University Movements in Aotearoa

This is a summary and curation of ‘university movements’ which I am classifying as grass-roots activities which regard the university institutions in Aotearoa, particularly the University of Auckland.

Currently this is just an archive of the materials I plan to use.

Lost media[?]: http://www.95bfm.co.nz/assets/sm/217162/3/Lillian.mp3

¶ We Are The University

¶ Flickr

¶ We are the University Publication Vol 1

Posted MAR 4 2012 Mediafire Hosted on this website

¶ ETHOS

We are a community of students and staff who are committed to the University as a site of intellectual expansion and academic freedom. We believe the University should function as the ‘critic and conscience of society’ and as an open space for expression of dissent. The escalating profit-driven and market-oriented agenda of the University over the last thirty years has eroded these principles.

We are committed to reclaiming the University, we believe in Free, accessible, and quality education Political freedom, and democratic governance of the university No privatisation of education Education and research should be driven by the needs of people, not the interests of the market. Management is not the University. Students, academics and workers all make this place what it is, and the truth is we are not a product of the university, WE ARE THE UNIVERSITY!

¶ State of the University – Henri Carlos

Posted FEB 25 2012 by ADMIN in ARTICLES

In 1914 Walter Benjamin wrote a shrewd little treatise on the poverty of student life under capitalism. He argued that the university was nothing more than a factory of future workers, that student life is a frigid and soulless production line of dutiful young subjects eager to fit themselves into some idle part of the world and start making a dime for the man. He wrote ‘uncritical and spineless acquiescence…is an essential feature of student life’ and that ‘the perversion of the creative spirit into the vocational spirit, which we see at work everywhere, has taken possession of the universities as a whole and has isolated them from the nonofficial, creative life of the mind’.

And what the fuck does that have to do with the life of students at the University of Auckland in 2012 you ask? Well, I’m about to tell you. Benjamin was not only a genius, but he could have been a time lord. It’s as if he was able to stare into the future and describe the precise conditions we find right here and now. Although you would have to think that it is worse now, and if not worse then we have surely reached into the offal pit of stupid to smear our tiny minds with idiocy, because it sure as fuck isn’t any better. And who are we to go ignoring the warnings of a Nazi fighting time lord for generation after generation, only to end up with this cluster fuck we call an education? Whether it is worse or it is just as bad, the real tragedy is that most of you don’t have a clue what kind of emptiness you are buying into. Your experience here will naturalise all manner of mindless garbage. No doubt you already buy the nonsense about austerity or so-called ‘economic reality’, perhaps you think free education is ‘unrealistic’. After all you have already spent your entire life being shaped into good little consumers. You have your loyalty cards and frequent flyer miles, your favourite soft drink and your T-shirt with the ironic anti-consumer logo. You probably buy fair trade and feel a warm glow when you put your rubbish in the recycling. Or perhaps you are dosed to the eyeballs with unbridled cynicism, your life is too busy to worry about anything, you hardly have time to eat, and if it wasn’t for the convenience of drive through fast food you probably wouldn’t.

Well then, you will fit right in, as what you will get here is a fast food education. Processed mystery meat for the mind. You might think that sounds like hyperbole, but I’m not just talking figuratively. McDonald’s actually sponsors some of the courses here, so your happy meal education comes replete with golden arches note pads and helpful burger related examples. And guess what, that is just how our current government and the university administration want it to be. They think in numbers, just like a production line. They count you up like bags of frozen chicken wings, ready dusted for the deep fryer. The National government’s ideas (or rather lack of ideas) about education are abhorrent. They shamelessly fuse a program of simpleton economics and output to the insipid notion that the only education worth a jot is the kind that brings in loads of cash. A civic education, the humanities, the development of politics and a critical conscience, or for that matter anything that doesn’t deaden your senses to the banality of your world, is a waste of money, it’s not an ‘investment’ you see. If you can’t be an entrepreneur, then you are cannon fodder. If you can’t perform like a monkey for the market then you are probably one of those mindless arts students who thinks about crazy things like gender equality or social justice, or worse… you could be a fucking communist.

The biggest propaganda success of our time is the idea of austerity. All around the world the crimes of finance capital were investigated by putting the murderer in charge of the crime scene, and it is no different here. Forget the fact that 151 New Zealanders earned an extra $7 Billion last year while the rest of us saw the price of living rise and real wages stagnate, making us, guess what, that’s right… quantifiably poorer. Never mind that the average student debt is now around $30,000, or that you fees will rise around 20% in the time you are here. Who cares about the 250,000 children living in poverty, or the hundreds of families being evicted from their homes because the market says so? What does it matter that we have one of the highest youth suicide rates in the world, or that we have disgraceful rates of preventable diseases. We know what to do about that, let’s started shredding education funding and give the top 10% of earners in our country a tax cut of $2 Billion dollars. Seriously, what the fuck? Financialisation has poisoned our world with a dehumanising logic that has colonised the minds of people making decisions. It is not that free education is impossible, or that there is some kind of esoteric economic reality that ordinary people cannot grasp, the truth is this logic says education is a commodity and a source of profit. This is about the priorities of people that have a hand in guiding the structure of our world, not about some invisible hand that is linked to the almighty god of the market. All of these symptoms are a failure of the same reasoning that is increasingly dominant in our education system. We are not about solving anything through education; we are about making it impossible to think anything that cannot be measured by a balance sheet.

So where exactly do the ideas come from that get us into this mess? Who is it that thinks up all the plans? Well, let me give you a clue. A lot of them come from that eyesore over on Grafton road. The monolith of steel and glass that is so full of those neatly built pedagogues that dictate how you learn. The one with the exciting names like the Fisher and Paykel Auditorium and the ASB Careers centre. Hell, the place itself is named after a tax-dodging ex-pat who ‘donated’ money to buy a degree and some political influence. And what is it that goes on over at the business school? The valorisation of failure, that’s what. Stunted ideologues frothing up at empty signifiers like ‘growth’, ‘performance’ and ‘flexibility’. Contemporary commerce calls you a human resource without a hint of irony. From the bottom up you are considered to be a compartmentalised vessel, a portable plastic convenience for reading, writing and maths. You are a sequenced map of a person ready to be made into a paint-by-numbers individual, a walking resume with added value, or as you are known on paper, a unit of human capital. And if you don’t subscribe to that worldview then you are either unrealistic or stupid. The knowledge produced in that place is what legitimates the ideology of the market that has our leaders so transfixed in a mental haze.

I was over there last year for a prize giving when a man in a navy blue suit accosted me. You know the guy, he’s everywhere, he has that kind of fashion mullet haircut that was popular in the nineties, and he wears a baby blue gingham shirt and those chunky shoes that scream ‘I might be wearing a suit, but I could break into fun mode at any moment!’. Anyway, this guy sits next to me and introduces himself. He then tells me that he works in the ‘school’, and as if he is about to pull a card trick from his pocket, he produces a book with the title Postgraduate Prospectus, and then he says ‘these are some of our products’. ‘No shit? And I here I was thinking they were called courses and degrees, or were you referring to the pictures of the students on the cover?’ You see that is what they think education is. They have catchall monikers like entrepreneurial ecosystem and technology incubator, and they run crack institutes with names like Excelerator. They use words like ‘flexible’ and ‘dynamic’ and ‘adaptable’ to obscure the truth that you are nothing but disposable units, fragments of capital to keep grinding through the numbers. They have think tanks, as if a war on ideas is needed to compliment all the other wars against abstractions, and they have outreach programs to ‘cross-fertilise’ the work of engineering, science and medicine with ‘business concepts’. Make no mistake; these are the dominant ideas of our world. The economy, economic reality, consumer confidence, budgets, forecasts, and the white noise of the stock ticking fictions that solidify the tyranny of a marketplace worldview that has proven time and again to be a failure.

If we are to be honest then real ideas are not actually born in that place. An idea is that intersection between a fucked up piece of the world and the ability to change it. It is a truth that breaks down the oscillating logic of circulation and pointlessness. Ideas are not widgets and commodities, they are not for trade and they are certainly not property. Universities used to have real ideas, now they just have the market. If anything, business schools are where ideas go to die. They take what start out as ideas in other parts of the university and they emulsify them. Look at the university itself. Look around you; the public space is festooned with hoardings of advertising and inane branding. The common areas are infected with a common malaise. Students are atomised units of accumulation, knocking around in sense-deprived worlds of their own, anesthetised by the very education that is supposed to open their eyes. You all have to work shitty jobs to afford to live, you drink way too much because if you don’t you will be faced with the pervading sense that you are wasting your time. How ironic. The university is the point of exchange for inter-generational theft and the legitimating of a particular kind of cultural logic that has spectacularly failed. Here you may comment on anything you like, but you cannot change a thing.

