LEFT IN VISION 4 – COMMENTS BOOK
Left in Vision 4 was a major success. Over 200 attended the Launch and we had to move to a bigger space. There was also a very high attendance of people throughout the five days. The show was very enthusiastically received as can be seen in the Comments Book below. Photographs to follow'
So a very big thank you to every one who contributed.
LEFT IN VISION 4 – COMMENTS BOOK
Even better than last year’s! I especially liked ol’ Benito!! Excellent, comrades!
Tim Evans
This is a show to Lift the Heart AS WELL AS the Politics!!
Maureen Delenian
Great selection – political – brilliant antidote to mainstream art – fantastic curation. Well done John
Deni xx
It’s even better than last year! A reflective, sharp atmosphere, inventive collection and sense of wild possibilities. The inner world interacts with the outer. Thanks to everyone, I especially love the leaning cabinet, the hanging effigies and the May Ayres ceramic sculpture.
Nicole Field
This is our first year here. Excellent exhibition.
Jon Bailes, Ethan Aksan, State of Nature Journal
Thank you for your exhibition. On my journey I start to think about anti-consumerism.
Onanong
Wonderful and complex.
Riaz Ahmed
What to write, as an art historian in training it’s refreshing to see art with an explicit left basis.
H
It’s great that art is seen as Marxism. Political art is an absolute necessity for a serious political organisation.
E.P
Amazing art:
Aja S from Macedonia
This is the best – well done
Fred from Swansea
Love the Red Saunders! and ‘All you fascists are bound to lose’.
(We’re from Bradford)
Fantastic work. I enjoyed lots thanks.
Excellent exhibitions – real quality. See you at the opening.
Sherrl
Excellent to see it. Hope the project continues.
Ken Devine
Very good work – loved it!
Isabel
Interesting show – great variety of work.
Ginny
May Ayres Ceramic ‘Pro- Consul’ - in a Socialist World would have pride of place in Tate Modern!
Great exhibition hope to see it in every Marxism.
Bassen
Lebanon
Very interesting and inspiring. I appreciate every effort made in creating such fantastic space.
Fouad
From Iraq
WOW – I will be back
Annie
Very stimulating
Connor Donnally
What we need the more painters and other can do it.
Very interesting, provocative. Thank you
Maria Emery
Excellent show, some really powerful works. Thank you
BRILLIANT! WE WANT THIS AGAIN!!
The work is better than ever – but not enough of it.
Gary Critchley -What an artist to emerge from that environment. Hope Left in Vision will carry on after John’s retirement. We owe it to him as a tribute for all he’s done.
Pauline
Excellent show – very stimulating and thought provoking.
Chris
Ditto
Leo
Very interesting and well curated show!
M. Wydler
It is wonderful art. All of it is talking in different ways.
Maher Deyab
Very interesting representation of lots of important and practical issues and social problems. Thank you
Ashraf Abdelhay
Interesting
Anthony
Interesting work overall, especially Zita and Antonietta’s work. Also John Levett’s photography is interesting.
Wonderful exhibition – need more art exhibitions displaying the work of Marx in the left. Thank you for including my art. Zeta
P.S. Would have liked to have seen Antonietta’s art on display not just in slides.
Well done guys!
Really love the work big up!
The Negroponte sculpture is just amazing. Thanks to everyone and particularly the great John Molyneux.
M.B.
Extremely good show.
Richie Peacock
A lovely show with the depths and breadths of the struggle. Good to have seen.
Gillian Noel
Great show – lots of variety and emotional – passionate. Thanks
E. Shirley
Fantastic!
Hans Pudner
South Wales
Very interesting, need to spend more time here. Thanks
Really enjoyed the quiet of looking around! So good to see here at Marxism!
Brilliant and enjoyable, very inspired by the Fascism 2010.
Very good – I like.
R McFarlane
Very well done once more.
Best wishes
Jenny Walden
Love it all thanks for great inspirational work.
Very nice, I always enjoy a wonky cupboard.
Thought provoking – especially sculpture
Chanie Rosenberg
Need to come and see the ‘Left in Vision’ again.
I enjoyeded this presentation, thought provoking. The video ‘Going Up North’ was lovely.
Thanks Brenda
Thanks, this was very enjoyable and engaging.
Some very distressing themes treated in a powerful way.
Many thanks
Mike Champion
Thought provoking, uplifting, interactive
Great to see Marxism in art. I only wish it wasn’t a focus once a year. Why can’t we take this further?
Anthony Elliott
I’m a film scholar and was really pleased to see you had an AV section – the film by the 8 year old is wonderful! But fantastic exhibition more generally too, as always.
