellico, Reginald Maudling, Peter Walker and Geoffrey have the following in common: all held lucrative directorships in companies with sub-
sidaries or investments in South Africa, and all are now members of the Tory Cabinet. The British capitalist class, having taken the soft option of easy profits in South Africa instead of tackling the structural change needed to generate sufficient investment at home, now wants to protect its profits against the liberation movements.
To return to our liberal capitalist's arguments — (a) British business and political support are directly involved in the support of the apartheid regime by providing the necessary investment funds to maintain an economic boom (for the whites) and the armaments for the regime to protect itself, (b) as long as there are adequate investment funds for continual labour-saving innovation, labour will be at the mercy of the capitalists and there will be no need for social changes, (c) we do not have an economic or political power of any significance over the eastern block—the comparison is completely spurious. Over oppression in the East our only attack can only be idealogical. In South Africa it is sheer hypocrisy to make idealogical attacks when British capitalism is one of the main props of apartheid.
The British capitalist class does have the power to act in South Africa. That it does not shows their lack of commitment to the ideas they profess. A union motion has already demanded that the Governors of this school who hold interests in South Africa should resign.
JKM!C)ft,ATICw\ prpic E \
U




p lycbcu-vlCmeAJr
J	s
These are the LSE slave traders who should be forced to resign:
Name:
J. O. Blair-Cunningham A. G. B. Burney
Sir Paul Chambers
Lord Crowther Sir Eric Drake Earl of Drogheda A. F. Earle Sir Ronald Edwards
Earl of Halsbury
R. J. Kirton Sir Frank Lee
Reginald Maudling
Sir Harry Melville Sir James Pitman
Lord Plowden Sir Richard Powell
Sir Eric Roll Evelyn de Rothschild
Sir Frederick Seebohm
M. J. Babington Smith Hon. A. Maxwell Stamp Donald Tyerman Albert Weinstock Sir Henry Wells Sir Frederick Harmer
Interest in SA through:
Provincial Insurance Co.
Commercial Union Assurance International Computers Stone Piatt Industries
Royal Insurance of S. Africa Ltd.
Commercial Union Assurance B.P.
Finanical Mail S.A. Ltd.
Hoover
Beecham Group ICI
Distillers Head Wrightson J oseph Lucas
Thos. Firth & John Brown Bowater
Matthews Wrightson (Holdings)
Dunlop
Her Majesty's Govt. Ltd.
Dunlop
Boots Pure Drug Bovril
Tube Investments Commercial Union Assurance
Albright and Wilson	j
GE and EE	!
Hill Samuel & Co.	j
i
Mercury Securities	i
Rootes Motors	|
De Beers
International Pacific Corp.
Barclays Bank DCO (Chairman).
National and Grindlays Bank Hill Samuel & Co.
United City Merchants GE and EE
Morgan, Crucible	\
BP Tankers
Government Director of BP
March 11, 1971
BEAVER
Page 7
TRADE UNIONS UNDER APARTHEID
The tragic-comic acts of petty personal dscrimination in which South Africa's apartheid policy results are internationally notorious. Japanese are classified as white, but Chinese are non-white. Repeatedly the child of (classified) white parents is reclassified, on the basis of appearance only, as coloure4 — often throwbacks to the early period of Dutch colonisation. Separate schools, separate buses, separate beaches, separate living areas are all prescribed for the different races. There is no way for people of different races to marry. If they sleep together they commit a criminal offence.
Many of these discriminatory laws are genuinely tragic for the people involved. As the white population doesn't want to do without its comforts, the rule about separate residential areas is reluctantly waived so that black domestic servants can live in. But this permission is not extended to the servant's husband, wife or family. So economic pressures force them to live apart. Apartheid breaks up family life.
What is less well-known is the impact of apartheid on wages, working conditions and the trade unions. Of course it is common wisdom that the apparatus of apartheid is largely designed to preserve and enlarge the economic interests of the whites at the expense of the non-whites. But it is instructive to study just what is needed to keep the non-white worker down.
First, some figures. The whites of South Africa received 10 times as much income per head as the African population. Partly this is because of the incredible poverty of the reserves, where income is as low as £1 per head per month. But even the African who finds a job in industry outside the reserves is paid a small fraction of the wage of a white worker. While a white miner earned over £30 a week the African in the same mine earned only £2. Or compare a white railway porter's £17 per week with an African porter's £6. Those aren't differentials, they arc different worlds.
The laws of South Africa do all they can to stop Africans (or Coloureds or Asians) from getting better jobs. For example they make sure that African workers get separate and inferior training. But just so there can't be any doubt there is the system of 'job reservation' by which the Ministry of Labour reserve skilled jobs for whites only. And not only the skilled ones. A typical example is refuse removal in the town of Durban. The driver of the dust-van must be white — in 1968 he earned over £13 per week. The men who hump the bins (Africans) received less than a quarter of this. (By contrast, in London the driver would then have earned £14.18.4 per week, which is only 5 shillings more than his colleagues).
If any worker in Britam was receiving these starvation wages we'd want to know what the hell his union was playing at. But don't blame the union, look at the Government imposed system.
For any African to go on strike is a criminal offence punishable by a £500 fine and/or 3 years in prison. (Some of this paragraph may seem strangely reminiscent of current controversies outside South Africa). Without the right to strike, a trade union can have little bargaining power. But they are not even permitted to negotiate. They can't take part in the industrial bargaining machinery laid down by the Government, because they are not permitted to register for that purpose. Also because an African trade union can't register, it is not eligible for immunity from civil legal actions for damages resulting from industrial action; its members are not protected from victimisation for their TU activities; union fees can not be deducted automatically from wage packets, even if the employer agrees to it. Coloured unions are better placed than African ones, but not much.
Naturally no African can join a registered union. But it is the registered unions which operate the bargaming niach-inery which finally results in the Minister of Labour 'fixing' the wage structure for an industry — and the decision is binding on the Africans. So the white unions effectively decide the wages for the Africans, without their participation at all.
If after all this there should be a dispute between an employer and African employees (remember, they're not allowed actually to strike), there is a complex machinery for 'settling' it which involves a (white) Native labour officer, a (white) Native Labour Board and the Minister of Labour (white). The only provision even for consultation with the workers themselves is through works committees; but this is obviously not taken seriously, because 15 years after this law came into force there were only 50 works committees in the whole country.
What then is it like to be an official of a non-white trade union in South Africa? He will be constantly harassed as he tries to carry out normal trade union activities. At home he can expect a raid by the Security Police in the middle of any night. He is likely to be 'banned' by the Minister of the trade union movement. He may be forbidden to move Justice, which will force him to break all connections with outside the township where he lives. If he tries to get another job the Security Police will warn off the employer. Some leaders have been put under 24-hour house arrest;
less extremist Trade Union Council of South Africa (TUCSA) which intermittently permits unregistered African others have been sentenced to long terms of imprisonment for 'sabotage'.
There have been two effects on the South African trade union movement of this persecution. The direct effect has been that African trade unions have been gravely hampered in their activities. Membership has been reduced, and some unions have virtually ceased to exist. But others continue, thanks to the heroism of men and women who daily risk prison and torture to keep the organisation going.
Another effect has been to split the labour movement in fragments. One group of white unions takes an outright racialist position. Most white unions belong to the slightly unions to be affiliate (not full) members — depending on the strength of Government pressure to exclude them.
In any case most African unions, and others representing Coloured, Indian and white workers belong to the South African Congress of Trade Unions (SACTU). Against all the odds and despite particularly vicious attacks on its leaders SACTU has struggled to produce a genuinely multiracial trade union movement.
