I'd rephrase somewhat.

Most of the times they do useful work that possibly wouldn't have been done in a timely mannter by the institution itself. Sometimes they do invaluable work that the institution is determined to?

I don't doubt that most services currently provided?

They really don't.

Not only do you not get the money back (a big deal for some, but not a particularly big deal from a freedom of association perspective), but they?

It won't be replaced by the institutions, but I predict we'll see pretty much the same people advocating on behalf of students after VSM as we do now.

There's advocating and advocating.

We'll have the same people agitating on behalf of students collectively, but without someone picking up the tab,?

What is it that is inherent about being a student at a university that means there should be a law that allows other students at that university to force you to be a member of a students' association entirely distinct?

Which isn't to say I don't agree with most of your points. It's just that the inaccuracies detract from the argument for anyone aware of them.

Well put. This is the main reason I won't join a union, despite some of the good work they do advocating for individual?

They really don?t.

They don't have to go to that university. It goes to the question of "choice". Right now, you can choose between a VSM university and a CSM university. But the VSM bill is saying that this individual's right to choose supercedes any right for that institution, or?

Sometimes universities do step in where important stuff is needed. An example is something like the disability services at Victoria university, they are amazing.

For student unionists, it?s basically just patch-protection. Student unions are atrophied, dysfunctional organs run by and largely for self-promoters, and they understandably don?t want the tap of unearned, unmandated revenues turned off. ACT on Campus is the sort?

It's been a long time since I worked in a university, I concede, but I'm at a loss to understand why you'd?

What a gross over generalisation Lew.

ETA. Snap Islander.

L

No. If they weren't atrophied and dysfunctional, they'd be able to use their unmandated millions to — picking one example — persuade 50 people to turn up to a VUWSA meeting to vote down an ACT On Campus motion resolving that VUWSA submit in?

The ones that are self-promoters you mean?

But the bare fact is: a SA that can't gain a meaningful mandate under compulsory membership, or that can't defend their system from?

Because it is the state and the state can't legitimately do that. We live in a society where the government has promised not to do certain things: like torture people, or discriminate, or force?

Anyway, it's over now. Hopefully the country can get back to caring about shit that matters, like whether?

That's not correct. It's the fourth time its come before Parliament, which almost makes your first point right;?

L

The ideological part of this debate, not the one here, has sometimes obscured the fact that on the ground,?

Because here, at least, the fees are largely irrelevant. The fee does not affect the human rights argument.

1. Parliament just recently adopted an amendment to the Education Act to give the government some control of the substantial increases in?

Jesus fuck.

Students of the future may be free, but they'll be poorer for it.

It's all provided good ammunition for the pro-VSM crowd – along with a speedboat that AUSA purchased a couple of decades ago, and some van.

However a bunch of our MPs can get drunk and fight, have us pay for their holidays, and umpteen other stupid things and?

Well, Keith, perhaps you can explain to the group why "the public" was completely justified in passing legislation in 1915 to remove Professor George William von Zedlitz from his teaching post at Victoria?

Universities?

But Russell, its entirely exceptional. The parade of scandals in student politics will always be more colourful given the age of the actors but I suspect the consequence compares favourably with scandal elsewhere, local and other government included. Also, it doesn't argue for their evisceration, just reform.

18?

And I'm only being slightly snarky in saying this: How the hell did the civil rights movement, opposition?

I know there is so little at stake for academia but I would like take time to point out some real world examples.

Last week, the UoA Tramping Club realised it's either going to raise its member fees, run less long form South?

I agree with this, but that's the problem: it wasn't reformed. The SAs themselves haven't historically taken sufficient action against their own, and the profligacy, nepotism, clownishness and offensive idiocy have continued as a result. A prior government could have stepped in?

I think you should read up on their history. From the beginning, they've been about the student body governing itself, and exacting concessions by waging war?

Luxury! When I was occasionally debating in the early '90s, there was possibly a travel subsidy, but participants wore some of the costs themselves, and accommodation usually involved being billeted on?

Does that mean you kill only the cutest baby seals with an ice pick instead of a club?

Yes, quite so. There are some broader, serious questions about the role of a university, which are the?

I don?t think I would. They?re democracies. Nobody is being ?compelled? to take those positions ? unless?

Not meaningfully. Voter turnout is around the 6% mark. Most students don't know they've joined. It's just a single entry in a long list of fees when you pay your tuition.

More seriously, there is an issue here. And it is not a matter of life and death, on the one side, but nor is it a matter of liberty over oppression on the other. It's something minor, in a small institution that is?

I object to the how I'm prohibited from having a homephone unless I become a member of the EMA.

Or, in?

Anecdotes?

Because only the wealthy went to university. And paid for their own ski trips.

"If we don't have CSM we won't be able to force all the students to subsidise american exchanged students tramping/ski trips and that would look bad"

gjsdflgjdklfjgkldfjgkldjsfg

To be a practitioner in these areas you have to belong?

So, why can't universities fund the student association out of fees? Individual students can then choose to be take up free membership or not?