S Bould
Inspiring pieces – and thought provoking. I liked many of them but Leon’s images was/is very powerful.
Chris Kelly
It just keeps getting better – love the many perspectives – very inspiring.
Jacqui Miller
For the future we must never forget the past horrors of injustice.
Gerry Conlon
Keep up the good work of displaying committed art work at Marxism.
Mike Stirland
A good experience as always. A bigger room next year?
Debbie Rolls
Loved the tit box, very interesting.
Thank you very much for this very touching and inspiring exhibition. There is a very brilliant mixture of art and artists in this exhibition leading to a wide range of emotion: fear, sorrow, fighting-spirit, a great deal of humour and … how can I call it … self-reflecting possibilities.
Frances,
Cologne, Germany
This exhibition is great – expresses a wide range of emotion.
Fantastic keep on keep on!
This exhibition is really impressive and it is fascinating the different styles of radical art displayed.
Sheila Rowbotham
Thought provoking – my thoughts exactly about bankers and on David and Nick.
Theresa
London
I enjoyed the exhibition very much
Jhoselin Loza
Very insightful and useful, hope you carry on the good work.
J
Love it Dale!
A Stennett
Birmingham
Great stuff – Art for resistance. That’s how it should be. I am so liberated as I don’t believe in capitalism.
Well done Zita. Love also the ‘Poverty’ sculpture and all.
A very informative and fantastically relevant exhibition. Hooray to Zita for her exhibits and Fred for ‘Marching to Freedom’. Brilliant anti fascist material here today.
MC
Thought provoking, politically diverse works of art which left me reeling, smiling and frowning.
Peace
Benita
Amazing
C. Campbell
Fantastic work.
Very skilled and beautiful work. May God (Lord Jesus Christ) come back soon and end all suffering as we repent.
Linda P
Very good and inspiring. More of this please!
Ammedy
Wonderful! Let there be more!
Lots of really invigorating art, especially when you consider how much dry and uncaring work gets out, gets paid millions for in the mainstream. Definitely enjoyed Fred Whitby’s agitprop.
Soren Goard
Thank you
Ella
Fantastic – thanks for organising this.
Such an important part of Marxism – bigger next year please!
Some brilliant stuff – lots of quality and range.
Martin Adams
I think when the works are engaged with the materiality of the injustice and crime, their ideas are better transformed and become more effective. Well done to the artist and organizers who worked for such a forgotten/ignored vision of the world.
An amazing exhibition really loved it; and looking forward to share such good sculpting, painting, installations. Just keep inspiring us!
Selma
NPR France
Moving, chilling and provocative – a great exhibitions.
S Magorian
Fantastic exhibition – especially The Gypsies. It reminded me of Van Gogh’s ‘Potato Eaters’ – lovely. The Hitler picture was also one of my favourites because it is so clear what he did and his crimes, and you have got him and pinned him against the wall. Love it. The other side with Nick Griffin too shows what a demented and backward thing he represents, in his face too. Brilliant. It is all good.
Am glad to have seen it this year at Marxism as I was initially very disappointed in not getting my stuff included. However, it was a good lesson in not being to precious about ones work and seeing the exhibition gave me a boost to think about starting to produce work again. This exhibition needs to visited at least three or four times as there is so much to see. Well done everyone – I loved it.
Sophie Jongman, Kent
Excellent, powerful, creative and thought provoking – a treat for the intellectual senses!!
Well done!!
Some of the pieces made me laugh, some made me want to cry and they all made me think.
Thank you
Sarah Cox
Needs to be more widely shown.
Please keep up the tradition or radical left art – we need it!
All the best.
Sadie, Australia
Very good. We need more lefty art. Keep it up.
Jim Roche (Irish Anti War Movement)
Sort of encapsulates a few thoughts I have – very creative.
S Elliott
Whitstable
More explicitly political than previous exhibitions – not necessarily better (or worse) but more a sign of the times. We need this work.
Great
Danielle Darby
Thank you. Interesting as always. Please come again next year.
Lovely
Fine and interesting exhibition.
Thomas W
Excellent
Excellent as always! I particularly like The Pro Consul
Penny Foskett
Could have done with more explanation from the artists of what they were trying to say – also mostly negative/horrific – could do with more hope.
David Hughes
Very interesting … quite a variety in a small exhibition.
Jan Friday
Long live revolutionary art.
Ian Birchall
I appreciated listening to the music while looking at the slideshow. Also like the ‘Footprints’ by Kim.
Jasmina
Some interesting work – good to see prisoners work on show. Like the theme of historical portraits of ‘our’ hero’s time to take them back.