So the effect of attacks on black trade unionists has been not only to keep Africans' wages at subsistence level. It has also been to split and weaken the whole trade union movement, black and white. All workers have suffered from this lack of unity, and only those who like to keep wages down and profits up have really benefited.
by Jonathan Rosenhead
".To accuse the CGT of treachery in May and June is nonsense — it had shown its hand long before. The trade unions, in France as elsewhere in the west, play the part of the 'loyal opposition', and in May 1968, the workers simply turned down their thumbs not only on the contestants but also on the game itself"
from Obsolete Communism
SOUTH AFRICA:
NO ROOM FOR ILLUSIONS
After Sharpeville (1960), it became fashionable to predict an "explosion" in South Africa that would rid the country once and for all of white supremacy. South Africa's stability in recent years and the survival of the Smith regime in Rhodesia despite the odds against it have dispelled these illusions. It is to the Portuguese territories of Angola and Mozambique that many revolutionaries now look for hope of change in Southern Africa. It is often suggested that guerilla victories in these two cotones will provide the trigger for change throughout the area.
Rarely in these calculations is sufficient account taken of South Africa's enormous military, economic, and technological strength. To spell it out, half of all foreign investment on the continent has been made in South Africa. South Africa accounts for nearly a quarter of the continent's entire gross production and nearly a half of Africa's total industrial and mineral output. In 1960-61 South Africa budgetted for an expenditure of £25^ million on defence. To-day the country spends over £160 million annually on the military, more than the total budget of many African countries.
However, the illusion that South Africa is on the brink of a revolution is not my main concern. It is the new myth that economic forces are slowly but surely eroding apartheid; a view particularly popular among conservatives, not only in Britain but also in America.
The argument is especially appealing to businessmen and investors as it offers a ready "moral" justification for profiting from a system akin to forced labour.
There is little evidence to justify the new myth. In fact, quite the reverse. Since 1948 the disparity between white and black earnings has been growing, and in the last decade, which has seen massive investment of foreign capital, particularly British, in S. Africa, at a faster rate than previously.
However, it is true that more and more blacks have been moving into semi-skilled and skilled jobs in the last ten years and that the country is suffering from an acute shortage of skilled man-power that can only partly, be met by white immigration. Consequently, the trend of blacks doing jobs once reserved for whites is likely to continue. But the implication often drawn from this that it will result in a narrowing of the economic gap between white and black that will eventually be reflected in the social and political field is not.
Why? Because when blacks are put in skilled or semiskilled positions, they are never paid the wage given whites in the same positions.
A .typical example is provided by the steel industry. There acute labour shortages forced the government to allow
HASSLE SOUTH AFRICA . . . TARGETS
1.	Deposit a box containing fish, cheese or anything else that stinks when it goes off in the safe of Barclays. By law it cannot be opened for one year after date of deposit and you are the only person who gets a key. This method was first tried accidentally by Mac and the boys in John Stein becks Cannery Row.
2.	Apply for emigration to S. Africa go through all the formalities lasting about 3 months and at the final interview tell them what the fuck to do with their S. Africa. This only works if you have no criminal record to start with.
3.	Write letters to your local paper. Most of the freaks who get to have a local paper Read Every Word! You might even start one of those great long chain correspondence things.
4.	Hold a teach-in in Barclays. We are indebted to Dennis Brutus for this idea. This could include Barclays customers—A big blackboard with figures, diagrams, etc., and a dunces cap for the bank clerks.
5.	Send lovely presents of rotten spuds all wrapped up in gift paper to your friendly neighbourhood Barclays manager, Ted Heath, Harold Sorof, etc. Inside loving messages "Apartheid stinks worse than this".
6.	Requests for S. African political prisoners/all in Shanty Town on 2-way Family Favourites etc.
7.	Straight looking people! Apply for jobs at Barclays GKN Sankey etc. Lengthy interviews then reject the job at the end.
8.	Apply to go on Frost Show, Bernard Braden Show etc. Get John Peel (I can hear the howls of derision from here but anyway) to read out one of his zingy little messages on the Beeb.
9.	Surreptitiously (!) deface adverts for holidays in surujy S. Africa in colour mags etc. before they're sold. OR if you've got lots of money buy them and then put them back on the shelves complete with defacing.
10.	Join the guerrilla forces in S. Africa. Well — just an idea.
Africans into certain jobs previously done by whites. The rate for the job was then slashed from 68 cents an hour to 22 cents. And what happened to all those 46 cents the employers saved? Most was paid in increased bonuses (backdated) to the white workers That ensured that the white steelworkers trade union would accept the "horrible humiliation" of blacks doing "white men's" work. As only white trade unions are recognised, they consequently have the whiphand in most industrial situations.
In general, African workers have a very weak bargaining position. It is illegal for them to strike. Should they nevertheless do so as in the 1969 Durban dock strike, the police have a time-honoured method of dealing with the situation. The strikers are Isolated. Should any refuse to return to work, they are deported to the reserves. Banishment to the reserves, then 13% of the country assigned as African homelands, is a powerful sanction, as life there is even grimmer than in the rest of the country: job opportunities are few and life expectancy low. (In a recent study of malnutrition Professor Reid of the University of Natal concludes that 50% of Africans in a typical reserve die before the age of five).
Finding replacements for any strikers who still refuse to return to work, usually only a very small proportion of those who originally struck, presents few problems. Thousands of Africans daily breach the pass laws restricting freedom of movement in the "white" areas (87% of the country) in their desparate search for employment. There are over 1,700 arrests under these laws every day. South African policy is in the words of the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration "the elimination of the R^undant non-economically active Bantu in our white areas", in practice the separation of wives and children from their husbands.
In these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that African workers have difficulty just keeping up with inflation and that their share of the national cake is progres-ively diminishing. There is a further reason. The expansion of the South African economy has been based not on any raising of African consumption levels, but on an expansion of the "white" market. The West's massive involvement — British investment totals over £1.000 million — makes it highly unlikely that concertcd international action against South Africa will get the necessary support.
The prospects of internal revolution are also low. TTie last decade has seen a massive increase in the powers of the police and in the use of informers, particularly in the African townships. Under the 1967 Terrorism Act, a police officer can detain anyone indefinitely without trial, incommunicado, and in solitary confinement. In 1969 the Bureau of State Security (BOSS) was set up to expand and co-ordinate the political police network. It reports directly to the Prime Minister.
Page 8
BEAVER
Thursday, March 11, 1971
THE UNITED NATIONS AND SOUTH AFRICA
The policies of apartheid of the South African Government have been dealt with by the United Nations General Assembly ever since its first session in 1946. The UN's obvious ineffectiveness in dealing with the problem can be belter understood if the organisation is considered as a whole. Here you have a gathermg of 127 delegations from all over the world, joining together in the common cause of world pcace. But a closer look reveals that, however idealistic we may assume their hopes and aims to be, each one of these 127 delegations represent the interests of tiieir countries, which, heaven forbid, cannot be brusiied aside in lavour of tne more urgent objectives of world peace and freedom for all men. And none of these nations are willing to give up their sovereignty — in other words few nations will tolerate United Nations intervention
into what they consider as their internal affairs. So most countries, although willing to vote in favour of resolutions condemning South Africa, arc reluctant to press for active intervention, as any such "violation of sovereignty" is too close. to home for any country with internal problems of its own.
We must put the blame for this ineffectiveness where it is due — not with the United Nations Organisation which, with countless potentially sound resolutions has done as much as it can witliin its present confines, but with the big powers, especially the UK, which could, both by stopping all diplomatic and trade ties with South Africa and by adding their considerable influence to the fight, make elfective the weignt of opposition against South Africa.