And make no mistake, it is always getting worse. Funding is being well and truly cut here, but we are all frogs in a pot. The gas is lit, the water temperature is rising, and the gleeful little tory boys are giddy with anticipation. Look Bill, look Steve, look Johnny, the students have no idea… you see, if you put them straight in the boiling water, they will just jump out and make a mess. But if we boil them slowly they won’t notice, we can reduce their education to a watery mess and they will just swim around in it until they are truly fucked, boiled in their own stupidity like mindless little frogs. This is what Stephen Joyce means when he says ‘keep your heads down’, he means ‘get back in the water little froggie and take what’s coming to you quietly’.

Last year students protested all over the world. Thousands took to the streets in the UK and Ireland, even more protested in Spain and in Chile. Students were instrumental in the Middle East and they played an important part in the global Occupy movement. History has repeatedly shown us that students can drive social change. From Vienna in 1848, to May 68’ in Paris, from the People’s Park and Civil Rights to the Vietnam War protests, from Tahrir to Santiago, London and right here in Auckland. Students have stood up time and again to the inadequacy of an unimaginative status quo. And as our leaders set about selling our future to line their own pockets, and our own University continues to model itself as the soulless vehicle for the financialisation of everything, it is time we stood up and changed things before it is too late. Students in Aotearoa have been crucial to the success of social movements. Without student activism the anti-nuclear movement would have struggled, the Halt All Racist Tours campaign would not have happened and countless other movements would have fizzled. A radical student body can make things happen that otherwise would not.

The University is a symptom. It is a place where knowledge is considered to be property and ideas are kept locked up for when they can be rented out. Stephen Joyce, John Key, Stewart McCutcheon are silly old white men that know fuck all about your world. They come from a place that has failed you. They all had free education and a world of opportunity that they squandered and now they want you to pay to keep them in the manner they are accustomed to. There will be people in this University imagining all sorts of incredible things, but nothing sees the light of day unless it is worth money to the greedy trolls that run this racket. Education is not for betterment, it is not for public good or for the ‘unrealistic’ utopian fantasies of children, it is for profit, it is for cold hard cash. How else can you explain a world in which we can send people to the moon and make human organs out of plastic, but we can’t provide free education to everyone? How else can you explain a world in which Invercargill is a stand-alone model for everyone else?

The truth is you will spend the next few years here doing a half-arsed job regurgitating some half-baked ideas that you will soon forget, your education will turn you into a commodity so you can live out your alienated days in an office cubicle, gold-bricking ‘lolz’ on Facebook and paying back the ‘market’ rate on your disproportionate debt. While you are here you will totally overlook the fact that the university is a workplace with hundreds of underpaid and casual workers that clean the bins, tend the gardens and pick up the shit that you leave lying around. The academics that are teaching you will continue to turn out mediocrity in their peer reviewed journals and teach you dumbed down versions of worn out theories, or write books that nobody will ever read, especially not you. The accounting logic of targets and objectives, categorisations and compartmentalisation will fix you into a pattern that convinces you that reality might suck but there is nothing you can do about it. Even those of you who manage to get a ‘good job’ will mostly lead an empty existence. You might go on an OE to the UK where you won’t be able to get a job that pays more than 150 quid a week because the situation over there is worse. And while you are there you will be hunted relentlessly for your loan arrears until you have no choice but to pay back five times what you borrowed in order to complete a shitty degree that is all but worthless.

Or, perhaps you will finally wake up to the warnings of the doctor. Benjamin argues that the first step in overturning this situation is to understand what we are dealing with. He said, ‘Through understanding, everyone will succeed in liberating the future from its deformed existence in the womb of the present’. If we want to escape the world of perpetual crisis we live in then we need to wake the fuck up and do something about this place right here.

Henri Carlos

¶ Response to Paul Holmes

Posted MAR 2 2012 by ADMIN in CRACCUM with 0 COMMENTS

Nathalie Jaques

I always knew that New Zealand was a pretty racist country, but I never expected one of its national papers to publish something on par with a KKK press release. Paul Holmes is not unknown for his racist sentiments and yet the Herald opts to keep him on staff as an opinion piece columnist. Though… with the likes of Garth George and Paul Henry fuelling our media what more can we expect? Perhaps our national media is just a cesspit for racism and bigotry. It isn’t outside the realm of possibility that the Herald sets a certain level of misanthropy as a prerequisite for employment.

The opening to paragraph to this vomit-inducing hate speech (in blatant violation of the section61 of the Human Rights Act 1993) Holmes characterises the Maori as ‘a group of hateful, hate-fuelled weirdos who seem to exist in a perfect world of benefit provision.’ Let’s just pause for some self-reflection on behalf of the Reich Minister of Propaganda Holmes. The first and most obvious response is that the crowd he ham-fistedly refers to was actually an ethnically diverse body of protesters ranging across various gender, ages and socioeconomic backgrounds. It is a pity that selective viewing is a foundation stone for journalism these days. In addition, could anyone live up to the archetypal role of a ‘hateful, hate-fuelled weirdo’ more than prejudiced Paulie? If the life of luxury enjoyed by Maori, and by extension Polynesians, that Mr Holmes indicts is so enviable it is a wonder he doesn’t step out of his middle-class bubble to join them in their free ride on the back of the long suffering middle-classes. It would seem that my conception of what constitutes as existing in a perfect world of benefit provision is diametrically opposed to that of our propaganda pioneer. Certainly being white, male and self-entitled eases access to the social ladder allowing those who get to the top to kick it away from the ledge and spit on those remaining on the ground.

¶ Beneficiary Bashing and the National Party

Posted MAR 2 2012 by ADMIN in CRACCUM with 0 COMMENTS

BY HALA NASR

When it comes to National Party policy, don’t let John Key’s smarmy smile or Paula Bennett’s ‘scientific evidence’ fool you. A flick through their cryptically proposed welfare reforms and it is quite clear what they are implying without explicitly saying it. Tricky! Although this mightn’t come as much of a surprise considering our PM has never been one for transparency or honesty – refer to the Tea party tape and the backdoor meetings with Petrobas, despite the very recent and very poorly-managed RENA disaster. Bennett claims the Welfare reforms are “resetting expectations,” so let’s take a look at what that really means.

Firstly who are these elusive beneficiaries that National love to hate? Recent figures suggest there are currently 328,000 beneficiaries, which is approximately 12% of the working-age population. Of that group, 26% are on the invalids benefit, 18% are on the sickness benefit and 2% are carers for the sick and infirm, 33% are parents supporting children and 17% are on the unemployment benefit. However National party rhetoric consistently dumps all beneficiaries into one homogenous group of lazy, unmotivated and undeserving, which is misleading at the very least, and absolutely disgusting at its most reasonable. It creates a culture of disdain for all beneficiaries, while carefully ignoring any distinctions or reasons as to their inability to work. Little to no attempts are made to correct these popular misconceptions, and understandably so, because they carve the way for their proposed welfare reforms.

“The expectation is for the majority of beneficiaries to be available and looking for work”, exhorts Bennett.

Hold on Bennett, this ‘majority of beneficiaries’ you speak of are on the invalid and sick benefits, sitting at around 46% of the total beneficiary population. So what you are really saying here is that you expect the sick and the invalid, which includes individuals with mental health problems, disabilities and impairments, to enter or re-enter the workforce (i.e. for their labour to be exploited and the like). Ask yourself if this is the type of society you wish to be a part of, one starved of empathy that has no respect for the sick.

There are a number of draconian proposals to ensure that those who are weaselling out of work are made to get off their asses. One recommendation will see to it that medical certificates go ‘transformers’ on us, and become ‘fit notes.’ Instead of describing the length of time an individual is unable to work, the health professional will describe what the individual is capable of doing in paid work. The last say then goes to “work professionals” who will gauge the validity of said ‘fit note’. This means that your job descripition and work expected of you will be tweaked to allow you to be as productive as possible during this time. (Apparently, health professionals cannot be trusted to put the economy before their patients. Go figure.)

National party policy then goes on to state: “There are clear links between welfare, poverty and poor health. Evidence shows children are better off when their parents are in work, not on welfare.” This simply is not true; one trip down to the Auckland City Mission will make anyone a believer. Under John Key’s watch, we now have a new class of people – the working class poor. These are individuals with fulltime jobs, who aren’t leeching or being lazy, who are now unable to support their families and feed their children. Why is this? Well again under National’s watch, wages have gone down, which apparently is meant to lead to long-term economic growth, which in a nutshell and without sounding too much like an activist on a megaphone, means ‘the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer’. The trickledown theory has yet to ever trickle down genuinely, I’m afraid. So where’s the incentive to work? Well, in my opinion, there are none. Alongside the inability to support yourself and your family, working conditions are, to put it bluntly, shit (refer to, for example, the 90-day work trial bill and plans to introduce an un-liveable youth minimum wage). So perhaps instead of pointing the finger at individuals for not working, the government could seek to better working conditions and treatment of workers (that’s assuming of course there are jobs to begin with…)

The punishment for those seen to be ‘leeching’ off the system? Benefit-cutting. For example if offered a night shift, the individual must accept irrespective of their ability to find childcare (childcare, which by the way, is on its way to not being subsidised if National has its way! Woo!) This treatment is also known as leaving people out in the cold. For what, you may ask? Well, for daring to be sick and invalid, for daring to be marginalised, for daring to become parents (if poor people can’t afford children, why are they continuing to breed?!) and most importantly, for having the audacity to not have a job despite there being none to speak of (job creation hasn’t been one of National’s strong points, you see).