Matt
Awesome, have one every year! More diversity and more descriptions/explanations the better. Have artist’s email too.
N
Fantastic, great work, would have liked more context or comment or just biography – it really helps to understand.
Thank you for all your hard work.
Andrew Smith
Even more wonderful than last year – keep on keeping on with it. Loved the gypsies.
Anna x
Good stuff – keep creating!
Ewa
I applaud the work and achievement. Quite a mixed bunch in terms of what ‘worked’ for me. As others have said more context would be helpful.
Look forward to next year’s!
Colin F
Thanks for an excellent show.
Leon Kuhn
Great to see work and comrades. Love Tony Cliff sculpture
Good job – keep up the good work.
Jon
Fantastic show, please repeat next year!
N. Brute
It’s not really about liking us, not liking, but I’ll say that what excited me were the sculptures rather than the photos/drawings/paintings.
Please come back next year (maybe even with art that is not just built in spectatorship but on interaction or participation as well)!
Viva La Revolution
Patrick
Nice stuff! We need more of this.
Phoebe
Fabulous to have this here!
Ian
Dear John
Thank you for your brilliant lecture on Michelangelo and for one of those who organised the exhibition ‘Left in Vision’.
Yes, art can change things yes, art can be revolutionary and yes, together with other factions art can make socialism!
Ivor Jordre, Marxist and painter, Norway.
Really great to see how this show has developed over the years with all this interesting work. Keep it up!
Penny
Brilliant exhibit! A superb collection of works that I feel are sadly not very likely to be collected elsewhere. It would be wonderful to have a ‘Left of Vision’ webpage where we could share these works with more people throughout the course of the year.
Thank you
Joshua, Glasgow
Great Art
Dear John
One passed by.
Now, I thought it was going to be pretentious student toss but it was great! The Fred Whitby ‘Marching to Freedom’ is amazing.
Well done.
Marcus
A stunning exhibition, witty, thought provoking
Well done John
Hannah
John Thanx for all your hard work.
Mick Lynes
Many, many thanks John for another wonderful show.
May
Excellent show, very impressed with the range of work and the imagination expressed.
Ian S
Very impressive!!
Alexander Ling
Even better than last year’s! I especially liked ol’ Benito!! Excellent, comrades!
Tim Evans
This is a show to Lift the Heart AS WELL AS the Politics!!
Maureen Delenian
Great selection – political – brilliant antidote to mainstream art – fantastic curation. Well done John
Deni xx
It’s even better than last year! A reflective, sharp atmosphere, inventive collection and sense of wild possibilities. The inner world interacts with the outer. Thanks to everyone, I especially love the leaning cabinet, the hanging effigies and the May Ayres ceramic sculpture.
Nicole Field
This is our first year here. Excellent exhibition.
Jon Bailes, Ethan Aksan, State of Nature Journal
Thank you for your exhibition. On my journey I start to think about anti-consumerism.
Onanong
Wonderful and complex.
Riaz Ahmed
What to write, as an art historian in training it’s refreshing to see art with an explicit left basis.
H
It’s great that art is seen as Marxism. Political art is an absolute necessity for a serious political organisation.
E.P
Amazing art:
Aja S from Macedonia
This is the best – well done
Fred from Swansea
Love the Red Saunders! and ‘All you fascists are bound to lose’.
(We’re from Bradford)
Fantastic work. I enjoyed lots thanks.
Excellent exhibitions – real quality. See you at the opening.
Sherrl
Excellent to see it. Hope the project continues.
Ken Devine
Very good work – loved it!
Isabel
Interesting show – great variety of work.
Ginny
May Ayres Ceramic ‘Pro- Consul’ - in a Socialist World would have pride of place in Tate Modern!
Great exhibition hope to see it in every Marxism.
Bassen
Lebanon
Very interesting and inspiring. I appreciate every effort made in creating such fantastic space.
Fouad
From Iraq
WOW – I will be back
Annie
Very stimulating
Connor Donnally
What we need the more painters and other can do it.
Very interesting, provocative. Thank you
Maria Emery
Excellent show, some really powerful works. Thank you
BRILLIANT! WE WANT THIS AGAIN!!
The work is better than ever – but not enough of it.
Gary Critchley -What an artist to emerge from that environment. Hope Left in Vision will carry on after John’s retirement. We owe it to him as a tribute for all he’s done.
Pauline
Excellent show – very stimulating and thought provoking.
Chris
Ditto
Leo
Very interesting and well curated show!
M. Wydler
It is wonderful art. All of it is talking in different ways.