The story of the UN and South Africa consists of a
series of well-meaning but ignored resolutions, and the interminable rhetoric of UN debates. From the beginning South Africa has totally rejected or ignored any UN resolutions concerning itself and consistently refused to co-operate with the UN Commission set up to investigate the situation. Since 1955 they have refused to participate in UN discussions on the problem.
After the Sharpeville disaster in 1960 a Security Council was convened for the first time on this question, and it called upon the South African Government to improve the situation and abandon its policies of apartheid. The UK and France abstained from voting. In 1962 the General Assembly adopted a resolution imposing diplomatic and
economic sanctions against South Africa, and since then has passed repeated resolutions condemning Francc, ihe L'K and the US for their continued collaboration with South Africa.
Since 1965 the United Nations Trust Fund for South Africa has provided legal assistance to persons persecuted under repressive legislation, while the UN Educational and Training Programme for South Africans has promoted the education and training abroad of South Africans.
In 1966 the UN initiated an anti-aparlheid campaign of political action, humanitarian measures and information activity. Anti-apartheid movements have organised boycotts, expres.sed solidarity with the oppressed people of
South Africa and helped victims of apartheid.
21st March International
Action Day 1971 is International Year for Action against Racism and 21 March, anniversary of SharpeviHe is International Action Day. Among events planned here . . . Christian Aid is organising a meeting in London with such speakers as Jeremy Thorpe and Clutton Brock, recently deported from Rhodesia. The UN Students Association are planning an exhibition of photos and other material at Speakers Corner, with a good speaker; or a procession of people carrying coffins and depositing them outside South Africa House. Watch ACAR notices for more details.
Thalia Marriott
'ELEMENTS OF GENOCIDE' IN RHODESIA
An investigating group appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Commission has found that the "forced removal" of Africans from lands in Rhodesia and South West Africa (Mamibia) constitutes what it calls "elements of genocide". It also says in a report issued today that the Portuguese authorities in Angola, Guinea (Bissau) and Mozambique have conducted mass executions of people .suspected of opposing the regime . . .
On the basis of evidence received the group has asked the Human Rights Commission, now in session at Geneva, to approve a "full and thorough investigation" of the enforced population transfer and the "cleaning up" of the Caprivi strip of South West Africa in 1968 . . .
The Times 25/2/71

l^Xou vere
Qxid ^
lived in ^
XOIJT
S'si 0 n
lOT)
ttiW:jr]^'Re OUT
ror, wwjtgt wot fum CC'WTAC-T" ; "thC Mih /STT'R
I L(iK>2)0S> ,U-C.2-K/
i CR.AStf, (\r	.
need us, SRornerf
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND APARTHEID
"Some human situations cry out to heaven for justice. Revolution may well seem justilied when whole nations are deprived of basic human rignts" (Development of Peoples — Paul VI).
Apartheid is a system of race segregation pecuhar to South Africa. While this has long been a policy in that country, it became a political issue in 1948 when the Nationali.st Party under Prime Minister Malan inaugurated a legislative programme of apartheid. It is oflicially stated that its purpose is to ensure the continued domination of the country by a white minority. The non-whites are set apart in reserved lands, their movement is restricted, and their national, political and economic rights are severely curtailed. The major part of the coloured population, the Bantu, cannot hold property, cannot vote, and cannot live outside designated areas. In urban settings they are subject to curfew regulations and passbook requirements.
Such m brief is the essence of apartheid. The attitude of the Church to such a situation is clear and simple. It is not based on any political viewpoint but on the dignity of man.' Any spstem which degrades human dignity; which denies or curtails man's rights and privileges stemming from his dignity, stands condemned as unjust, unhuman and unchristian. ". . . with respect to the fundamental rights of the person, every type of discrimination, whether social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, colour, social condition, language or religion, is to be overcome and eradicated as contrary to God's intent." (Vat. II Church in Modern World).
The dignity of man is a fundamental Christian concept. Since man is created in the image and likeness of God; since he is destined to share an eternal happiness hereafter, he possesses a dignity above and beyond all material creation. And from this view of man comes his dignity, his rights, which are inalienable.
Where man is subjugated, where his inherent rights are ignored, there he is treated unjustly, and the development of his human personality stunted. Such a system not only perpetuates unjustice, not only hinders human development and the progress of culture, but also sows the seeds of hatred and discontent. As Shakespeare says, "the evil men do lives after them", so this injustice and hatred, deliberately fostered by apartheid vv-ili bring about its own destruction. But it will take many generations for the evils to work themselves out of the system.
Where there is no recognition of the brotherhood of man, there is a rejection of the fatherhood of God. And once God is eliminated from the scene, the dignity of man is taken away. In merely human terms man is insignificant, just one amongst many, a brief flash of light between two periods of darkness. But if man ultimately comesf rom God; has received his human dignity from God; is destined to go back to God, and to be united in a higher life, then man is sacred: he is in a privileged position, and any interference with his liberty, his human rights, is an attack not only on his dignity, but on the very existence and nature of God.
All this is summed up in Paul VI's New Year Message: "True peace must be founded upon justice, upon a sense of the intangible dignity of man, upon the recognition of an abiding and happy equality between men, upon the basic principle of human brotherhood, that is, of the respect and love due to each man, because he is man . . .
Whoever works to educate the rising generations in the conviction that every man is our brother, is building from the foundation the edifice of peace. Whoever implants in public opinion the sentiments of human brotherhood without reserve, is preparing better days for the world . . . Whoever helps in discovering in every man, beyond his physical, ethnic and racial characteristics, the existence of a being equal to his own, is transforming the earth from an epicentre of division, antagonism, treachery and revenge into a field of vital work for civil collaboration.
Where brotherhood amongst man is at root disregarded, peace is at root destroyed. And yet peace is the mirror of the real, authentic modern humanity, victorious over every anachronistic self-injury . .	p.^trick McCoy.
11th March, 1971
BEAVER
'- 'Page 9
Apocalypse
Cymru Am Byth
S.IOO was the scene for the oldest and most influential migrant group—the Welsh — celebrating St. David's Day. Conversations, and there were many new acuaintances made among staff and students inevitably began with "Which part of Wales do you come from", the exception being "Beaver" 's editor, "I'm from Worcestershire". If any one would like more information about LSE Welsh Society please contact the secretary through the society pigeonholes.
Pooh at the Baimeades
Let all the men and women be warned, danger threatens and rabbit is engulfed. The jugulars have dropped and the lurking woozles have smelt blood, it is time for all friends and relations to stand up and be counted.
Apathy looms large, heflf-alumps are afoot and the animals are baying at the door of her warren: the bunnies have taken fright and soon all would be lost in a Scotch mist.
The warren must not fall! Stand and fight! Rabbit must be defended at all cost, if she goes the bunnies are lost and we are no more. Financial problems can be dealt with, we have the book to guide us, but we must be strong in number as well as strong in spirit.
A new generation of bunnies is required, some of rabbit's friends are fading away to the great warren in the sky and carrots are getting shorter. It is time for all the poohs to stand and be counted.
Historical Note
The election of Mr. Danny La Rue as Honorary President of the union might seem a somewhat odd occurrence for a college such as ours. In fact his election is part of a rare LSE tradition. It is only since 1966 that hon. presidents have been of a political nature eg. Ho Chi Minh. Before, those chosen were from, or associated with, show business.
The Gen. See's, file on this subject is one of the most interesting in the bureaucratic machine. It shows for example that the "show business" type presidents have not always been politically dormant. A good example of an aware hon. president is Wolf Mankowitz, who in .1958 rjpsigned by telegram in protest at an invitation sent to Sir Oswald Mosely to speak at the school.
Many presidents took the job seriously and there are
plenty of letters requesting mtormation on what they were expected to do durmg the year. Nor were they aDseniee presidents; Harry Secombe and Jimmy Edwards are good examples of those wno took the trouble to go to LSE. In fact it would appear that their presidential addresses were quite an occasion.