Claims by John Key that there will be an emphasis on child wellbeing are empty, as they are the unquestionable victims of these reforms. [Note: we have 200,000 children living in poverty, right here in Aotearoa.] National party recommendations include parents being coerced into ‘work-preparation schemes’ if their child is under 3, working part-time when their youngest child is 3 and must work full time once their child is 5. If they have more children while on the benefit, the recommendations state that they should return to work when their baby is 14 weeks. While some of these recommendations are not yet concrete (they have to be elected first!), there is a clear message being sent to NZers. Being a parent is not considered valuable or worthy of an individual’s time. The repercussions for children in welfare homes are bleak, whose parents face benefit cuts should they decline work, regardless of the circumstances. The current benefit sits at $322p/w, so any further cuts could see families turned out onto the streets, or lead to neglect when parents have to work and cannot arrange/afford adequate childcare.

Not to mention that these reforms stink of hypocrisy, especially considering Bennett herself reaped the benefits of a positive welfare system having been a solo mother at 17 and a recipient of the Domestic Purposes Benefit (DPB) and the Training Incentive Allowance (TIA), which allowed her to obtain her degree from Massey University.

With all these considerations, you can bet your bottom dollar that National’s forecasts for reducing those on welfare by 100,000 won’t be making Aotearoa a healthier, richer place to live in (perhaps only for the 1%). Increased rejection of claims and coercion into work where it is inappropriate to do so mean poverty rates will go up. Repeat after me: Poverty rates will go up. Poverty rates will go up. Poverty rates will go up. This negates any rationale behind having a welfare system at all, as it is meant to support and empower individuals during their times of need. National’s reforms do the opposite. They worsen socioeconomic conditions, hinder attempts to enter workforce in a positive manner, which will inevitably widen the gap between the rich and the poor and strengthen intergenerational welfare dependency. Say goodbye to social mobility, folks!

The discourse needs to be shifted away from victim-blaming towards more effective, problem-solving. This would involve contextualising welfare dependency, by disaggregating data, correcting popular misconceptions, and understanding the reasons behind high levels of dependency to begin with. For example, instead of punishing and driving individuals further into poverty through benefit cutting, how about focusing on creating jobs for the 17% currently on the unemployment benefit, who have no chance of finding a job when there a no jobs to speak of! This I’m sorry to say John Key (actually, no I’m not) is the responsibility of the government (yes, he had the audacity to say it wasn’t). So do your job and do it properly.

¶ A Brief History of Student Debt

Posted MAR 2 2012 by ADMIN in CRACCUM with 0 COMMENTS

Student debt is a normal part of studying right? Wrong! Until 1989 not only were there no university fees, but most students were given a living grant – they were paid to study. That means that of the generation that is in power now, the politicians and the university Vice Chancellors of New Zealand, virtually all of them got to study without the burden of a snowballing loan and got to start their careers with zero debt. Makes you wonder where the fuck the Minister for Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce, gets off saying that students should stop complaining, “keep your heads down,” and take $30,000+ of debt on the chin.

Student debt in NZ is currently around $12 billion, so how did things get so bad in just over 20 years? Here’s the gist:[1]

1989 The Labour Government introduces fees for the first time (around $129) which for the majority of students is covered by their grant, plus there’s a virtually universal student allowance scheme – not so bad right?

1990 Getting cheeky, the Labour Government introduces a flat tuition rate of $1250 per year. That’s a raise of 969% in one year.

1991 Despite election promises to abolish tuition fees, the new National Government instead scraps the flat rate and allows universities to set their own fees, while simultaneously reducing their funding to universities. This is where the shit hits the fan, for the next 10 years fees rise on average 13% per year. Fees setting across the country becomes a tug-of-war between students and uni management, with management proposing fee rises of as much as 45% at a time, often met by student protests and occupations.

1992 The Student Loan Scheme is introduced so that students can cope with their massive fees, but don’t get too excited – they’re accruing interest at 7% even while studying.

1999 Eight years after the flat rate was lifted and fees have increased 142% on average, compared with 13% inflation.

2000 The newly elected Labour Government commits to deal with the problem of student debt, first introducing interest-free loans while studying.

2001 Following this the Labour Government places a freeze on tuition fees until 2003.

2003 Counter to their claim of being committed to “first stabilising and then lowering tertiary fees,” the Labour Government allows universities to keep increasing fees, but now at a maximum of 5% per year.

2004 The percentage of students receiving an allowance is now 29%, compared to 86.4% in 1991.

2006 Following through with their 2005 election promise, Labour introduces interest-free student loans (provided the recipient doesn’t leave NZ).

2008 The Labour Government increases access to allowances and promises to phase in a universal allowance if re-elected, National has no specific policy but promises to be more generous.

2009 The newly elected National government cuts the Training Incentive Allowance for sole parents.

2010 National limits student loans to a maximum of 7 years of study in one student’s lifetime – meaning that students cannot self-fund a PhD so more will have to look for corporate scholarships and tailor their research to external demands.

2011 Access to living allowances and course related costs cut to part-time students and over 55s. Loan repayment threshold frozen at just under $20,000 and repayment holiday cut from 3 years to 1.

Where are we now?

New Zealand has the 7th highest fees in the OECD and a combined student debt-load of $12 billion. The National Party has no desire to reduce student debt but has promised to maintain interest-free loans. This is no guarantee however, given the flippant nature of party promises and, most troubling, the fact that their coalition partner, Act, wants to reinstate interest. Why should this worry you when Act is just a minor party? Because last year Act managed to pass though the ‘Voluntary Student Membership Bill’ which will see Students’ Associations receiving dramatically less funding this year, effectively immobilising them from significantly resisting any major policy changes, say like taking away interest-free loans… Add to this the fact that Act’s leader, John Banks, is currently the Associate Minister for Education and has already pushed though charter schools (a scheme that were never mentioned before the election), and that the Minister for Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce, drops veiled threats when students protest significant policy changes, and you get a climate where our futures become ever more precarious.

Without allowances and interest-free loans the last of the doors will be closed to students from middle to low-income backgrounds and education will finally become the user-pays factory that it has been morphing into over the last 20 years. As students, the only way to stop this is to put our collective foot down, and declare education to be a public good that should be open to all, not just to those who can already afford it. We need to do this, not just for ourselves, but for the generations that will follow us, if we want to stop the escalating income-inequality and if we want to live in a country where people are not crushed by debt before they even get into the workforce.

[1] NZUSA has done up a comprehensive timeline which this is shamelessly pilfered from, you can view it at www.demandabetterfuture.org.nz

¶ The Figure of the Student

Posted MAR 18 2012 by ADMIN in CRACCUM with 0 COMMENTS

Guy Cohn

It is now undeniable. The university is fucked. There is no other way of putting it. Any form of life that is not fully subsumed by the logic of capital is currently being expelled from campus. The administration at Victoria University of Wellington, having made it clear that patriarchy is no longer up for debate, has now informed us that what goes on between States stays between States. Meanwhile, the administration at the University of Auckland has just failed in the most obscene of power grabs which, had it been successful, would have lead to the sort of intellectual terrorism that makes Norwegian neo-Nazis smile. All this, without even mentioning the government’s recent strike against the collective power of the student body.

Is it really any wonder that so many young people are trying to kill themselves? What are they supposed to do, go to university and train to be psychopaths in the commerce department? Study sociology and discover everything is fucked and there is nothing you can do about it? Join the science department and get sponsored by some huge corporation to fuck shit up? We used to say, ‘Sure, everything is fucked, but we are ok, we study for the sake of study! There is pride to be found in such pursuits!’ But it is becoming increasingly impossible even to claim this. Study for the sake of study? The only people who ever really believed in that is our teachers, and look what has become of them! For a while now they have been writing papers for journals that no one ever reads and books that no one could care less about, but now they cannot even get away with that. We could tell you what proportion of academics are on antidepressants, but would it really surprise you?

What the university’s corporate sponsors understand, which no one else really does, is that the real object of study is to decide. Hence why they are so keen to preempt our decisions by making them for us. After all, didn’t we come here with some idea of ‘making the world a better place’? Of course we quickly realise the impossibility of such things, which is to say we’re being made to realize this. We hardly want to encourage any such ideas, only to have them crushed once more. We think, rather, it is time for us to assert our power. Perhaps such an operation is not as difficult as we think, barely any one really believes in anything anymore, it is no longer a matter of convincing anyone.

