TheLiaison Committee for the Defence of Student Unions is to hold its third national conference in Birmingham on the 20/21 May at the University of Aston. This conference will be a much needed opportunity to reevaluate its positions in the light of its experience in the ISSN LIAISONENT INTEE OFF U.S What will come across loud and clear with little doubt is the absolute correctness of its position in relation to the nature of the attack on political autonomy. Both that it is a political attack, which is now no longer contested by anyone; and that it was the State as a whole and not simply the backward clements in the Tory Party who had an interest in politically emasculating students and their organised centres of resistance. This springs from the most fundamental needs of capitalism, not some nasty conspiracy. This latter point is becoming daily more clear, even to the Communist Party dominated NUS leadership. As the College authorities in place after place go on the offensive, as they call in the help of the courts, LEAs, ete., their identity of interests with other elements of the State becomes ever more apparent. Every move of the college authorities is one more nail in the coffin of the idea that they are potential alam it is possible to collaborate The other major but of the equation of public acstability has yet to ties the LCDSU the reality will be AUTONOMY - ONE ISSUE AMONGST MANY?
I be blind not to admit that orientation of the mass of Site disastrous to draw from this, hos ever, the conclusion that the autonomy in should no longer be the central focus of the LCDSU. In the first place this would betray a completely impressionistic appraisal of the current situation. The absence of national student action on this issue is emphatically not because the attack was over after the eventful six months of existence Shelving of the Thatcher proposals. On the contrary, the attack in the colleges has actually intensified. What has happened is two-fold. On the one hand, the main organising focus, the NUS became incapable of offering a perspective for struggle in the colleges when the main focus of the attack was transferred from the government and the DES to the college authorities and the courts. What the NUS leadership was blind to was precisely the fundamental unity of interest among all these bodies. On the other hand, and partly as a consequence of this, the various local conflicts have either been defeated or settled into an uneasy compromise. Consequently. there has been no ongoing focus around which the LCDSU could agitate on all the various questions involved. This would have been the lever to force back the attention of the radicalised students to this all important struggle. NECESSITY FOR A POLITICAL FOCUS Even if this were not the case, the alternative answer would not be that of the LCDSU being the organisational centraliser of all the disparate struggles which occur over accommodation, James proposals, autonomy, political victimisations, course content and what have you. The history of student struggles in this country indicates that that could not occur because of the fragmentation in higher eduThe point is, that the particular way in which higher education in this country expanded, through the binary system and not through the growth of massive universities, has meant that any particular struggle has not got the social depth which similar struggles elsewhere have had. Both the small size of the average institution and the heterogeneous conditions to be found throughout the binary system has made the generalisation of issues originating in a single college well nigh impossible.
For any information about the conference, documents submitied, etc, contact the LCDSU clo Students Union, Northern Poly, Holloway Road, London, N.J. The characteristic scenario has not been the growth ofastrongand combattive student movement, but that of sporadic, often simultaneous but most often isolated struggles.
The exception to this was the VSC. Here, the issue of Vietnam did unite briefly all the radicalising forces. That they had radicalised on quite disparate issues, did not prevent Vietnam being the issue on which mobilisation was effected. Struggles in opposition to the Vietnam War were the peg on which all the specific oppressions were hung. The lesson of all this is that the issue on which people radicalise can be quite other than that on which they struggle. This general point has universal application, but it is a condition of existence of a student movement in this country. In particular, any strategy for mass intervention in the student field must rest on the ability to locate a political issue which is widespread and important enough to impinge on the consciousness of all students. It is this political focus which the autonomy issue provides. It is principally on the issue of autonomy that the LCDSU should fight to organise the forces in the colleges. This is what it has attempted to do in the past and should continue to do.
UNITED FRONT OR PERIPHERAL SECT? Having decided on the main issue, is however, only part of the answer. It is the way that the forces are organised for this fight which is also important. What has characterised the LCDSU and has been one of the sources of its strength is the fact that it is a principled alliance. The LCDSU stands to unite all forces which wish to wage a genuine fight for union autonomy. The LCDSU has never insisted, however, that those who wish to struggle on this issue must adopt any of the specific analyses of the situation nor the programme of any of the groups or individuals involved. On the contrary, any group or individual, whatever its analysis or programme, can and, indeed, is urged to unite As a matter of fact a particular demand will take on different meanings depending upon the context in which it is placed. For instance, one of the major demands that Lenin put forward during the Russian Revolution was for "Peace'. What marked this off from the pacifist/liberal position, was precisely the fact that the Bolsheviks argued that peace could only be achieved through a social revolution Similarly, the LCDSU has taken a position for full political autonomy. The IMG believes that this can only be achieved through a fight with the State. Other people may believe that it is the first of all necessary to bring down the Tory government. These differing analyses do not, however, prevent these forces from uniting to fight together on the question of autonomy. Practice will actually decide whose analysis is correct. This is the essence of a united front.
Any other method of going about the struggle would be self-defeating. A Linited Front can only exist on an objective basis, that is, on the basis of a large radicalised mass. If it were attempted to set up a united front on the basis of the specific analysis or programme of a particular organisation, this would imply two things, It would imply that one particular group was in a position to hegemonise the whole radicalised layer and consequently, that this layer in its entirety could and would join. the particular organisation in question. What happens in practice, however, is that precisely because the radicalised elements are unwilling to commit themselves to one particular organisation, only a small number of the potential forces are actually organised for the struggle. In this situation, the united front becomes a peripheral sect.
In sum then, the LCDSU should provide an integrated set of demands for which radicalised students can fight. The LCDSU should not place any preconditions on this fight such as the acceptance of a particular analysis. The IMG believes that the following platform is such as to provide this and offers it for discussion at the coming national conference of the LCDSU.
J. R. Clynes of production which oppress them.
(ii) The LCDSU will see its special task as solidarising with the struggles of the teaching technical and domestic staff in the colleges themselves. It will seek unity in action on all issues.
6. Solidarity with all Anti-Imperialist Struggles The LCDSU adopts a parallel position in relation to the international class struggle. It defends the right of all nations to self determination. In particular, on the most important struggle facing the British working class, that of the war in Ireland, it will fight in the NUS and local unions and organise local and national activities in support of the following points:
(i) The right of self determination for Ireland;
(ii) Immediate withdrawal of all British troops (ill) Immediate end of internment and release of all political prisoners;
(iv) Unconditional but not uncritical support to both wings of the IRA in their struggle against the armed forces of British imperialism. 7. Democracy in the NUS In order that these policies can be fought for in the most effective way possible and that policies when adopted are implemented, the LCDSU campaigns for the following changes in the NUS structure:
i) Yearly election of all executive committee members and the right of immediate recall;
(ii) Executive meetings to be open to all members of the union;
(ii) All negotiated agreements to be ratified by whole membership with simple majority deciding;
(iv) Complete overhaul of constitution and procedure to simplify debating and decision making;
(v) Election by Constituent Organisations of all delegates and observers to conference.
----- pull-quotes -----
BAYS THE HANDS