The tile stretches back to 1950 and since then there have been quite a variety of presidents ranging trom Gerard Hollnung (who spoke at LSE on lUth October, 1958) and more recently Bernard Braden. It would appear that the last of the traditional presidential speeches was given by Bernard Braden in 1965, so the practice has not been lapsed for that long a period.
No-one is suggesting that the election of Mr. La Rue means LSE has finally become totally divorced from politics. It probably reflects more of a desire to stop acting symbolically when there is a possibility of doing some practical good for the union. To give an idea of what life us^ to be like at LSE here are some quotes from a letter sent to John Betjeman in 1960: "The duties involve delivery of an annual address to the student body (which is not given to showering its guests with missiles!) followed by a reception and dinner with students and the Director . . . usual to be guest of honour at a Commemoration Ball at the Royal Festival Hall".
It is worth pointing out that even with all that, LSE was regarded as a hot-bed of revolution! Another little fact which reveals how much life has changed is that the president used to write and ask people if they would allow themselves to be nominated.
Those were the days!
Thus Spoke Zarathustra
At 12.45 on March 25, LSE witnessed one of the
greatest of its annual spectaculars, the A.G.M. The moment when an ancient LSE dynasty stepped down to be replaced by a sultan and his own circle of retainers and henchmen, most seasoned in many a bridge tournament, and not a tew bearing the scars of poker.
To the sound of the muffled bells, agamst the backdrop of the lush extravagance of the old theatre a crowd, hushed and respectful witnessed a great event. How many during those all too brief moments managed to find time to cast their minds back over the past, and especially the future.
As the rod of empire was thrown to the phoenix strange noises could be heard echoing through the corridors as the serpent and canker-worms of the past year were hurled into the styx. The remainders of a year when the omnipotent deity cowered before prowling bands of evil minded men and women, pyromaniacs lar-kins, blood suckers and even the apache-gunman. These fool people known by all as the beaurocrats, ceaselessly beleaguered the man. Deeds most foul were done that year, not least the crime of frivolity that most terrible of sins in this hallowed political institution.
But that is now past, a new era of joy and poker is upon us, a new dawn has broken over the St. Clements ramparts.
We must all look to the future with hope in our hearts, ahead is the goal of the dead end job we must all strive for: some will reach their ultimate end, others will fall by the wayside and become successful.
Seen on a wall in NW Poly: "Why docs Edward Heath were underpants in the bath?" "Because he doesn't like to look down on the unemployed!"
LSE Entertainments Committee
Saturday, 13 March, 7.30 p.m. KEEF HARTLEY BAND FREEDOM HENDRDC 'EXPERIENCE' (Film)
65p Advance Tickets, Union Office
Flying beacon ruins bedstead myth
The Rugby Club have been on yet another fantastic away match, this time to King's College, Cambridge.
We kicked off into almost gale-force winds and found ourselves 13-3 down at half-time. The wind died down in the second half and Steve Baumgartner came into his own in the line-out with some briUiant jumping and good possession. Rod Webb excelled himself in scoring three very good tries. One of the best tries of the game came from a move by Chris Whelan. LSE finally beat Kings by 27 points to 13 points.
The evening consisted of a game of claptrap- with Ian
Eklwards as Chairman. After a few rounds of claptrap a couple of typical Cambridge types came up and, with some weird gestures, said "What's the point of this game?" to which Brian Morgan, King of gay wit and ready repartee, retorted "Piss off".
We rounded off the evening with a few songs and a strip by none other than Ian Edwards.
After taking some of us on a pub crawl round Cambridge, Harry the driver decided to look for the coach. When we got back it was being driven up and down outside Kings by Brian Morgan and Edwards. After waking
Graham Leather up, who was fast asleep by the side of the stream in which John Hors-thuis and Chris Whelan were paddling, we took some souvenirs from King's and Went looking for a chippy. However, Harry went up a one way street the wrong way and when a passing motorist mentioned this to him he said "Piss-off, I'm bigger than you". All the chippies were closed, so we returned to London; with very few stops because of an adaptation of a Belisha beacon globe which was unfortunately emptied over a Cambridge student sitting on a bedstead during a rag stunt!
"And so to bed" said Taff, 30 times!

"This big"
Eric Church to attend Soccer Club Dinner
Since the trip to Oxford, the social calendar of the soccer club has suffered something of a blank. However this should be put right at the forthcoming club dinner. At unbelieveable expense a whole galaxy of super-stars has been booked for the occasion, including our illustrious Honorary President, Mr. Brian Glanville and that well known impresario. Eric Church (yes the Eric Church). Eric was recommended to us by none other than Andy Wiggins and even Fred the groundsman joined in the praise—^'He knows an incredible number of dirty jokes'. What finer tribute could be paid?
The Executive apologises for the length of time taken to arrange the dinner, but I'm sure that members will appreciate the effort (negotiations over contracts, fees, dates^ etc.) that are needed to guarantee the appearance of such personalities. Some difficul-
ties were also experiences in the rather less glamorous task of finding a place to eat— past activities of the LSE rugby and soccer clubs have hardly made us the most desirable of clientele amongst London's restaurauteurs. More than one polite enquiry ended with the phone being slammed down in our face as it were.
The question of drink also proved something of a problem. Previous arrangements had to be cancelled when it was found that ale sold at the outrageous price of four shillings a pint. A quick telephone call mentioning the fact that it was the LSE soccer club, and not the "Pass-field Hall Society" that would be attending was sufficient to get us out of any commitments to that particular eating house with the minimum of fuss and cost.	'
Anyway, at last all looks set for a good night. Good jokes, an enjoyable meal and plenty of lovely booze. What else could any normal pleasure loving alcoholic want?
Burp...
AU ELECTION S
The new A.U. executive took over on February 25th, they are John Burnside (President), Keith (Taff) Turner, Sam (Paddy) Hazley and John (Manx) Horsthuis. The new officers hope to continue the diligent and extensive work done by their forebears in extending the A.U. membership and promoting interest in new clubs. The main task of the new Exec, will be to extend sporting facilities in the School, particularly in Squash and Badminton, when the library moves to Strand House.
We hope to build closer links between the clubs, es pecially on the social side with the main events to be a Beer and Cheese Party this term and then early next term, at these we can informally discuss any problem^ arising amongst the Clubs and promote more discussion between Clubs. We are planning block inter-collegiate fixtures for various clubs for next year which, we hope, will form a precedent for years to come.
John Burnside, President A.U.
NOTES
LSE Rugby Club beat L'Institut des Etudes Politi-ques 19—6.
Holland trip is off!
1
Page 10
BEAVER
11th March, 1971
DRAM. SOC. RESURGENT ?
/ H.'j.	^	--yy- ^ /¦¦'/tSftamiWm III illiMMI
The great experiment: three engineers rebuild Galy Gay (Henry Woolf)
Man is Man Royal Court
Brecht's play, written in 1926 lacks the social revolutionary quality of his later work, but it nevertheless fires one with a deep philosophical question and with high spirited comedy.
The theme is the substance of man. Galy Gay the packer sets out with one name to buy a fish for dinner, joins the army, buys an army-registered elephant and ends up with another name as officer in command of a machine-gun section in Tibet. What's in a name? What's
Ellen
Hampstead Theatre Club
Peter Ransley's first play is well written but clumsily structured. From the title you might expect Ellen O'Connor-Manczag to be the central character; a frail old Rumanian woman living with her memories of the past in Paris and her visions of the future.
You would however be disappointed. She is indeed a live character and the author's inspiration, but beyond the general appeal of a beautiful performance by Mary Merrall her contribution is incidental.