Now, the argument is that they're currently not very representative. But the solution to a body which is not sufficiently?

Did the Robinson Cup ever actually return? Last I remember?

Act and Labour have spent most of the past year pointlessly fighting over an irrelevency. This in hindsight might have been a?

OTOH, the?

Oh, while we?re at it, why not have sororities and fraternities? And wierd patriarchy-boosting secret societies? And professional athletes given a waiver of academic requirements and paid ten times as much as professors? And a college motto?

Absolutely. And?

bFM? It doesn't take kindly to being told what to do by its sole shareholder. Perhaps it's stronger because of it – I wouldn't know, I kept well?

That's a silly argument. We don't do that with other sectors of society. The Act?

NZUSA spent quite a bit of money getting data on the Australian?

AUSA has a tremendously difficult history, they've had tremendous problems?

More than likely an Act on Campus member taking "Their" property back.
;-)

I can't speak for every university, but, at Victoria:?

People are forced to fund them. They are not forced to belong to them.

Perhaps it would have failed,?

A random Actoid took very unkindly to that passing suggestion recently and tossed off a post at solopassion declaiming my name. I'm from The Standard, apparently. And Somalia's a great place.

Because it is the state and the state can?t legitimately do that.

You're conflating what the kinds of conditions the state can set with whether the state can set conditions at all.

You?re argument ?don?t want to be a member of a students? association, then don?t go that university? is?

However, like Lew, I'd rather the sound and fury expended in a never-could-be-successful parliamentary defense of Student Associations had been deployed in other areas that more strongly affect the lives of needy?

I should add that lawyers must all pay money to the New Zealand Law Society for it to perform its regulatory function (they also pay money to fund the Legal Complaints Review Officer). The NZLS?

Sure, democracies do the wrong thing all the time. Doesn't that mean they shouldn't have the right?

And rightly so. Being a representative in a duel sounds dangerous.

Well it's still an important conversation?

Totally agree with this Keith, as it is exactly what has happened. The public, through their elected representatives, has decided that VSM will now be one of these conditions.

All in all a?

I don't think it's ironic. They were trying to destroy it from the inside. I think that is why ACToids can be such crooked bastards – because they inherently don't consider themselves part of the system. They don't even want there to be a system.?

the inverse seems to be the case at University of?

I thought they were the only association to own their own building/site? Gave a foothold in the property market to leverage. Solid income from venue hire and catering over the years, I recall.

I don?t know that I?m conflating them, so much as ignoring one of them.

Of course the state can set some conditions (e.g. ?if you go to university, you must?

unless they are about unwarranted surveillance, of course :)

Well, yes. Some wrong things anyway. That's what fundamental rights are.

Democracies don't get to torture. And they don't get to convict people of crimes without fair trials. And they?

And,?

Hyperbole? No. It was a statement in response to an implicit claim that democracies could do anything because they were democracies. My response had nothing to do with the general debate about VSM, but was directed?

I do have to agree with you on this Graeme – CSM by itself?

In?

Is that not a valid reason any more? Damn and blast.

I'm pretty sure those will still exist. Indeed, the Vic Debating Society is older than the Vic Students' Association.

Perhaps they will. I note from the third reading debate, the Minister now has final say on what student services and fees institutions can offer/charge, do you think they'll propose alternative?

At Otago the Student Union was built using student association funds, and the building is half owned by OUSA. The gym is 40% owned by OUSA, but supported by a university levy. The bar is a joint operation between the university?

And this is the problem with your hypothetical: torture doesn't work. If the suspect is guilty, he will hold out as long as possible and/or give you misinformation. Or he'll just tell you what he thinks you?

That?s not the problem, because Graeme isn?t saying torture is bad because it doesn?t work. He?s saying it?s a fundamental breach of human rights (regardless of whether it?s effective or not).

I?m against torture, and the state use of?

Probably more interesting is "does a personal have a fundamental human right not to be injected with truth serum" in such a situation. Surely we have the right not to?

Depends on the side-effects. A drug which has no particular after-effects and is very low-risk for serious side effects is a lot harder to argue against than a drug which will kill one person?

Yep.

The ?more people may die overall as a result of allowing torture? argument is just the icing on the cake.

And when did absolutism become such a bad thing? To drag things a little closer to the topic? Do I think Oxford University was a totally worthless institution of higher learning before 1920, when women were finally allowed to become full?

and the land they sit on? maybe that was the distinctive thing? it was a while ago.

Like most decision-makers. You don't need a rights-based argument to be against torture. However I have yet to hear why compulsory student association membership so shrivels the willies of the young men of Act. In real terms.

No, but it helps, and I have a lot of admiration for people who do have the patience to formalize ethical arguments. I usually resort to "hurting people bad!", which is somewhat less convincing.

Keith?

Sacha: Sorry for being all po? faced and PC, but when I was involved with VSM campaign there were plenty of women around the place. Perhaps?

Only if they steal your speedboat.

Well, it happened well after Rogernomics, which is still, to this day, a major reason not to vote Labour.