Maher Deyab
Very interesting representation of lots of important and practical issues and social problems. Thank you
Ashraf Abdelhay
Interesting
Anthony
Interesting work overall, especially Zita and Antonietta’s work. Also John Levett’s photography is interesting.
Wonderful exhibition – need more art exhibitions displaying the work of Marx in the left. Thank you for including my art. Zeta
P.S. Would have liked to have seen Antonietta’s art on display not just in slides.
Well done guys!
Really love the work big up!
The Negroponte sculpture is just amazing. Thanks to everyone and particularly the great John Molyneux.
M.B.
Extremely good show.
Richie Peacock
A lovely show with the depths and breadths of the struggle. Good to have seen.
Gillian Noel
Great show – lots of variety and emotional – passionate. Thanks
E. Shirley
Fantastic!
Hans Pudner
South Wales
Very interesting, need to spend more time here. Thanks
Really enjoyed the quiet of looking around! So good to see here at Marxism!
Brilliant and enjoyable, very inspired by the Fascism 2010.
Very good – I like.
R McFarlane
Very well done once more.
Best wishes
Jenny Walden
Love it all thanks for great inspirational work.
Very nice, I always enjoy a wonky cupboard.
Thought provoking – especially sculpture
Chanie Rosenberg
Need to come and see the ‘Left in Vision’ again.
I enjoyeded this presentation, thought provoking. The video ‘Going Up North’ was lovely.
Thanks Brenda
Thanks, this was very enjoyable and engaging.
Some very distressing themes treated in a powerful way.
Many thanks
Mike Champion
Thought provoking, uplifting, interactive
Great to see Marxism in art. I only wish it wasn’t a focus once a year. Why can’t we take this further?
Anthony Elliott
I’m a film scholar and was really pleased to see you had an AV section – the film by the 8 year old is wonderful! But fantastic exhibition more generally too, as always.
S Bould
Inspiring pieces – and thought provoking. I liked many of them but Leon’s images was/is very powerful.
Chris Kelly
It just keeps getting better – love the many perspectives – very inspiring.
Jacqui Miller
For the future we must never forget the past horrors of injustice.
Gerry Conlon
Keep up the good work of displaying committed art work at Marxism.
Mike Stirland
A good experience as always. A bigger room next year?
Debbie Rolls
Loved the tit box, very interesting.
Thank you very much for this very touching and inspiring exhibition. There is a very brilliant mixture of art and artists in this exhibition leading to a wide range of emotion: fear, sorrow, fighting-spirit, a great deal of humour and … how can I call it … self-reflecting possibilities.
Frances,
Cologne, Germany
This exhibition is great – expresses a wide range of emotion.
Fantastic keep on keep on!
This exhibition is really impressive and it is fascinating the different styles of radical art displayed.
Sheila Rowbotham
Thought provoking – my thoughts exactly about bankers and on David and Nick.
Theresa
London
I enjoyed the exhibition very much
Jhoselin Loza
Very insightful and useful, hope you carry on the good work.
J
Love it Dale!
A Stennett
Birmingham
Great stuff – Art for resistance. That’s how it should be. I am so liberated as I don’t believe in capitalism.
Well done Zita. Love also the ‘Poverty’ sculpture and all.
A very informative and fantastically relevant exhibition. Hooray to Zita for her exhibits and Fred for ‘Marching to Freedom’. Brilliant anti fascist material here today.
MC
Thought provoking, politically diverse works of art which left me reeling, smiling and frowning.
Peace
Benita
Amazing
C. Campbell
Fantastic work.
Very skilled and beautiful work. May God (Lord Jesus Christ) come back soon and end all suffering as we repent.
Linda P
Very good and inspiring. More of this please!
Ammedy
Wonderful! Let there be more!
Lots of really invigorating art, especially when you consider how much dry and uncaring work gets out, gets paid millions for in the mainstream. Definitely enjoyed Fred Whitby’s agitprop.
Soren Goard
Thank you
Ella
Fantastic – thanks for organising this.
Such an important part of Marxism – bigger next year please!
Some brilliant stuff – lots of quality and range.
Martin Adams
I think when the works are engaged with the materiality of the injustice and crime, their ideas are better transformed and become more effective. Well done to the artist and organizers who worked for such a forgotten/ignored vision of the world.
An amazing exhibition really loved it; and looking forward to share such good sculpting, painting, installations. Just keep inspiring us!
Selma
NPR France
Moving, chilling and provocative – a great exhibitions.