The central plot revolves around John Sutcliffe (Ian McShane) a playwright, his wife Clara (Maria Aitken) and their sterile relationship.
in a man? If everything in life is relative, can man really be man? After all man is nothing on his own unless spoken to. It isn't the self-opinionated individual who matters but what he does.
Our friends are drinkers, smokers, lovers and Galy Gay is just another bloke who can be persuaded through fear and cunning to assume another name and personality. . Brecht suggests that given the appropriate conditioning we can all become soldiers, murderers . . . But can we really be trained to change our true nature. In the end they could not rebuild Galy Gay.
The former reminisces of his life in the signal-box in Smethwick with Ted the artist and their mutual girl friend. Meanwhile he struggles manfully to prove his virility.
You sympathise with his plight, but soon realise that it is Clara, a prim frigid human specimen who is the non-operator. She is psychologically sterile and it takes more than sperm tests and Ellen's fortune-telling to catalyse their married life. It takes the intrusion of Ted, otherwise known as Cockalorum. Bounding in from Smethwick he recreates a manage k trois; then sperm and tempers fuse and clash.
The most interesting aspect of the play is the vicious duel between Clara and Cockalorum. The former's life is the ideal of a fully adapted, normal member of society; paste-board Aunt
Alongside the central philosophical debate laughs the full relief of a light-hearted comedy. Widow Bed-bick and her Bar provide the focus of activity for senseless soldiers whose sport is women, tobacco, beer and debunking the sergeant-major.
Director William Gaskill would probably argue that this play is entertainment, not the rack and he has therefore skilfully balanced the philosophical truths with a light-hearted musical comedy. The result is highly satisfactory. Students get a 25d reduction on all tickets.
Sally with no cracks.
Cockalorum on the other hand 5s unpredictable, shizo-phrenic, and relishes the demolition of Clara's facade. His initial kicks rebound, but a lengthening night, a great deal of whisky and vivid descriptions of therapeutic machinations in a mental hospital finally succeed in undermining her confidence.
Because of the nebulous structure of the play, there is varied speculation as to the characters intentions and personalities. Contradictory opinions sparked off a lively debate after the show and in this way distinguished EUen from what is otherwise a better television play than live production. The advantage of a Theatre Club is that it enables one to comment and criticise openly in an intimate atmosphere among theatre lovers.
London College Drama Festival
Recently LSE DramSoc has been attempting to pull itself out of the state of un-adventurous mediocrity into which it had fallen in the last couple of years, and a signal advance has been made in this direction with the winning of one of the awards in the London Colleges Drama Competition.
The standard was not in general particularly high, most of the colleges appearing to rely on their material rather too heavily in the achievement of any kind of impact. Small casts, amateur use of technical effects, and the fact that only one of the plays was an original contribution demonstrated the prevailing difficulty of evoking widespread enthusiasm or involvement with drama and what it tries to do.
The adjudicator matched the half-heartedness of the productions by his refusal to adjudicate. "Well, y'know, to stand up here and say that one play is better than another; well, man, that's not where drama's at today."
This may well be true, but the complete absence of spe-Oific. constructive criticism must have been particularly galling for those colleges who did not even have the indi-catioin of an award as to the opinion of the adjudicator on their production.
Two of the awards went.
Captain Smng at the Penny Gaff
Unity Theatre
The play recalls the peasant revolt of 1830 against the Enclosure System and the oppression of agricultural workers by landowners. The subject is political and treated with passion and persuasiveness. In this it is successful and the audience is made firmly aware of the injustice and outrages of 18th and 19th centuries. But their effort to make the situation relevant to today fails.
We have our injustices, but they are not agricultural and try as the Spence Group do to persuade one of their cause with their pamphlet and their earnestness, they
The Licentious Fly
Mermaid Theatre
The pantomime season has straggl^ on for the Mermaid and the only excuse for this Lenten farce must be debt. I can think of no other reason why this excellent
deservedly, to St Bart's, who had entered an original play that had already won the trophy at the NUS festival.
Written by one of their members. The Bird Garden is a highly imaginative, lyrical fantasy wnich successfully creates the atmosphere necessary to put over its highly complex thematic content in surrealistic terms.
The most impressive thing about it, however, was the real spirit of teamwork that made a unity of experience in a way that few amateur productions are. Should we be successful in bringing this play to LSE, it will be worth godng to see, if only to prove that drama need not necessarily be restricted to literary eggheads mouthing "To be or not to be" to cover up their own ineffectualness in everyday life.
LSE's entry, Edward Albee's Zoo Story is a cerebral rather than a visually dramatic play, and consequently relies heavily on the ability of its actors to make their characters, and the ideas contained in what they have to say interesting to the audience, while maintaining the overall structural balance.
Tom Lee in the role of Peter managed to exploit to the full the comic content of a middle-aged conformist's reaction to a deeply disturbed. unconventional social reject, and his achievement was the greater owing
cannot provide an explanation or remedy for present problems. The play's subject is historical and in this context it is enlightening.
The main body of the play lies in the musical performance at the Rotunda Pub. In preparation, the first act depicts the deplorable poverty and London's reaction to the agrarian revolt. Unfortunately this is unduly spun-out and lacks drama. However the clandestine performance at the Rotunda in the second act is powerful and moving.
One gets caught up in the excitement of what is essentially a political tableau. The villains and hero arc caricatured in puppet-show styie and the political stance is blatantly obvious. The plot does not attempt to be contrived, but its passion for-
theatre should want to put on a second - rate com^y. It's all baubles, bangles and beads. Brash music hall jokes in mediocre taste (but who is to judge good taste, certainly not Lord Eccles) which left me retching with laughter.
The plot is well constructed, the dialogue sharp and corny and the jokes screamingly funny. The acting is excellent, especially Christopher Benjamin as Jack Fly. Gay Soper as his daughter overacts, but a fine arse
to the fact the character has to be established not, as is usual, chiefly through the lines, but rather through a studied use of mannerism and facial expression.
The most complete and striking character of the play and of the whole festival, however, was Jerry, played by Jim Wilson, who won the Best Actor's award. Whereas most of the performers in the competition at best projected themselves or worked effectively to achieve a group effect, the part and Jim's real acting ability enabled him to produce a masterpiece of characterisation which dominated without disturbing the balance of the play.
Zoo Story is to be staged at LSE on 11 and 12 March, along with another new production The Room by Harold Pinter. It will be interesting to see if the present development of DramSoc can be maintained, and perhaps channelled more into the fields of modern experimental and political drama, a move that could give more impetus and involvement to the society in a school of Political Science.
DramSoc is looking for people who feel they would like to help in this, and those with fresh ideas or contacts in outside groups who would like to come and play in LSE will be especially welcome.
Hilary Chadwick
bids me to consider it naive.
The turmoil of history is enlivened by the music, arranged and directed by Bert Bennet. What the music lacks in modulation and subtle phrase it makes up in lusty melodies sung with conviction. Musicals usually send me to sleep, but here I wanted to stand up an join the chorus.
The acting in general is convincing and refreshing in its honesty and enthusiasm. The cast may be predominantly professional, but the amateur element gives it a spontaneous ad-lib quality which sparks off a politically involved audience.
The play is performed every Friday, Saturday and Sunday at 7.45 until March 28th and the tickets arc cheap.
wriggle is all part of the show.
If you want an evening out to unblock the bookworms then take the Mermaid's medicine. Unbuckle your belt, laugh your guts out and leer at fine bosoms and bums. I only hope that enough constipated businessmen go to fill the Mermaid's coffers. Meanwhile I sympathise with the theatre's predicament and look forward to brighter days when first-class plays can return to Puddleduck.