What then of our figure? The figure of the student is not the student. The student is the particular subjectivity, the particular way of being, which emerges from the figure; between the figure. The figure of the student is the shape and the form out of which what we call student comes to be, that which induces its way of acting. The figure of the student has a certain rhythm, it slows our senses down, it induces repetition, over and over again, until that which it repeats achieves a certain resonance, able to be thought in all its detail. But, ultimately, the figure of the student produces something which reaches toward a decision. The figure of the student, having forced the object of reflection to slow down and forced its repetition to the extent that it can become known in a way which was previously seemingly unknowable, is figured so as to produce the tendency toward decision. This is how the figure of the student goes beyond itself, how it transcends the student, how it overcomes its fundamental contradiction: the contradiction of study. Having studied and studied, the student is led to ask the question, but what is to be done? What are the consequences of all this? It is from this moment that the student (having emerged from the figure) enters into the production of a new figure, some new course of action, some attempt at going beyond that which already is.

This is why we must resist the urge to defend the university as the pure site of study, we must resist the easy option of saying what is good in ‘student’ is study in its purity. Against the urge to justify study as a means to itself we must realise why it is that we study in the first place, to, eventually, decide.

What role does this figure play politically? The figure of the student does not find its power within, it finds its power without, a power which involves grabbing at carefully chosen moments. The figure of the student is an activating agent: activating a moment in which the student comes into itself as that which it was always told to be: ‘the critic and conscience of society’: its critique becomes too strong, transcending critique and entering into practice, for its conscience is too heavy.

The figure of the liberal presents the figure of the student with the most fraternal of hostilities. The ultimate products of the figure of the liberal are not the neurotic partisans of bourgeois democracy, but those who, in a tactical move, take up the cause of the liberal democratic form in order to curb the most naked consequences of capital, without following the consequences of their desires to their end. It might seem here that we are confusing two figures: the liberal and the one who takes on the robes of the liberal in a political manoeuvre. But it is here that we must be especially clear: the latter provides the ultimate schema for the former. It is flirtation with liberalism which is at the heart of the figure of the liberal. That is to say, the liberal is essentially compromised. Indeed, we should distinguish between the figure of the liberal and the true partisans of bourgeois democracy, whom, themselves are compromised but in a different respect. The failure of the figure of the liberal is to come to terms with that with which they are compromised: the figure of the liberal is essentially compromised because that with which they have compromised ultimately has no loyalty to any particular form. The bourgeoisie will just as easily put their chips in behind fascism when dictated to by capital. When this happens the figure of the liberal is left defending a form devoid of content.

We need only look to what is happening in Europe to see the essential emptiness of the figure of the liberal. In Greece, the state, the democratic state, the bourgeois state, the liberal state, has shown us its reality. It will transform itself, it will ask bankers to take over its administration when required. Just as in Europe in the first half of the 20th century when the bourgeois state did not hesitate to, through democracy, become fascist. Democracy today signifies little more than a form.

This is one of the places where the figure of the student must be prepared to defend itself, against the figure of the liberal, which will attempt to provide it with a form, rather than letting its content find its own form. The figure of the student must combat the figure of the liberal, for the figure of the liberal will tend to disfigure the figure of the student so as to prevent it from following through with its own consequences. In this respect, one of the key necessities the figure of the student finds itself with today is to combat the figure of the liberal. It is clear there is only one way to do this, it is not a matter of convincing, but a matter of forcing the figure of the liberal to confront its essential compromise, forcing it to enter into its own enquiries and follow through with the consequences of those enquiries; it is a matter of forcing the figure of the student.

¶ Burnin’ and Lootin’: The London Riots

Posted MAR 18 2012 by ADMIN in CRACCUM with 0 COMMENTS

By Hala Nasr

“Burning an illusion tonight, burnin’ and lootin’ tonight.” – Bob Marley

It’s time we saw the rioting, looting and destruction for what it really was – a desperate cry for help. Thatcher’s policies (a pinch of social welfare cuts and a dab of increased tax burden on the poor) and the failure of successive governments to fix the problem, to be blunt, fucked the poor, and yet some of us then seemed surprised that it has bred generations of angry, desperate youths.

It all began in Tottenham, an area with a longstanding, shady history of police shootings of black men. Racial tensions between police and the Tottenham community were heightened when the police ‘accidentally’ shot Mark Duggan, a 29 year old unarmed black man, while attempting to arrest him on 4th August 2011. A peaceful protest over Duggan’s killing turned violent following police provocation, fuelling the fire and triggering the London riots, which took place from the 6-10 August 2011. Many of those involved were youths from low socioeconomic backgrounds, the by-products of the insatiable greed inherent within capitalist society.

It’s was never just a race issue, but it was also a class issue, an issue of intergenerational theft.

The mainstream media and hot-shot politicians did their usual thing; propagandising, demonising, and calling for harsh repercussions. But their rhetoric of ‘criminality’ was not innocent of self-interested prejudice. Naturally they placed more emphasis on the destruction of private property, channelling public anger towards the much loved Tory pastime of beneficiary bashing. They would have us call these youths ‘mindless idiots’ – further alienating and silencing an already powerless and socioeconomically deprived faction of society – in order to disqualify any sociopolitical commentary or analyses of their actions. All the while, successfully distracting the public from the government’s failings to attend to rising socioeconomic and racial inequality in the UK. That’s right. We, as a society, have failed these youths.

And it is more than a little cryptic, nay, disgusting that damage to private property can anger a nation more so than the ongoing suffering of a decent fraction of its population. Coming from poverty-stricken backgrounds, these youths are not only deprived of nutritional food, healthy homes and good educations – but of a voice. These youths are hungry for the chance to be heard, hungry for the respect they deserve and for their needs need to be met. And however unknowingly, these youths aren’t as useless as the Tories would have us believe. They managed to burn the illusion of social justice in the UK and start a much needed conversation. Good work y’all.

¶ A Legal Guide to Reclamation

Posted MAR 18 2012 by ADMIN in WATU with 0 COMMENTS

By Johnny Truant

DISCLAIMER: The law is incredibly complex and, at time fathomable. This article is intended to be taken as a rough guide if you are contemplating doing anything that may break the law, or even come close, please consult a practicing criminal lawyer.

Dealing with the Police:

You are legally obliged to give:

Your name Your date of birth Occupation (but not employer) Address Be honest as this information is generally easy to track. Legally, without consent or arresting you, the police cannot force you to answer any further questions or take you anywhere.

If the police stop you, ask whether you are free to go, if so, do so.

If arrested avoid answering questions until you have a lawyer present. This can range from direct questioning to seemingly benign causal conversation and compliments (such as “Good job in there, I actually support what you guys are doing. What time did you guys have to wake up to get everything set up?”). Everything they ask is building a case against you and your fellow activists.

In deflecting these questions, be friendly not confrontational. Your arresting officer has a role in determining your charges and therefore, in the long run, it easier not to fuck yourself over, especially if the police are not the target of your protest.

Being Searched by the Police:

After you have been arrested the Police can carry out a personal search – that is, they can search your person and your possessions without a warrant. The Police must arrest someone before they have the right to search him or her, unless a suspect consents to a search. However, the police can invoke the Misuse of Drugs Act giving them the power to search people without arresting them or having a warrant. This requires officers to be able to show reasonable grounds for suspecting that an individual is carrying drugs. Criminal Law

If you are reclaiming a building, or any other space for that matter, the mostly likely charge you are going to encounter is trespass under:

Summary Offences Act 1981, or Crimes act 1961 The Summary Offences Act is New Zealand’s least severe criminal act (thus results in the least severe penalties). The act an activist is charged under is primarily determined by their arresting officer (though charges can be modified up until your court date), hence again, don’t be a dick to your arresting officer.

Before Being Charged with Trespass

You need to have been notified that you are trespassing. (Either by the police, the official occupier of the land or tenants. Be asked to leave and given reasonable time as well as a convenient exit (If you leave at this point you cannot be charged). Then upon receiving said notification, refuse to leave. Other charges that could potentially be placed upon an activist during a reclamation are, but are not limited to: Unlawfully being in an enclosed space, obstruction, unlawfully preventing x from going about their legal right etc, disorderly behaviour, resisting arrest, burglary and failing to comply with a police order.

Avoid worsening your charges. If you are reclaiming a building ensure that you do not deliberately damage any property, remove items, act in a threatening manner or resist arrest.