S Magorian
Fantastic exhibition – especially The Gypsies. It reminded me of Van Gogh’s ‘Potato Eaters’ – lovely. The Hitler picture was also one of my favourites because it is so clear what he did and his crimes, and you have got him and pinned him against the wall. Love it. The other side with Nick Griffin too shows what a demented and backward thing he represents, in his face too. Brilliant. It is all good.
Am glad to have seen it this year at Marxism as I was initially very disappointed in not getting my stuff included. However, it was a good lesson in not being to precious about ones work and seeing the exhibition gave me a boost to think about starting to produce work again. This exhibition needs to visited at least three or four times as there is so much to see. Well done everyone – I loved it.
Sophie Jongman, Kent
Excellent, powerful, creative and thought provoking – a treat for the intellectual senses!!
Well done!!
Some of the pieces made me laugh, some made me want to cry and they all made me think.
Thank you
Sarah Cox
Needs to be more widely shown.
Please keep up the tradition or radical left art – we need it!
All the best.
Sadie, Australia
Very good. We need more lefty art. Keep it up.
Jim Roche (Irish Anti War Movement)
Sort of encapsulates a few thoughts I have – very creative.
S Elliott
Whitstable
More explicitly political than previous exhibitions – not necessarily better (or worse) but more a sign of the times. We need this work.
Great
Danielle Darby
Thank you. Interesting as always. Please come again next year.
Lovely
Fine and interesting exhibition.
Thomas W
Excellent
Excellent as always! I particularly like The Pro Consul
Penny Foskett
Could have done with more explanation from the artists of what they were trying to say – also mostly negative/horrific – could do with more hope.
David Hughes
Very interesting … quite a variety in a small exhibition.
Jan Friday
Long live revolutionary art.
Ian Birchall
I appreciated listening to the music while looking at the slideshow. Also like the ‘Footprints’ by Kim.
Jasmina
Some interesting work – good to see prisoners work on show. Like the theme of historical portraits of ‘our’ hero’s time to take them back.
Matt
Awesome, have one every year! More diversity and more descriptions/explanations the better. Have artist’s email too.
N
Fantastic, great work, would have liked more context or comment or just biography – it really helps to understand.
Thank you for all your hard work.
Andrew Smith
Even more wonderful than last year – keep on keeping on with it. Loved the gypsies.
Anna x
Good stuff – keep creating!
Ewa
I applaud the work and achievement. Quite a mixed bunch in terms of what ‘worked’ for me. As others have said more context would be helpful.
Look forward to next year’s!
Colin F
Thanks for an excellent show.
Leon Kuhn
Great to see work and comrades. Love Tony Cliff sculpture
Good job – keep up the good work.
Jon
Fantastic show, please repeat next year!
N. Brute
It’s not really about liking us, not liking, but I’ll say that what excited me were the sculptures rather than the photos/drawings/paintings.
Please come back next year (maybe even with art that is not just built in spectatorship but on interaction or participation as well)!
Viva La Revolution
Patrick
Nice stuff! We need more of this.
Phoebe
Fabulous to have this here!
Ian
Dear John
Thank you for your brilliant lecture on Michelangelo and for one of those who organised the exhibition ‘Left in Vision’.
Yes, art can change things yes, art can be revolutionary and yes, together with other factions art can make socialism!
Ivor Jordre, Marxist and painter, Norway.
Really great to see how this show has developed over the years with all this interesting work. Keep it up!
Penny
Brilliant exhibit! A superb collection of works that I feel are sadly not very likely to be collected elsewhere. It would be wonderful to have a ‘Left of Vision’ webpage where we could share these works with more people throughout the course of the year.
Thank you
Joshua, Glasgow
Great Art
Dear John
One passed by.
Now, I thought it was going to be pretentious student toss but it was great! The Fred Whitby ‘Marching to Freedom’ is amazing.
Well done.
Marcus
A stunning exhibition, witty, thought provoking
Well done John
Hannah
John Thanx for all your hard work.
Mick Lynes
Many, many thanks John for another wonderful show.
May
Excellent show, very impressed with the range of work and the imagination expressed.
Ian S
Very impressive!!
Alexander Ling
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Towards a Democratic University
TOWARDS A DEMOCRATIC UNIVERSITY
This article was first written for The Heckler, the magazine of Portsmouth University UCU branch. It therefore refers specifically to the situation in Portsmouth Uni but clearly its arguments are generalizable to other institutions. If anyone wants to take up those arguments or adapt this text to their situation please feel free to plagiarize shamelessly.