Page 11
BEAVER
March 11, 1971
Music:
LP "IF2"
Some time ago I wrote .iome complimentary tilings about IF's first album. IF are not a nationally famous group by any means but, as we all know, that's no indication of talent. IF have developed from that first album (which seemed to be a forum for the long solos of Dick Morrissey (sax, flute) and Terry Smith (guitar) into a really tight music band. Their appearance at LSE last October gave indication of this direction, but with this American-recorded album they have progressed even further whilst still retaining and at times even increasing their jazz and jazz-rock influences in the music. IF seems to be so much more of a band now.
"IF 1" just scraped into the M.M. Top 30 but "IF 2" has not as yet achieved any chart success. The group don't seem to be receiving any promotion any more from Island, their recording company, and the record reviews appeared in the music press a month after the L.P.'s release. What went wrong. Island? This band is surely worth publicising as it is very nearly unique among groups with the same or similar lineups.
The brass-section in groups like Mogul Thrash, Alan Bown, Dada, etc. are mainly used to produce an overwhelming heavy riif backing. IF, however use their jazz experience to produce well-balanced, non-hysterical solos (musical understatement?) and when the brass does riff it is to build the theme not drive home the impact.
Terry Smith, the group's guitarist and one-time winner of the M.M.'s Jazz Poll's "Best Hope" prize, has his own style (heard that one before?) and amongst the IF personnel perhaps retains the most evident jazz influence. His best solo on "IF 2" is on "Sunday Sad" which can only be described as an electric Spanish guitar type solo, but there isn't a filler track among the six on the whole album.
Apparently Miles Davis likes this group and has been accorded with saying that amongst the whole crop of jazz-rock (isn't it about time we forgot that phrase, in the fashion of "progressive" and "u n d e r ground" — and "heavy" too) groups IF alone know exactly what they arc doing. If Miles likes them, aren't they worth a listen? If their booking fee wasn't so high and out of relation (unhappily) to their drawing power they would certainly appear again at L.S.E. So you'll have to listen to the L.P. If you are boycotting L.P.s because of the extortionate price, like some people I know, ask to borrow my copy.
Clivc Attenborough.
At LSE:
KEEP HARTLEY
13th March
Keef Hartley is replacing the Groundhogs who were originally booked to appear at LSE on this date. The Groundhogs pulled out of th^-date to play on the Rolling Stones tour. Keef is playing for a vastly-reduced fee (one-third off) as it is a "quick date" and it's a small college. Thank you Keef. Also on the bill is the Jinii Hendrix film "Experience" and Freedom, a group with a very good reputation for entertainment. Tickets are 65p (Keef still isn't that cheap!) and the show is an especially long one, 7.30-11.45 p.m. I think it's still good value at that price, the Hartley band being possibly the "biggest" act we've had here since Soft Machine a year ago.
Keef Hartley has had a string of bands since he started up his own group after quitting John Mayall. It took a while to establish a live reputation but for a year or more now Keef has had the power to draw people knowing that whoever plays with the band that night will be good. Henry Lowther (violin/ trumpet) departed from the K.H.B. some time ago but as ace soloist Keef now has the indestructible Wynder K. Frogg (organ) backed by the now permanent members Keef (drums), Gary Thain (bass) and the much-under-rated musician, singer and group composer Miller Anderson (guitar). Keef occasionally has a 'name' soloist when he can get one for live gigs, recently Johnny Almond has played a few times, but we don't know who will be coming on Saturday . . . The rumour-mongers among us might like to day dream about the possibility of John Mayall or Sugarcane Harris (currently on tour in Britain) tourning up, but I'm just tempting you to buy a ticket.
Keef is soon to release a new album "Underdog" but his last album "The Time is Near" is indicative of the direction Hartley was taking when the brass section was still in the band. The group sounds like an English Electric Flag at times, only a lot more delicate and precisely arranged—mainly due to the original, unpretentious tunes and lyrics of Miller Anderson. What sort of music is it, Kcef? "Just good band music, that's all'. And so it is, not heavy, not a hype, not pretentious, just well-played music, totally indicative of the current high standard of musicianship of British musicians and particularly those who have been playing pop for as long as Keef and those who came to prominence in the Great British Blues Revival (mid-60's) variety). Keef still roars rock/blues in his
act, but the music (as this LP) is solely his.
Clive Attenborough.
Film:
'Mad Dogs
and Englishmen'
Joe Cocker, etc.
It doesn't seem hard to get into these film preview showings. All one has to do is act (and they all are) like a music industry hanger-on, put on one's King's Road/Ken. Mkt. revolutionary gear, stroll through the foyer, trying hard not to see who's who, who's here, past the half-hearted doormen and into the cinema. If there's any what's known as "hassle", just be "cool, man," and deceit will triumph. Take a place in the stalls, in plenty of time to gaze round (best to get near the back so you don't have to crane your neck turning round) at the members of the industry of human happiness assembled around. (If a bomb had dropped on the Empire Theatre the whole of Britain's major musical talent would have been killed at a stroke). See the recording executives (suits and tics), the money men (suits only), the artists, (all looking like next month's Mr. Fish window display) and the attendant groupies and heavy boys. And the hangers-on. 1,500 people in the Empire Cinema, at midnight, all with something to do with music. As you may have guessed, the film becomes almost irrelevant.
And in the ordinary, straight cinema-goers' terms, it is. Rock music films are big business these days. Since they realised the potential for transferring our little-seen superstars onto the screen, the film industry has turned-on, and it's all love
and peace and groovy, etc., (as well as inordinately profitable) to make a cheap film of a group's live performance and put it onto the circuit. A family going to the local pic-ture-house to a weekly treat would indeed be surprised at seeing 'Mad Dogs . . .'. They don't make 'em like they used to. Mother. Only to the stars and starfuckcrs in the Empire and the people who actually pay to see the film (the 'A. Fan's of Britain'), is this film important. Even then it is not as good as the trendsetter "Woodstock", despite its heavy use of that movie's techniques.
"Mad Dogs . . concentrates on one group's (Joe Cocker's 'Mad Dogs and Englishmen') tour of the USA and several of their performances. It gives interesting if not startling glimpses into a touring rock band's life-style, but the sole strength and only interesting part of the film is the music. Which is good. Joe Cocker, Leon Russell and 16 others (eight musicians and an eight-strong 'Space Choir') were a really bizarre band, which played pure undistilled rock'n'roll blasted out with real guts and conviction. The audience's reactions to the music arc incredible, and more deservedly so tlian the usual mass masturbation attendant with live concerts. (Been to one recently where the top act wasn't given an encore?). For those with a mind for such things, be warned that in the cinema encore-screams, storming the screen or idiot-dancing don't seem to be the correct thing to do. Yet.
So if you like rock music, go and see the film, it's well worth it. If you don't like rock music, there isn't much reason for going, in the usual manner of cinema entertainment.
And for the benefit of the gentlemen round at A and M records; by default, chance, etc., I did have a ticket. "Like 1 know someone in the business, man/men".
Clive Attenborough.
^ *
I FILM SOCIETY |
*
i	16 March:	%.
J The East is Red % * (Chinese Society) *
18 March:
Citizen Kane 27 April:
*	Battleship Potemkin -k J	29 April:
J	Rosemary's Baby
><¦	*
J	4 May:	*
J	Elvira Madigan	^
*	6 May:	*
Goodbye Columbus
11 May:	t
Zorba the Greek *
^ ^ -------- ^
t	15 May: t
J	The Charge of the Light *
J	Brisadc *




.,,¦,09.30-"'°
You look aw£ul. Why don't you go sossiewhere?