Overseas Travel

Visas are typically only denied to those with serious or violent offences and 5 years jail time. Occupying a building will invoke none of these. However immigration is a very subjective business, you can be turned around at the border for any reason at all, you do not have the right to enter any country but rather the privilege to. Whilst is it extremely uncommon for people to be denied entry due to an activist type criminal record, it is not impossible. Deportation

Similar to overseas travel, only more lenient. Your rights once an arrest is made:

The right to a lawyer. A person who has been arrested or detained has the right to consult and instruct a lawyer without delay, and to be informed of that right. Be charged. Everyone who is arrested for an offence has the right to be charged promptly or to be released. Statements to the Police. Everyone who is arrested or detained for an offence or suspected offence has the right to refrain from making any statement and to be informed of that right. Diversion

Designed for first time offenders with less serious crimes, such as trespass. Managed outside of the court system by the police. Thus the police determine whether it is granted. (Yet again it pays not to be a dick to the cops) ·Avoids staining your criminal record completely. ·In theory you only get one, thus, use it doing something awesome.

Points to Consider Before An Occupation

Contact a lawyer. Lawyers around the country are willing to provide free legal support to activists. Otherwise a free Duty Solicitor is available at your local district court. Appoint a legal liaison. The legal liaison stays outside of the reclamation and insures they are not arrestable. They are responsible for: Finding and contacting a lawyer before the action. Collecting names and details of all activists in arrestable positions (collected before or during the action, context dependent). Insuring that activists have their phone number and a lawyer contact details. Collecting backup medication and other essentials that activists may need upon being released from arrest. Travelling to the police station, finding out what activists have been charged with and relaying the information to the lawyer and other applicable parties. Waiting for the release of activists. Depending on the time, charges and whether police or court bail is utilised, this release time could vary.

¶ Reclamation: Theory into Practice

Posted MAR 18 2012 by ADMIN in WATU with 0 COMMENTS

By Johnny Truant

Plan a Campaign:

Every action should be a part of a clear and defined campaign narrative with established goals and rationale. Remember, reclamation is a tactic, not a strategy. Furthermore, civil disobedience is the last resort, never the first and can never be a substitute for community organising, awareness raising and lobbying.

Research: Check facts and allegations; form an airtight case against opponents and prepare for counter-charges. Analyse why the problem exists and have an alternative strategic plan of how the problem could be rectified. Furthermore, your campaign needs a vision to work towards so that your actions don’t simply become reactions. Establish the power dynamics for allies and opposition in relation to the issue. Create an inventory of your main resources, create a list of your supporters, your potential supporters, which groups you want to engage with. Prove the failure of institutions to the public. Prepare the conditions for a social movement. This includes building community support and approaching groups with common goals. Actions, when the time is appropriate, should function to be: An announcement or alarm: Shine light on an issue that needs immediate public attention. Reinforcement: Clearly define the injustice to add to public understanding alongside the ongoing campaign. Punctuation: Direct action can sustain interest in a campaign. Escalation: Raise the stakes of an ongoing struggle. Morale: Direct action can serve to raise spirits and renew the struggle during an extended campaign. Building a Group:

Start from the base of affinity groups. Autonomous groups of 5-15 people who know each others’ strengths and weaknesses. This dynamic can be useful for both starting a campaign as well as for a supporting structure in reclamations. Accept others into affinity groups so that mutual support can be spread during the stress of reclamations. This also helps to lighten the workload. Specialise. Differing individuals excel at varying things. Work to your strengths within campaigning and actions. Work on a consensus based model where everyone engages with plans and is able to affect the group’s direction. Ensure that you start as you want to continue. Don’t replicate the same social structures that you are campaigning against, for many groups this means forming as a leaderless movement. Be Flexible, Explore Diverse Types of Actions:

Direct Action: A form of creative resistance and intervention against the mechanisms of power as well as a step towards visionary forms of society. Direct Communication: An action or communication form aimed at directly influencing stakeholder who can effect change. Photo Opportunities: Play the media angle. Boost knowledge of your issue in the public sphere whilst subjecting your opponent to negative publicity. Protests: Do you have an opponent vulnerable to public opinion and is your message already widely understood? Hit the street with people power and demonstrate the power of your discontent. Any action you undertake won’t restrict itself to a single one of these categories but will rather be a complex mash of all of them. Explore this, be creative and have fun. Humour and fun don’t only get people on board and interested but also keep you from burning out.

Recommended Established Styles Are:

Culture jamming: The art of hijacking the mainstream media, corporate advertisers, and the public domain to get a across a message against one-way communication. Basically, the sabotage of corporate or public property for political purposes. Monkey Wrenching: Disrupting the normal operation of a corporate, political or private entity with the goal of demonstrating the indispensability of workers, the public or students. Blockades: Either form a human blockade or lock a gate to ensure that the issue is temporarily suspended. Strikes: Walk out, sit in, refusing to pay, whistle blowing, circumventing power hierarchies, the list goes on. Cyber activism. Reclaim!

Planning a Reclamation:

Plan ahead: Whether you reclaim as a small group of clandestine adventurers or a part of an inspired crowd, it’s a good idea to plan ahead.

Draw a crowd: Draw a crowd by calling a meeting. At the meeting, announce that a reclamation is imminent or, dependent on the vibe, convince people to reclaim with you and then do it immediately.

Control a door: When you scout out a building, you want to figure out how to open up the space to others once the reclamation is underway. Choose a means of getting people into and out of the space (for example, a door or window). Lock entrances in such a way that it can be opened and closed more easily. If you can’t control an entrance, control a supply line. Depending on how long you are reclaiming for, you’ll need a resupply of essentials.

Open the space: Activists often debate whom they should let into the space. Don’t let paranoia dominate this conversation, but also don’t be flippant. Whether you let people in and who you let in should be analysed in the context of your location and your numbers. Be wary of infiltrators and individuals who just want to cause trouble but don’t let this immobilise your action, you need to build interest and numbers in order to spread your message effectively.

Transform the space: Buildings you take may be designed for administration rather than education. Transforming the space will reclaim it for education and boost morale (as well as saving you from the drab nature of the previously mentioned corporate husk). While the issues you are contesting are serious, remember to still have fun and keep yourself entertained. Bring art supplies and instruments.

Have an exit strategy: Before you enter into an action make sure you know how you’re going to leave it. Ensure you leave from a position of strength, as this will affect the narrative created by your group in both the media and folklore. In order to do this successfully the whole nature of your action may need constant revision.

Reconnaissance:

Choose a building in a central location and which has either a symbolic value or as a means to disrupt the flow of capital. It is not always necessary to take a whole building; sometimes you can secure a floor or even a large room whilst leaving the rest of the building intact. Find out who owns the building, its history and its current usage and use this information to your advantage. Don’t be afraid to take space from those who label themselves your representatives: unions, student government, etc.

When doing reconnaissance, be discreet but thorough. Look for:

How many doors need to be secured? What do the doors look like, how can they be opened or secured? What can you use to build barricades? Is there a bathroom and running water? Can you control an entrance or get supplies in and out? Establish: Supply routes. Security shifts. Communication channels. Escape routes. Things you need to take:

Maps and aerial photos. Binoculars. Camera and recording equipment. Blue prints. Hardhat, hi-vis vest and clipboard. The best place to hide is in plain sight. Measuring tape. Watch. Location specific items. If possible, take pictures or at least notes. See if you can find access to blueprints. Before the action, work out what kind of locks you need and have them readily available. Bring extra locks. In the moment other locations could be spontaneously reclaimed.

Securing Doors:

Whether a door opens inward or outwards and what kind of handle it has, will radically change the fashion in which you secure it. Doors that open inwards are your friends. Well, as much as a door and a human can be friends. With these kinds of doors simple options such as barricading, wedging or even just using a doorstop become plausible. If none of these are practical you’ll have to rely, as with outward moving doors, on handle-based security.

Doors with turning handles: Loop one end of a cable lock around the door handle. Tie the other end to a structural support or to another door handle. Doors with push bars: If there is no space between the bar and the door, secure a C-clamp to the bar to create the space. Either loop a cable lock through the space, slide a length of wood through the handles (dependant on orientation) or secure the push bar to a structural support. If none of these options are available, spend some time thinking about solutions, after all, that’s why you go to university right? If there is a space between two doors, ensure that the securing device can’t be moved or sliced when the door is unattended. Chains, D-locks and bracing material will avoid this issue. Ratchet straps, due to their length and versatility (and relative price) are also highly recommended. Doors with no handles: These are almost impossible to secure without damaging doors. Unless they are opening inwards, avoid them. Hypothetically this issue can be remedied with welding, though in no way is this encouraged. Jamming the lock: Something as simple as super glue in the lock barrel can render a locked door secure. Be wary though, this will also make it impossible for you to utilise the door as an emergency exit and, alongside welding, can be considered property damage. Building Barricades:

Use heavy furniture distributed evenly among entrances. Keep barricades functional, you may have to push back if someone is trying to force their way in.