On May 6 we in Britain elected a new government. The process was rather messy and confused, which is not surprising given the nature of the British electoral system. Nevertheless the election took place and a new government emerged. The turnout was up, which took some returning officers by surprise but was generally regarded as a good thing, since it seems to be the prevailing attitude that it is our civic duty to exercise our vote. With the exception of a few very specific categories ( peers of the realm, criminals in prison etc) all adult citizens have the vote, a right which was very hard fought for over a long period in many campaigns (such those of the Chartists and the Suffragettes) but which is now taken for granted by more or less everyone. I know of NO political party or pressure group or even significant individual which says openly that it wishes to rescind this basic democratic right, or even curtail it. What would one think of someone today who proposed the government should be appointed by the Queen (without any election) or by the House of Lords, or wanted to remove the right to vote from, say, women or working class people?
Pretty much the same applies to the United States with difference that there the people directly elect an individual as President and that on November 4, 2008 this produced the historic victory, by a landslide, of Barack Obama; this being especially dramatic as the right to vote for black people was still being fought for in parts of America as late as the 1960s. Again what would one think of someone who suggested that the right to elect the President should be taken away, either from the US citizenry as a whole, or American women or people of colour?
WHY IS IT THEN THAT IN THIS UNIVERSITY WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ELECT OUR VICE CHANCELLOR? [OR OUR BOARD OF GOVERNORS, OR OUR FACULTY DEANS, OR OUR HEADS OF SCHOOL OR DEPARTMENTS?]
My experience is that when I ask this question it is generally assumed that I am joking, certainly not being serious. EVERYONE knows that’s not possible – we just don’t do things like that. If I put the question to people in positions of authority in the University they generally do not even deem it worthy of a response. Which is convenient because it is very hard to formulate a response which is not at the same time an argument against democracy in general, an argument against, for example, the right to elect the government.
For instance, the most obvious argument against electing the Vice Chancellor is that it would be likely to lead to the wrong person getting elected. The absurdity of this proposition becomes manifest the moment you apply it to British parliamentary or US presidential elections. If you are a supporter of either the Labour Party or the Conservative Party, the wrong party gets elected about half the time in Britain, likewise if you are a Republican or a Democrat in the US. If you are a Liberal Democrat or a radical Socialist, or a Green or a fascist, the wrong party or leader gets elected pretty much all the time. But unless you are a fascist this is not a reason for getting rid of elections.
Sometimes it is argued that the reason why the wrong people get elected is that the electors are not capable (too stupid, too uneducated, too immature, too fickle etc) of making the right judgement. This, of course, was the kind of argument advanced against giving the vote to working people in the 19th century, to women before the First World War, to women under 30 between 1918 and 1928, and to black people in South Africa under apartheid. It is, however, a rather difficult argument to defend in a university.
If, on the other hand, we actually had an election for Vice Chancellor the incompetence of the electors argument might come into play in determining the franchise in this election. Personally, I would favour voting rights only for male academics with PhDs. I joke; the important thing would be to restrict voting to academic staff and exclude the support staff who are mainly female, I mean less well educated. Or perhaps the white collar support staff could be included, so long as the really working class riff-raff like caretakers, canteen staff and cleaners were kept out. Actually, I suppose – if all that sounds a bit elitist, or sexist, or classist, or politically incorrect – ALL university employees could be allowed to vote, on one condition – no votes for students. Obviously students are too young, too inexperienced, too uneducated, and too volatile to be allowed to vote in parliamentary…I mean university elections.
In this context it is interesting to note that, just as the present parliamentary systems in Britain, the US, and France, all owe their existence to very unparliamentary wars and revolutions, so the present unelected Vice Chancellor actually owes his position, at least in part, to a vote: namely the vote of no confidence that unseated his predecessor, Neil Merritt, in which EVERY university employee had a vote. It is also worth noting that ONE section of the University community does govern itself relatively democratically, and does elect its leaders, locally and nationally, and that is the Students’ Union.
I really hope that someone who is opposed to the idea of democratically electing the University’s leading figures replies to this article – in fact I challenge them to do so – and in that reply I hope they explain why it would be wrong to elect VCs (and deans etc) but possible, nay mandatory, for the Students’ Union to elect its President. Or perhaps they would like to argue that the student president should be appointed (by the Directorate perhaps, or maybe by the Board of Governors). But, of course, one of the ironies of the situation is that because those who run the University are not subject to any real democratic accountability, they do not need to justify their position in democratic debate, but can simply ignore these arguments relying on their undemocratic power to preserve the status quo.