BSTC makes it easy
Jet London to Paris £5.50 to Rome £14.50 to Athens £22
15 days on a Greek island £60 Get FREE details today
British Student Travel Centre 44 GoodgeStreet LondonWI
Sorry, I didn't quite follow that
It was to be all the latest, up to date, progressive stuff about the role of the prisons in our society. The current University of London Extension Lecture series was organised by those in command of all the ideas on the subject, the Home Oflice (which organ was duly thanked by the chairman, a high ranking Home Oflice official). Not surprisingly perhaps, a careful sprinkling of nodding old men had been solicited to attend, as the proprietors of practical good sense, not to mention the collected wisdom of the ages. Needless to say they had notliing to say. What was this particular silent (knackered) majority doing there unless they were dragged along to ensure:
(a)	a good crowd (a groundless fear)
(b)	that the heretical ideas of any long (or short) haired insurrectionist who got in would not dominate the proceedings, leaving the tired old man who spoke to suffer the indignity of being ignored. (No way of sorting out the riffraff these days, y'know; They're giving Ph.D.'s to everyone).
Anyhow, Sir Arthur James, Q.C., some hanging and flogging judge from Birmingham was to address himself to the subject of: "The role of the prison in the penal system: A sentencer's view". In fact he was going to attempt to tell us how we could flog 'cm and cure 'em^ concommitantly ("at a stroke", maybe?).
But before we got to him, we were subjected to a sort of Kiddies Hour by Alan Bainton (Controller, Prison Department) Who bumped his gums for far too long attempting to establish a suitably sober mood by providing comfortable classical explanations and definitions. We heard what a prison is, who goes there and why, what we the people expect the prison to do to (or was it "for") them. Once the boys and girls in attendance had grasped these fundamental conceptual intricacies, we got on to this Birmingham geezer; there he was saying that punishment and retribution were legitimate functions of the prison, because society expected it to fulfill that role (izat so?). Transgressors must be punished for their sins. Well, that's O.K., I guess (logically) but then we heard that "inadequate offenders" were to be excused from exposure to the public wrath because punishment "had no effect on them". At this point I suspected that we were in a wee bit of a muddle:
—What's the punishment for?
—"Society's pound of
flesh", he seemed to be saying.
—On those grounds then, why exclude the inadcquates? (To strains of "Flog 'cm all, flog 'em all . . .")
—But if punishment is supposed to have a positive enduring effect, what about all the other categories on whom it has no effect? I am here ignoring for the moment that psychologists have known for decades that punishment does not have this outcome, and can moreover tell you why it doesn't.
Neither was the distinguished speaker particularly worried about treading upon individual liberties if the time spent awaiting trial (X = 6 months at the Old Bailey) were used for detailed analyses of individual back grounds, economic and social circumstances, and any other bit of personal information that is no-one else's fucking business. Fact is, he said, that the person concerned had come under suspicion and the police in their judgment had cause to lock him up so's a case could be brought against him. Society thus had the right . . . (and so on and so forth, far into the night). Didn't matter if he were subsequently acquitted.
We heard as well that sentencing was done not as a consequence of categorizing a man and applying the sentence appropriate to the category, but rather this function was based upon his character in the dock, his individuality and his problems were to some extent unique and were thus deserving of individualistic consideration. A few minutes later the speaker could not agree that exemplary sentences were unjust although he did concede that the poor bastards receiving them might understandably be in some confusion as to why they had been singled out.
Well, there is more, but what end requires it to be set down here? This is not a political treatise, hence I am not railling at the rampant implicit fascism; neither have I set down any of my own thoughts on the matter (I do in fact have some, why just the other day . . .). No, I just found it very disappointing that a distinguished judge sat up there with not a sign of confusion on his learned brow as he told us how it was, and further, that that, more or less, was how it should be. Why should he be allowed to draw contentment out of a rag-bag of incompatible, logically inconsistent notions, when rather than giving me any comfort, my already well-scrambled synopses received a further battering? Pisses me off, that does.
Dave McConih.
11th March, 1971
BEAVER
Page 12
N.W. POLY
(contd. from page 1)
finally agreed to allow the press into Ueneral Assemblies until further notice, but that student and underground press would be given free access at all times. All cameras were iorbidden. It was also decided to allow all other persons into the building, provided they undertook to abide by the decisions ot the Gen. Assembly, and a visitor's boolc was provided for that purpose.
Aiier messages of support had been announced, inciud-nig one from the JNUS, the meetmg went on to elect or-gamsmg bodies.
These were the Security Committee, which would mamtam security at the main entrance, provide a secure depot lor personal belongmgs. and generally see to it tnat the mandates of the Gen. As-semDiy were comphed with, and the Co-ordinating CoCm-miitee wmcn would replace the Preparation Committee and ensure the smooth running of the occupation. Various other sub-groups to deal with pubhcity. entertainment, etc., were proposed. Though this Committee was to generally take over the duties of the Students Union, the S.U. was not disbanded and its olhcers in fact did most of the work of the new bodies. By 6.30 p.m. the meeting had thmned out considerably, and came to an end after a motion was passed forbidding the use of offensive weapons, intoxicants or drugs within the building.
As the newly elected committees held their meetings, people drifted about, gathering mainly in the bar or the retectory. At 9.00 there was a concert by "If" in the bar. during which time duty rosters were arranged by Sec. Com, a "Sun" photographer was ejected and began a lonely vigil on the doorstep, and the porters stood about leaning stolidly on their brooms. By 11.30, "If" had been replaced by another group, "Citizen Kane" was bemg shown in the basement, and people were wandering about with sleeping bags trying to find some place to camp. The staff refectory was generally favoured because of its carpet. The atmosphere was more that of a late, rather disorganised school dance than an occupation.
Wednesday, February 24th
General Assembly at 11.00 a.m., attended by fewer people than before, mostly those who spent the night (about 300), plus some who came in the morning. Rather listlessly, the press are debated again. As this goes on for 45 minutes, the last two members of the national press walk
out in boredom. It is finally decided to allow them in at all times. It becomes obvious there has been a tactical mistake: the administration was allowed to move all its files out on the morning of the 23rd and take them to the other three buildings (Essex Road, Camden Idwn and Lad broke House) which make up the Polytechnic. The major building is occupied, but it turns out to be no longer essential. It is now a question of escalate or collapse, and much will depend upon whether, or not Miller's appointment will be ratified when the new Court of Governors (the Formation Committee under a new name) meet on Monday.
By evening, a new sense of purpose seems to have invaded the building. A press committee is organised. There is increased control and organisation, and security is more stringent. A first watershed has been passed. "You're occupying what they gave you—i.e. a nice centrally heated building, with canteen staff to feed you and the porters to hold your hand. So when does the real occupation start?"—poster in refectory.
Thursday, February 25th
The mood has changed entirely for the better, and there is a carnival air to the building, with posters covering most of the walls. There have been meetings held at the other houses in the morning, and Essex Road is de facto closed. A room has been set aside and is being used for unofficial mathematics lectures. The poster co-operative is working full time.
General Assembly at 5.00 p.m. A small LSE contingent helps circulate the agendas. It is discovered that when the microphone is clutched tightly, the PA system broadcasts Radio 1. Somebody starts the proceedings with a totally irrelevant speech about South Africa which is received in respectful if fidgety silence (why is it that mention of S.A. seems to paralyse everyone's critical faculties?)
After Hill gives the background to date, another effort is made to clarify the issues in the occupation. This is becoming more and more urgent, as the first sign of a possible split in the student ranks appears: N.W. Polytechnic includes many short term and intensive courses, generally attended by people aged thirty and over who are on salary or financed by their local authorities, and a long term occupation would jeopardise their examinations, most of which are ex-
ternal. To add to the problem, these courses are concentrated in the Essex Road and Ladbroke House branches. An Essex Road speaker seems to echo the general feelings "I am against Miller but I am not interested in disrupting the studies I have come here to pursue. 1 want my degree." There is a strange and admirable lack of serious heckling. By 7.30 the discussion is running down again, the issues are shelved and the meeting gets on to tactics. There is a fight after Sec. Com. has to justify throwing out an outsider who was found defacing the walls last night, but they are finally congratulated. The meeting ends, and - extempore seminars on organisation v. populism spring up all over the place.