Supplies:

Food and water Locks and cables Blankets Duct tape Banners Megaphones Applicable beats Sleeping bag Entrainment Internet and phone connections Computers and communication devices Cameras and media equipment Supplies specific to a role Supplies specific to location Outside Support:

Legal: Please refer to legal article: http://wearetheuniversity.org.nz/a-legal-guide-to-reclamation/

Media Team: It is important that you supply your version of events to the media and ensure that your message is broadcast to other students. Outside and inside media representatives should be elected to ensure that everything from photos to interviews are accessible. Individuals who are interviewed should make sure they identify as delegates of the reclamation rather than leaders or representatives. Ensure that activists interviewed are informed, calm, concise and simple. Don’t make too many points and ensure that your point can summarised in three lines.

Press releases: press releases should be prepared before any action so that they can be distributed as soon as possible. Furthermore a media list should already be compiled. Don’t lose the surprise advantage by wasting time as the action progresses. Write press releases in a pyramid structure with the most important information at the top with more expanded points nearing the end.

Ensure that your message gets out to all media forms. The morning is the best time to send out releases as news developments after 3:00pm, other than major disasters, won’t get covered on the evening news (however, don’t give away any major details if the action is yet to start).

Medical Team: Have medical teams both on the inside and the outside. Medics should know about any specific needs of individuals involved in the action and have a first aid understanding.

Safety and welfare: Society is a shit place. There is nothing that makes your group any different to what is shit about society if you simply replicate the unsafe conditions of wider society in your own operations. Ensure that everyone on the inside of the reclamation is aware of the importance of respect and emotional safety and take steps to pre-empt these concerns with a safe spaces policy and specifically appointed welfare officers, both male and female. Make sure that no one feels intimidated or silenced out of raising safety concerns.

Debrief:

It is important to debrief after an action. Do this as soon as possible, ideally on the same day. It’s a great way of learning lessons and giving everyone a chance to express how they feel the action went. Make notes and use them to improve future reclamations.

Things to consider:

Vision, strategy and objectives Preparation Tactics Organisation Impact Audience Miscellaneous things to remember:

Publicise and enforce a ban on alcohol and drugs during actions: People agitated by your actions will attempt undercut your credibility. These are petty counter-arguments but still; don’t make it easier for them. Communicate with the usual occupiers and workers of the space you are reclaiming. This point is especially important with regard to security officers, as by reclaiming a building you are directly challenging their authority. Clearly communicate the reasons behind your actions and stress that it is not an affront to them. Critically think about every action you take and ensure that you’re considering the context, the meta-context and all parties involved. This will involve a lot more effort and thought but after all, what else is the university environment for? Finally, whatever happens, remember rule number 1, don’t be a dick.

¶ Health Is Not A Priority, Profit Is.

Posted MAR 30 2012 by ADMIN in CRACCUM with 0 COMMENTS

By Hala Nasr

Have to say, the middle management at the university certainly are consistent – never failing to drive home one inexhaustible message to students: ‘Show us the money!’

In late 2011 we saw more raising of fees, followed swiftly by the raising of the Student Service Levy, and finally the topic of today’s rant: the introduction of a user-fee at the University Health Services. From student-friendly to money-maker, the University Health Services will now charge enrolled students $12 per visit.

AUSA voiced clear opposition to the introduction of fees at the Students’ Affairs Committee meeting in 2011 where the fees were first discussed. After said opposition, student input would have been viewed as a hindrance, running counter to the profit-driven scheme of Campus Life (The so-called “Service Division” that is funded through your levies and controls the healthcare system at university), and was thus disregarded. And with limited (if any) input from students in the decision making, the $12 fee was backhandedly put in place without any fuss. This flagrant disregard for transparency and student input in decision-making by certain factions in the university’s management show us that their priority is not student welfare but bald profit.

So hang on, if charging user-fees for access to health care services is the purported solution, what exactly was the problem to begin with? The likely answers are that fees are a means to mobilising money for the rising demand for health services, or perhaps that they will improve efficiency by moderating and containing costs. And while this logic may be sound when it comes to businesses, health care is a different ball game and requires a completely different approach.

Let us dispel the myths surrounding the introduction of fees for health services. Because user-fees do not reduce cost, they could simply displace the burden to hospitals (where health care is free and waiting times are already ridiculous), or cause sick students to forego treatment all together and increase inequity overall for those most vulnerable.

MYTH 1: “THE UNIVERSITY DOESN’T HAVE THE MONEY TO SUBSIDISE FREE HEALTH CARE.”

One word: nonsense. There is plenty of money to go around. Each and every student has to pay the compulsory Student Services Levy (SSL), a whopping $689 a year, which is the highest SSL fee in the country! So instead of the levy going towards McCutcheon’s ridiculous plans to renovate every inch of the university to attract potential consumers, I mean, students, we could be channelling it towards a much more worthy service, like that of the University Health Services.

And lest we forget, our fees went up by 4% last year, only to see our services cut and McCutcheon getting another pay rise (taking his personal wages to around $800,000 per year!). If there really isn’t enough money to go around, the property development wouldn’t be happening and neither would the pay rise. C’mon McCutcheon, whose back have you got?

If this is about cost control, focusing on patient behaviour rather than that of the providers (doctors) has been proven to have little real success. Not only are the providers a more powerful determinant of healthcare costs, as they make decisions on behalf of patients in terms of diagnosis and treatment, but it has been found that changes in provider payment mechanisms is a more powerful way of influencing their behaviour and working toward reducing service costs.

MYTH 2: “IT TAKES AGES TO GET AN APPOINTMENT BECAUSE IT’S FREE. TOO MANY BLUDGERS BLUDGIN’!”

The idea is that by introducing a user fee, the waiting times will decrease as students are less likely to book unnecessary appointments once they have to foot the bill. While this may lead to a reduction in appointments, it runs the risk of causing students who genuinely need access to free health care to forego treatment they legitimately require, as they simply cannot afford it. There have already been reports of staff turning sick students away – is that the type of environment we want to encourage at our university?

The immediate knee-jerk ‘blame students, not management’ reaction is beyond me. Management have been reducing staff for years, so maybe, just maybe, the waiting times are long because the university has failed to supply the adequate resources and staff that are needed. Ponder that…

MYTH 3: “WHY SHOULD I BE SUBSIDISING HEALTHCARE FOR OTHER PEOPLE THROUGH MY SSL, EVEN WHEN I’M NOT ENROLLED AT THE UNI HEALTH SERVICES?”

In the real world, you already subsidise a lot of things for other people – it’s called paying your taxes, buddy. If you don’t like taxes, find a libertarian safe haven to live out the rest of your self-serving days. Better yet, stop paying them, and see what happens then! Besides wouldn’t you prefer your money went to something more worthwhile than hideously-coloured windows for the new Arts 1 building? I definitely would.

MYTH 4: “WHAT’S ALL THE FUSS ABOUT? $12 IS NOT THAT MUCH!”

Well, you’re right. $12 is not a heck of a lot, for some people. For others, that amount of money can make or break their week

Simply put, introducing a user-fee, even as marginal as Campus Life purports the $12 fee to be, will have a profound effect on access to health services for certain groups, particularly Maori, Pacific and female students (for sexual health services). Shifting the financial burden from risk-sharing population-based models (i.e. free healthcare for all) to individuals shifts the financial burden onto poorer students. Why? Well, poor students are more likely to get sick more often, which is mainly due to their poor diets (healthy food is more expensive) and their poor living and working conditions. For example, living in a damp and mouldy household directly correlates to experiencing higher rates of respiratory illnesses, e.g. severe asthma, and lower immunity in general. They are also more sensitive to health care prices than wealthier students because they’re, uh, poorer.

User-fee introduction as a policy instrument is uninspired to say the least. With plenty of evidence to say that it has limited success and potentially serious effects in terms of equity, you’d really question whether or not Campus Life had done their homework on the issue first.

WHAT CAN YOU DO ABOUT THIS?

Email the current president of AUSA, Arena, with your thoughts at president@ausa.org.nz If you have had any issues accessing health care at the university, or in general, email us your stories. This can help raise awareness and the chances that the fees might be cut again!

¶ University Without Conditions

Posted MAR 4 2012 by ADMIN in MAIN DISPLAY with 0 COMMENTS

“The University Without Conditions is a free university.

By free, we mean free of conditions. We recognise that education at other institutions is only open to those who are willing to live with debt, and our aim is to not be a burden on those studying with us.

We are a self-organising collective, without ties to Government or corporations. We exist not to produce ‘degrees for jobs’, but to enable a human being to improve themselves and the society in which they exist.

Courses are open to all, and anyone can run a course.

We hold lectures, seminars, exhibitions and workshops at a variety of locations, includingTangle Ball, a community workshop and art space near Karangahape Road, and at various public venues through the city, such as Myers Park, Albert Park and others.”

Please visit: http://universitywithoutconditions.ac.nz/ for more information

¶ AAAP Post Budget Picket

Posted MAR 30 2012 by ADMIN in MAIN DISPLAY with 0 COMMENTS

https://www.facebook.com/events/403971106309288/

Join Auckland Action against Poverty in a picket of John Key and the Govt: 7.00am onwards Friday 25 May, outside the Waipuna Hotel in Mt Wellington where he’ll be making a post budget speech to the National Party.