Heh, I like the way your abstract mind works.

To me, the formulation of argument against torture?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nGsUbZpCKM

Then I encourage you to read the submission ACT on Campus made on the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill.

Post-revolution, there are going to be a large number of reactionaries amongst the bourgeoisie and lumpenproletariat. In order to avert a counter revolution, it will typically be necessary to liquidate these people. An alternative would be to select various?

What you are talking about is targeted killing, which is perfectly legitimate exercise of democratic force and is practiced openly by many states. This cannot be confused with torture which is cruel and barbaric.

For instance after NZ has upgraded the survellaince laws we will be able to use?

Angus,

What I take Rich to be talking about is the systematic use of targeted killing?

The only chance to avoid it and have a nicer outcome is if we can move beyond current capitalist/authoritarian models and construct an alternative cooperative?

There is also a saying that goes something like: "the English have satire instead of revolutions".

Laughter can act as a convenient/inconvenient safety valve.

Gawd, the pessimism. I like to think civilized humans can organize themselves better than that. A sustained downturn in democracies could just lead to them organizing another variant on the New Deal, and perhaps addressing the key causes of global financial instability. Doesn't?

once the capitalist system collapses under resource exhaustion and the (failed) globalisation of affluence.

See I don't think that's going to happen. Only Western capitalism is collapsing, and to a large extent it's collapsing towards the Third World, which rises the more it seizes (well,?

You see, I reckon that process has been under way for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. The question is whether we go the?

connecting? With who?
Textor & Crosby?
Merchant-banker mates?

You and me
turned off
months ago-"

Pinker's conclusions seem mostly valid to me, although I'd like some explanation of whether, when they?

It was way cheaper ? because people were seen as functions-

Abortions/died-at-births/?death in womb?/- and my favourite- ?failed to breathe?
just meant your conceived kid and just-born baby died.

It wasnt just murder & battle-death: there was a significant sieving out going on in Euro societies.

In?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Are you saying there was a deliberate distinction in quality of medical care given to different people?

Certainly another reason life was "cheap" was that?

By way of correction – you need two blunt knives, a plastic bottle, a stove and to have paid your electrical bill for this to work.

Certainly, when life is cheap and short, you'd be inclined to get on with it as hard and fast as possible. But the inclination to murder and?

Yeah,?

Press knives together once glowing do not plant face on element.

As with most things they should be shared for best results.

I have a horrible feeling that that generation is now in its 20s (except grumpy middle-aged men have always said that about every?

In Christchurch around 1989, perhaps?

What do you reckon was the differential impact on generations? Not something I've seen anywhere.

Middle-aged cave painter 1: 'Bloody kids today.'

Middle-aged cave painter 2: 'I reckon. That boy we've got doesn't even want to chew the end of sticks to make his brushes like we've always done. He was talking some bollocks about sticking some animal?

What I don't get, currently, is that there is so much buy into, by?

You're not being disingenuous?

Emphatically there was a distinction in quality of medical care – none for the poor. Let's take Victorian England and?

Middle-aged cave painters would be about 25 years old. The boy'd be about 13. The oldest cave painter, head of the school and enforcer of traditional values, would be about 40. His main physical problem would be?

Yes, obviously. You just made it sound a bit more deliberate than that, rather than the (highly disturbing, but inevitable) result of massive income inequalities?

But it was deliberate. I don't think it was the impersonal forces of social inequality that determined whether?

And I dispute this as well. Doctors before the 20th?

Right here, right now, in our own backyard. You and me and everyone we know.

I tend to think it's a bad thing generally. But not absolutely.

I totally agree with you BUT-unfortunately a *lot* of homeless/marginal people are not only addicts but also mentally ill and are unable to do this- and there are very few people disinterestedly speaking on?

Anyone wondering what DB and Lucy were referring to, or who hasn?t seen the talk Pinker gave on violence at a TED conference (which would be hard to believe, as I seem to have linked to it on every web?

For those?

Indeed. I wouldn't put it past any generation, including my own. Traditionally, gratuitous war has been something most pushed for by the people?

People routinely survived amputation. It was not a death sentence. No picnic either, but not necessarily a death sentence by any means.

My point was twofold: 1 Doctors could do more than stop bleeding. 2 Your quality of?

What I have noted is how many ?helping? organisations actually have a self-interested motive.

Generalising off-topic wildly, I can't think of any organisation or institution that doesn't quickly lose sight of its original purpose and become a self-perpetuating gravy train.?

The Futurists (and others) wanted a clean break between Tradition and the Modern. They wanted to stop telling the old stories, the continuous pictorial tradition stretching back at least 50,000 years, and tell new stories with new pictorial means for the?

It's our ability to project our fantasies on to the stars?

From where I'm sitting, those in the service of the Left and Right pay nothing more than hypocritical lip-service to the old slogans of Freedom, Equality, Progress and God, Country, Family. Instead, both openly worship Money, Power, Position, the means to?

Nobody ever does that on PAS.