An argument that might be used by an astute opponent is that elections would ‘politicise’ the running of the University and that it would be much better for the University to remain ‘non- political’. This argument is superficially attractive because it appeals to popular (and entirely understandable) hostility to ‘politics’ and ‘politicians’ but in reality it is completely specious. First it relies on the very narrow, and false, definition of ‘politics’ as limited only to what goes on in the Palace of Westminster and City Hall, and ‘politicians’ as only elected MPs and Councillors. Second it fails to recognise that the running of this and every other university is already deeply political and could not be otherwise – the ability to present decisions and institutional structures as non-political is really just testimony to their political hegemony, in the same way that the ability to present ideas as ‘just common sense’ as opposed to ‘political’ or ‘ideological’ is merely evidence of their deep political and ideological hold. For example the belief that the free market is the best way to run society is presented by its adherents as ‘common sense’ but its acceptance as such represents a very important victory for a definite political ideology, namely right wing neo- liberalism. A system of appointment, as we have at present, is every bit as ‘political’ as a system of election, it’s just a different undemocratic politics. Finally, and I keep coming back to this, if elections equal politics and its good for things to be run non-politically why shouldn’t the country ( or the Students Union or Trades Unions ) be run that way i.e. as dictatorships.
In the end there is only one serious argument in favour of the undemocratic way the University is run, and it is an argument that all the senior officials in the University know in their bones but that none can state openly, namely that the University has to be run in a way that is contrary to the interests and values of the vast majority of its staff and students. That is it has to be run first and foremost as an instrument of government and ruling class policy and as a business enterprise rather than meeting people’s educational, scholarly and human needs. That is why the powers that be don’t want democratic elections and precisely why I do want them.
In practice this stark contradiction is papered over with the device of ‘consultation’. The decision makers ‘consult’ with staff and students and then go ahead, regardless of what is said, with what they wanted to do in the first place. I have lost count of the number of times I have been through this experience – being ‘consulted’ only to be ignored. What we need is not just more consultation but some democratic power. I therefore propose for Portsmouth University as a democratic minimum:
1. The election by universal suffrage, i.e. by the whole university community, of the Vice- Chancellor on a five year fixed term basis.
2. The election by universal suffrage on a faculty by faculty basis of Deans for a four year term of office.
What’s good enough for the White House is good enough for University House!
John Molyneux
22 May 2010
This article was first written for The Heckler, the magazine of Portsmouth University UCU branch. It therefore refers specifically to the situation in Portsmouth Uni but clearly its arguments are generalizable to other institutions. If anyone wants to take up those arguments or adapt this text to their situation please feel free to plagiarize shamelessly.
On May 6 we in Britain elected a new government. The process was rather messy and confused, which is not surprising given the nature of the British electoral system. Nevertheless the election took place and a new government emerged. The turnout was up, which took some returning officers by surprise but was generally regarded as a good thing, since it seems to be the prevailing attitude that it is our civic duty to exercise our vote. With the exception of a few very specific categories ( peers of the realm, criminals in prison etc) all adult citizens have the vote, a right which was very hard fought for over a long period in many campaigns (such those of the Chartists and the Suffragettes) but which is now taken for granted by more or less everyone. I know of NO political party or pressure group or even significant individual which says openly that it wishes to rescind this basic democratic right, or even curtail it. What would one think of someone today who proposed the government should be appointed by the Queen (without any election) or by the House of Lords, or wanted to remove the right to vote from, say, women or working class people?
Pretty much the same applies to the United States with difference that there the people directly elect an individual as President and that on November 4, 2008 this produced the historic victory, by a landslide, of Barack Obama; this being especially dramatic as the right to vote for black people was still being fought for in parts of America as late as the 1960s. Again what would one think of someone who suggested that the right to elect the President should be taken away, either from the US citizenry as a whole, or American women or people of colour?
WHY IS IT THEN THAT IN THIS UNIVERSITY WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ELECT OUR VICE CHANCELLOR? [OR OUR BOARD OF GOVERNORS, OR OUR FACULTY DEANS, OR OUR HEADS OF SCHOOL OR DEPARTMENTS?]
My experience is that when I ask this question it is generally assumed that I am joking, certainly not being serious. EVERYONE knows that’s not possible – we just don’t do things like that. If I put the question to people in positions of authority in the University they generally do not even deem it worthy of a response. Which is convenient because it is very hard to formulate a response which is not at the same time an argument against democracy in general, an argument against, for example, the right to elect the government.
For instance, the most obvious argument against electing the Vice Chancellor is that it would be likely to lead to the wrong person getting elected. The absurdity of this proposition becomes manifest the moment you apply it to British parliamentary or US presidential elections. If you are a supporter of either the Labour Party or the Conservative Party, the wrong party gets elected about half the time in Britain, likewise if you are a Republican or a Democrat in the US. If you are a Liberal Democrat or a radical Socialist, or a Green or a fascist, the wrong party or leader gets elected pretty much all the time. But unless you are a fascist this is not a reason for getting rid of elections.