PICKET 11.30 a.m. John Key speaks to Business Forum at Langham Hotel, 83 Symonds Street, City

Look forward to seeing you there.

¶ UoA Activism Week

Posted MAR 30 2012 by ADMIN in MAIN DISPLAY with 0 COMMENTS

Monday 14th Workshop 1 Esperanto Society and UNANZ Presentation 5pm AUSA Clubspace

Medical Students for Global Awareness Present: DR Sujit speaks. B10 Library Basement 6pm

Tuesday 15th

Workshop 3 Generation Zero presents: “Auckland Transport that’s not S#$T!!!” 6pm AUSA Exec chambers

UN Youth & The Global Poverty Project present: Oxfam Coffee Break + Trade Zealand Justice Expert Panel 6pm Engineering Building Rm 3.404

Students for Justice in Palestine: Peaceful Vigil in remembrance on Nakba 6pm AUSA Quad

Wednesday 16th

Workshop 4 Nga Tauira Maori Presents: A History of Maori Actvism 4pm Waipapa Marae, Wynyard St

Workshop 5 Free the Cuban Five Presentation: 5pm AUSA Clubspace

Action Againist White-Collar Crime Penny Bright speaks 6pm B10 library basement

Workshop 6 UNITE Union Presents: “Students are workers, workers are students” 7pm AUSA Clubspace

Thursday 17th

Workshop 7 SAFE: What is SAFE and how you can get involved 4pm AUSA house meeting room 1

Fair-trade on Campus “Is free-trade really fair-trade?” 6:30pm Library Basement B10

Aaron Chang Presents: “Intersexuality and activism” 6pm AUSA Exec Chambers https://www.facebook.com/events/109644312505558/

Aotearoa Not For Sale Strategy Meeting 7pm Library Basement B15

Friday 18th

Workshop 8 Introduction to Greenpeace 5pm AUSA Clubspace

BlackHeart InfoShop Presents: “Rock Activist Week”

Penny Dreadful Bio-Robots Melting Pot Massacre

¶ Blockade the Budget – Protest

Posted MAR 30 2012 by ADMIN in MAIN DISPLAY with 0 COMMENTS

https://www.facebook.com/events/172083019584218/

The National Government is planning to attack Students with this year’s budget. The Black Budget adds to the already reigning view that education should be run like a business. It will affect current students, ex-students and potential future students by limiting allowances to the first four years of study (with no exceptions to longer degrees or postgrad study), by freezing the parental income threshold to get the allowance (so even less students can get it), and increasing the repayment rate from 10% to 12%. We have had enough of the short sighted, mindless politics of austerity that limit who gets access to tertiary education and that see us paying rent to a generation that had everything they are taking from us.

We are calling for students in Aotearoa to fight back against education cuts, just as students all over the world have. We will be protesting against the budget at the University of Auckland on the 24th of May, the day the Black Budget is released, and we invite students from everywhere to join us in resisting the scapegoat politics of a terminally ideological government. This is an issue for all New Zealanders, investment in education is essential for the growth of a healthy society and this budget is penalising already-struggling students.

“We, students, teachers, researchers, workers, politicians, parents…, call for a transformation to the current fees, loans and repayment system in tertiary education. We do not need small reforms, we need structural change. When the government and the elite insist that the only way to fund education is indebtedness, we say that education is a human right and a social necessity. We say that targeting citizen-students who cannot pay and landing them with crippling debt, is a violation of the principles of equality and freedom that our country is supposedly built on. We say that democracy demands educated and creative people, and that these changes, and the fees and loans system as it already stands, impoverish nearly every citizen who decides to pursue tertiary education. We say that the current government and the elite are destabilizing our country and mindlessly trading our future for their own privileged present.” The above statement is supported by the Council of Trade Unions, the Service and Food Workers Union, the Mana movement, Socialist Aotearoa, Auckland Action Against Poverty…

¶ Teach In 01/03/12

WE ARE THE UNIVERSITY TEACH IN IDEOLOGY AND THE UNIVERSITY THURSDAY SMARCH LIBRARY BASEMENT LIB 15 - 5PM Dr Paul Taillon ‘How the University Works’ How Corportization of the University has affected academic work and university governance. Dr David Mayeda ‘The Importance of Being Active’ Student Activism in Social Movements Auckland Action Against Poverty ‘The University and Poverty’ The role of the University in a world of increasing poverty WEARETHEUNIVERSITY.ORG.NZ FACEBOOK/WEARETHEUNIVERSITYAKL BROUGHT TO YOU BY OWE WEEK

Alternative Strategic Plan (WATU)

¶ PRESS RELEASE – 26TH SEPTEMBER 2011

26thnd September 2011

For immediate release

Students in Auckland plan rally

On Monday 26th September 2011, in coordination with universities around the country, and with the support of the Auckland University Students’ Association (AUSA), We Are The University (Auckland) will hold a rally to oppose new policies affecting staff and student conditions.

This rally follows the Nationwide Day of Student Action on the 14th September that saw students across the country undertake critical discussion and action in response to government policies on education. In Auckland three people were arrested and two trespassed from the university for taking part in peaceful protests.

The rally aims to demonstrate student opposition to three key issues: the Voluntary Student Membership (VSM) bill, due to pass into law on the 28th September, the erosion of democracy on campus and the hiking of student fees on a regular basis.

We Are The University spokesperson Guy Cohen says, “These measures threaten the university as a space for free engagement with people and ideas. The VSM Bill signals the latest in a larger pattern of destructive education policy that will destroy student unions and services and decimate campus culture across the country.”

Universities are gradually being streamlined to prioritise a business model over providing a quality education service. This is most recently demonstrated through the protracted industrial dispute between staff and management over key working conditions.

“The policies of universities nationwide are being based increasingly upon ideologies that pursue profit over the larger-picture value of having a populace with the right to education” says Guy Cohen. “This is unbelievably short-sighted. We can see that the result of a profit-orientated qualification industry is to burden students with debt and further embed the idea of education as a means to wealth rather than as a contribution to our society.”

A supporter of the rally, Jai Bentley-Payne, says, “This is our university, and a lot of us pay a lot of money to be here. It’s supposedly an open space for ideas, where we’re able to share our creative thoughts on what the university should be. The democratic process in this university and in other universities around the country is under sustained attack.”

ENDS.

¶ PRESS RELEASE – 30TH SEPTEMBER 2011

Media Release – 30th September 2011

An open letter to journalists, and ministers, and vice chancellors, and the public at large regarding the events at the University of Auckland as part of the Nationwide day of Student Action

We Are the University (Auckland) staged a rally and protest occupation on the 26th September 2011, aiming to build awareness of current issues affecting universities nationwide. This was an event for re-establishing unity between students. This was a rally to defend the university against sustained attacks upon its foundational bedrock. The university’s traditional role has been to foster members of society who can contribute genuinely to a better future through free critical endeavour. Universities in Aotearoa New Zealand are seeing that future slip away as the central point of education is being ignored in favour of profit. We Are the University reclaims the university as defined by those who attend or teach at the university: a space of intellectual expansion, a hotbed of creativity that shapes, improves and informs society, independently and with freedom from pecuniary interests that mislead and wound the quality of scholarly content.

The rally and ensuing occupation aimed to demonstrate student opposition to three key issues symptomatic of increasingly profit-driven decisions by the University management and the Government:

1. The Voluntary Student Membership (VSM) bill, due to pass its third reading on the 28th September. This bill will decimate communal culture on campus and see a number of vital services cut. It is important to remember that all automatic student association schemes include an opt-out clause as it is. As Chris Trotter says, “One can no more be a “voluntary” member of the student body than one can be a “voluntary” member of the human race.” (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/columnists/chris-trotter/5652798/Political-vandalism-will-be-death-knell-of-student-representation)

2. The erosion of democracy on campus through the revocation from staff of key working conditions around study leave, disciplinary procedures and course content. This despite protracted efforts by the Tertiary Education Union to defend the collective staff agreement and protect the power over academic decisions from funnelling into the hands of university management alone.

3. The student debt disaster, sitting at $11,898,955,693 and rising rapidly at the time of writing (www.students.org.nz). This scheme hobbles graduates before they even begin working life. Add to this burden the fact that there are very few jobs in New Zealand for graduates and we begin to see the working parts of what Mohsen Al Attar calls the “soft war” on students, aimed at producing compliant cogs that maintain the status quo, rather than progressive thinkers who find ways to improve the whole of society and the world by refusing to continue behaviours and structures that do not work.

Here follows a summary of the events of and motivations behind 26th September, lest people who were not in fact present continue to labour under any more unfortunate illusions.