Friday, 26th — Sunday, 28th February
The weekend has been quiet, with the expected drop in occupiers on Saturday but a large increase on Sunday night. Thankfully, the occupier's demands have finally been summarised in a set of five principles: (1) No Miller, (2) No victimisation. (3) 50 per cent staff/student representation, (4) Staff/student veto, and (5) an inquiry into Miller's selection.
Monday, March 1st
Pickets have been operating at the other buildings. Three apparently cheerful students in the kitchen are preparing dinner (sausages and mash) for an estimated 500 people. At 4.30 the news comes through that the new Court of Governors have ratified Miller's appointment. The Gen. Assembly at 5.00 is led off by a shop steward from Ford pledging support, Mike Hill, who has attended the Governors' meeting, reports on it and announces that Northern have just voted unanimously to continue their occupation. A motion is on the agenda to end the occupation "as support will diminish now that Miller has been appointed, and it will endanger third year students". Despite the fact that the proposer is warmly applauded by the very large audience, the motion is heavily defeated. A lot of people walk out. The question of the short term students, who are being pressurised by their local authorities, comes up again; they propose to hold one day strikes in Essex Road, rather than occupy. Some extreme students rather short-sightedly do not accept this, and an interminable wrangling begins. This ends rather non-commitally, and after the food committee
point out that the same five people have been doing all the work and could they please have some volunteers, there is a discussion of tactics. A motion is passed calling for a rally on Friday to be attended by students from other colleges and polytechnics. The problem of the porters controlling the heating. hght and power in the buildmg is brought up but remains unsolved.
Tuesday, March 2nd
At a Co-ordination Committee meeting, representatives from Essex Road announce that their lectures have been made compulsory, and that they will disassociate themselves from the occupu-tion unless Essex Road is occupied and their lectures cancelled. Later in the morning the Union exec meet with the Academic Board, who suggest that a date be given for calling off the occupation. A rather listless Gen. Assembly considers the problems of the Physical Education students who are being blackmailed by the ILEA which refuses to hold their examinations anywhere else but the Kentish Town gymnasium: this exam is in less than two weeks and cannot be held in an occupied building.
Wednesday, March 3rd
The differences between the short-term students and the occupiers have come to a head with disastrous results: this morning members of the Co-ordination Committee, acting on previous decisions, padlocked the entrance of Ladbroke House. At 9.00 a.m. students turned up for the intensive studies courses, came through the picket lines, and threatened to smash the lock. This was removed, and at an informal meeting held on the spot, most of the Ladbroke students expressed support for the occupation, but declared themselves unable to support it physically. A large gathering in Kentish Town at 2.30 a.m., attended by many non-occupiers, expressed its dismay at this unauthorised action, and called for emergency U.G.M. on
an
Friday with the view to calling the occupation off. It was obvious that the backs of the moderates, especially the child-care group, had been put up by the event, particularly in view of the fact that their problems had yet to be taken seriously by the occupiers. The Gen. Assembly reflects yet another change of mood. For the first time, tellers are elected and recounts are called for. The Co-ordination Committee mandate is queried, and a motion to extend the occupation is rejected. The same night, somebody smashes the juke-box and the pin-ball machine in the bar, and some records are stolen.
Thursday, March 4th
A quiet day as both sides marshal their forces for the
UGM. A motion to disband is defeated, and it is voted to exclude unaccompanied children under sixteen from the building.
Friday, March 5th
This is the day of the rally, which suffers from its proximity to the UGM, though about 120 people turn up. The meeting is delayed for about an hour in an effort to get more people into the hall, which is crammed to the rafters. Everybody is really uptight. The main motion is that the occupation be terminated immediately, but in an unexpected move, six substantive amendments have been placed which propose it be continued. A hassle about the constitutionality of these amendments results in both the chairman and the SU Presidents supporting them and the first of a long series of challenges to the chairman's rulings, all of them defeated, is placed. The proposer of the first motion gives a rather lumbering speech, is heavily applauded, and the first speaker against provides the only inspired speech of the day. The meeting then proceeds to a discussion of the amendments in an atmosphere of increasing polarisation and bitterness. Oddly enough, those in favour of the motion indulge in constant delaving tactics.
Countine: the votes poses an immediate problem, and the vote on the first amendment (essentially in favour of continuins: the occupation, since a substantive- amendment replaces the original motion) is 314 for and 335 against in the first count, and 323 for and 317 asainst in the second count. Chaos explodes after the result of the second count is announced, and it is several minutes before the chairman can restore order. Since a vote by ballot is obviously out of the question, it is decided to take a third count by moving all the voters out of the hall through two doors depending on how they intend voting, and counting them as they file back in; this proc^ure gives 364 votes for and 396 against the amendment. In the ensuing confusion it is suggested that since those opposed used a door leading into rather than out of the building, they have led back many people with no knowledge of the vote, and the numbers would certainly suggest this; nevertheless, the chairman declares the amendment defeated, and proceeds to the second one. In gathering hysteria, this is answered by motions to vote on all amendments at once, to adjourn till Monday, and to remove all outsiders, and the chaii' is challenged again and again. Debate has become vicious and threatening, but despite the protests the chairman is upheld by the meeting and proceeds to take a vote on the second amendment; this is passed by 234 votes to 219.
The Union has therefore vc ed to continue the occup tion. At this point, the ma of those favouring an end the occupation storm or and after one more amen ment is passed, the rest a withdrawn and the meeti comes to an end.
About an hour and a haJ after the end of the meetiiif a girl discovers that the fou large sacks containing the refuse of the meeting havt been dragged into the middl of the floor and set alight these have burned through tb . tarpauhns and damag^ th( floor-boards of the hall. A couple of porters manage t drag the entire mass out int an alley. At this point, th head porter locks up the hall and declares his intention ti cut of power and water, withdraw from the building and declare it a fire risk. An eme gency meeting is convened the refectory which is atte ed by all the occupiers in state of mild panic. The poi ice, who have to treat this a possible case of arson, arrive in the shape of three uni formed officers and g( through the budding without getting involved with anyone. Their presence in fact turr out to have been providentis' as they declare they have m. interest in what they consider to be an internal dispute, and they persuade the head porter to retain the building's se' vices in the interests of safetv The Head Clerk to the go ernors also puts in a rathei sinister appearance to inforp-Mike Hill that everybody i-considered to be trespassing, and attempts to intimidate a few isolated students. The Principal of N.W. rings up to deliver a rather non-com-mital message. Twenty-four hour patrols are oragnised b\ Sec. Com., and most people stay talking in groups till late into the night.
Saturday, March 6th
The heatmg is off, but everything else is working. The canteen provides late breakfasts, admirably run by a new crew under John. A General Meeting is held in the refectory at 2.00 p.m., attended by 70-odd occupiers. Despite, or maybe because of. yesterday's events, morale is generally high. Smith, the head porter, tries to make things as easy as possible for the students, and will keep things running until Mondav at least. There is a post-mo-tem on the U.G.M., where is finally conceded that thv support of the centre has been alienated, and it is decided tf call a new A.G.M. on Wee nesday to clarify the situa tioh once and for all.
One way or anotht through a series of crises, t' occupation has survived twelfth day. The future is ui. certain, as there is talk of th governors getting injunctic on Monday, but that rema to be seen. For the momi. the students of North Wi ern are in occupation. .
John Stathatc