Sometimes it is argued that the reason why the wrong people get elected is that the electors are not capable (too stupid, too uneducated, too immature, too fickle etc) of making the right judgement. This, of course, was the kind of argument advanced against giving the vote to working people in the 19th century, to women before the First World War, to women under 30 between 1918 and 1928, and to black people in South Africa under apartheid. It is, however, a rather difficult argument to defend in a university.
If, on the other hand, we actually had an election for Vice Chancellor the incompetence of the electors argument might come into play in determining the franchise in this election. Personally, I would favour voting rights only for male academics with PhDs. I joke; the important thing would be to restrict voting to academic staff and exclude the support staff who are mainly female, I mean less well educated. Or perhaps the white collar support staff could be included, so long as the really working class riff-raff like caretakers, canteen staff and cleaners were kept out. Actually, I suppose – if all that sounds a bit elitist, or sexist, or classist, or politically incorrect – ALL university employees could be allowed to vote, on one condition – no votes for students. Obviously students are too young, too inexperienced, too uneducated, and too volatile to be allowed to vote in parliamentary…I mean university elections.
In this context it is interesting to note that, just as the present parliamentary systems in Britain, the US, and France, all owe their existence to very unparliamentary wars and revolutions, so the present unelected Vice Chancellor actually owes his position, at least in part, to a vote: namely the vote of no confidence that unseated his predecessor, Neil Merritt, in which EVERY university employee had a vote. It is also worth noting that ONE section of the University community does govern itself relatively democratically, and does elect its leaders, locally and nationally, and that is the Students’ Union.
I really hope that someone who is opposed to the idea of democratically electing the University’s leading figures replies to this article – in fact I challenge them to do so – and in that reply I hope they explain why it would be wrong to elect VCs (and deans etc) but possible, nay mandatory, for the Students’ Union to elect its President. Or perhaps they would like to argue that the student president should be appointed (by the Directorate perhaps, or maybe by the Board of Governors). But, of course, one of the ironies of the situation is that because those who run the University are not subject to any real democratic accountability, they do not need to justify their position in democratic debate, but can simply ignore these arguments relying on their undemocratic power to preserve the status quo.
An argument that might be used by an astute opponent is that elections would ‘politicise’ the running of the University and that it would be much better for the University to remain ‘non- political’. This argument is superficially attractive because it appeals to popular (and entirely understandable) hostility to ‘politics’ and ‘politicians’ but in reality it is completely specious. First it relies on the very narrow, and false, definition of ‘politics’ as limited only to what goes on in the Palace of Westminster and City Hall, and ‘politicians’ as only elected MPs and Councillors. Second it fails to recognise that the running of this and every other university is already deeply political and could not be otherwise – the ability to present decisions and institutional structures as non-political is really just testimony to their political hegemony, in the same way that the ability to present ideas as ‘just common sense’ as opposed to ‘political’ or ‘ideological’ is merely evidence of their deep political and ideological hold. For example the belief that the free market is the best way to run society is presented by its adherents as ‘common sense’ but its acceptance as such represents a very important victory for a definite political ideology, namely right wing neo- liberalism. A system of appointment, as we have at present, is every bit as ‘political’ as a system of election, it’s just a different undemocratic politics. Finally, and I keep coming back to this, if elections equal politics and its good for things to be run non-politically why shouldn’t the country ( or the Students Union or Trades Unions ) be run that way i.e. as dictatorships.
In the end there is only one serious argument in favour of the undemocratic way the University is run, and it is an argument that all the senior officials in the University know in their bones but that none can state openly, namely that the University has to be run in a way that is contrary to the interests and values of the vast majority of its staff and students. That is it has to be run first and foremost as an instrument of government and ruling class policy and as a business enterprise rather than meeting people’s educational, scholarly and human needs. That is why the powers that be don’t want democratic elections and precisely why I do want them.
In practice this stark contradiction is papered over with the device of ‘consultation’. The decision makers ‘consult’ with staff and students and then go ahead, regardless of what is said, with what they wanted to do in the first place. I have lost count of the number of times I have been through this experience – being ‘consulted’ only to be ignored. What we need is not just more consultation but some democratic power. I therefore propose for Portsmouth University as a democratic minimum:
1. The election by universal suffrage, i.e. by the whole university community, of the Vice- Chancellor on a five year fixed term basis.
2. The election by universal suffrage on a faculty by faculty basis of Deans for a four year term of office.
What’s good enough for the White House is good enough for University House!
John Molyneux
22 May 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)