1pm: Around 300-400 students gathered in the University Quad to hear speakers from AUSA, NZUSA, the Tertiary Education Union, The Labour Party and the Green Party talk about their struggles to be heard in their opposition to recent destructive and corporatist education policies. They all concurred on one thing: that making the connection, that conceiving of these specific policies as part of a larger ideological assault on the university and society en masse is the only rational principle on which to proceed. That this struggle does not begin and end with VSM, or the TEU dispute, or another other single issue. They form a networked web of controls. So just as we are attacked on all sides by those who believe in money more than they do in people, so must we defend ourselves from those attacks on a number of fronts. The future is at stake here.

c.1:45pm: After the rally, students marched on the Vice Chancellor’s building to protest his attacks on staff and student conditions.

c.2pm: It was decided collectively that we would march through the campus to the Owen G Glenn Building, the business school, symbolic bastion of the corporatism of the university. Along the way, we picked up many more students unhappy with how the Government and university management is crippling staff and student conditions on a number of fronts.

c.2:05pm: When we arrived, over 300 people invaded the top floor of the business school as a statement about who the university is, ie. those who study and teach there.

c.3pm: As people were free to come and go through one exit, numbers fluctuated, levelling out at precisely 243 people. We know this, because we did a head count. The Vice Chancellor’s claims that there were 60 people, 20 of whom were not students, is woefully uninformed bordering on disingenuous, given that he would not come and talk to us in good faith and see the numbers himself.

c.3:30pm: We were given word that the Vice Chancellor would come and speak to the leaders of the group. We were provisionally pleased about this, but explained that there are no leaders, we are a collective voice. We began gathering questions for the Vice Chancellor from among the students. We were soon told that the VC would only speak with us if we left. We politely declined.

c. 4pm: We heard that the VSM bill, one of our points of protest, had been postponed until after the election. We were very happy to have achieved some little progress with one of our demands. We have since discovered that it will still have its third reading on Wednesday.

All the while during the occupation, students from across the disciplines were meeting each other, speaking critically and constructively about how to improve the university, what the university’s role might be in society, what responsibilities it might hold in relation to wider society, and how best to defend those principles: empathy over cynicism, seeking over arriving, questions that open up capillaries of ideas over answers that close down discourse, inclusivity over marginalisation and taking responsibility over wallowing in fear or guilt or apathy. Students were seen sharing food, knitting, reading and standing together in common purpose on a scale unseen for a long time at the University of Auckland.

c.6pm:Police entered the building. Mediated by the Auckland University Students’ Association President, Joe McCrory, we agreed to leave peacefully on the understanding that there would be no penalty as they recognised this as the peaceful protest it was. Students got together and cleaned up the 6th floor, removing rubbish and wiping away any mess. After all, our dispute is not with the cleaners, who we know work under gruelling and inequitable conditions themselves and who we appreciate warmly.

c.6:30pm: Upon exiting the building, a student was arrested by the Police in an alarmingly aggressive manner. Unfairly and without recourse to appeal, this group member had been trespassed from the university last week for taking part in some critical street theatre as part of AUSA Human Rights Week, a peaceful re-enactment of an Israeli checkpoint aimed at raising awareness of the everyday plight of Palestinians, many of whom attend our university. In opposition to his arrest, students gathered non-violently around the police car in which he was detained and chanted “let him go.” At this point, around ten police officers charged the group, shoving and throwing punches at the students gathered there. If the media is going to report that the protest turned violent, they should also report who the parties were offering this violence, that is, the Police and security. (http://www.3news.co.nz/Students-lock-themselves-in-uni-to-protest-VSM-Bill/tabid/423/articleID/227354/Default.aspx; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV9MXtdQYEQ&feature=channel_video_title)

c.7pm: In support for this member, we then marched to the Central Police station to demand his bail. We sat peacefully on the intersection of Cook Street and Mayoral Drive and listened to speeches by members of the university, and engaged in some rousing chants for Marcus’ release.

c.9pm: We reached an impasse when it became clear that the police would not release Marcus while we were there. We decided to return to the university to await word of his bail and reflect upon the day. Spending the best part of eight hours fighting for the principles of justice and democracy that New Zealand claims to laud so highly, had made us hungry. We had pizza.

(This seems to have emerged as one of the most fascinating aspects of the day for reporters. It is disappointingly cliché to see journalists honing in like flies to sugar to exploit, in a manner poignantly embarrassing to their high-journalistic claims, the tired stereotype of the one-dimensional student. Furthermore, the claim that students abandoned their protest out of boredom or lack or commitment or defeat (“[Joyce] also questioned their commitment to the cause, after the protesters abandoned their occupation to go and get pizza.”) is an interesting one, coming from a source that would benefit were it the case that student resistance may be so easily quelled. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10754503, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10754706)

This government and in particular the education minister, Joyce, has a shameful track record of stubbornly not listening to the actual words coming out of students’ and staff’s mouths. This constitutes a perplexingly wilful and obvious obliviousness. Even a cursory look at our “grab bag” of demands shows a number of common intersections of concern around the danger of valuing profit over people. It is understandable perhaps for the “wo/man on the street” to not understand how these issues relate to one another, especially when s/he is subjected to consistently omissive reporting. But for a journalist, or a vice chancellor, or a Government minister, who is by virtue of their position purportedly versed in the workings of society, how and why the micro intersects with the macro, to appear to miss this relationship when it is expressed explicitly is unacceptable. And, honestly, not very believable.

Steven Joyce is a man presumably cognisant of the actual situation confronting students, and by extension, workers in Aotearoa New Zealand as it is he who has been elbow-deep in the flagrant flaying of policy in place to protect staff and students. This is conducted with much confident assurance in his right to ignore critical questioning of policy by those involved or affected. To claim that the interests of students are treated in a privileged manner under this Government is massively disingenuous and deflects attention from a discussion that needs to be had about our collective future vision for the university.

(http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10754706)

Joyce’s advice to students to “keep your heads down…” sounds very much like a threat: keep your heads down. Look at how good you have it now. We wouldn’t want to jeopardise that now, would we? Now keep your heads down or I’ll take away more of your things. This is bullying language, filled with implied threat, but also hollow enough to be plausibly disavowed in the future. This is not the language of a leader.

It also seems a tactic to alienate students from workers by calling upon the implication that “most New Zealanders” resent universities and begrudge students for going to them. This works in the interests of keeping opposition to this Government’s destructive actions divided and diffuse. Joyce’s rather, well, obvious argumentum ad populum, “I think most New Zealanders think students are reasonably well looked after at this point in time,” has very little bearing on the reality of the current situation. “Most New Zealanders” is, first-off, an impossible claim for Joyce to make. What, did he meet and ask them all? Secondly, even if we could scientifically attest that “most New Zealanders” think this, what of it? A lot of people thinking something does not an argument make. What Joyce, and McCutcheon, and other supporters of neoliberal expansion fail to understand about our perspective as students and workers, is that a pattern of measures taken over the past years and intensifying today are one-way moves, very difficult and hugely expensive to change back later if and when they don’t work. Toothpaste is very difficult to get back in the tube.

Steven Joyce’s threat will not work to intimidate us. It only confirms the reasons we are compelled by principle to stand up.

The education minister’s role is to represent the interests of students, a task at which he is failing dismally. Let us not forget that the Hon. Steven Joyce was at university before 1992 and the end of free tertiary education in Aotearoa New Zealand. We have become so used to the apathy and cynical defeatism bred by failed protests against fees in the 90s that even a glimmer of disagreement in self-defence seems radical.

The university’s traditional role has been to foster members of society who can contribute genuinely to a better future through academic endeavour. Universities in Aotearoa New Zealand are seeing that future slip away as the central point of education in society is being dismantled in favour of profit. Enforced voluntary student membership, threats to key working conditions and colossal student debt will cripple the future of our institution and its benefit to society.

Well, no more. We’re back. We are the university and we will defend it.

Love from the future,

THE UNIVERSITY

¶ PRESS RELEASE – 17TH SEPTEMBER 2011

Media Release – 17th September 2011 @ 17:17

Hundreds of students marched on the University Council of Auckland University this afternoon.

Currently a hundred students and some faculty members are occupying the Council chambers in the Clocktower building.

The occupation occurred as students attempted, and were blocked from, attending a public meeting to raise students fees.

Occupy Auckland, which has occupied Aotea square, will be holding its General Assembly outside the Clocktower in solidarity.

A forum organised by the Teritary Education Union and ‘We are the University’ will be held outside the Clocktower at 7pm.

Students are expressing solidarity with international student movements, and the international occupy movement.

They are calling for students and people around the country and around the world to join in occupying their universities, city centers and workplaces.

In a university council meeting room, We are the University came to these conclusions in a democratic process:

(1) Free education, Zero Frees (Unconditional).

(2) Sack Stuart McCutcheon and Patrick Walsh as vice chancellors of the University of Auckland and Victoria University respectively. Restructure university in a public forum.

(3) Remove trespass orders on Marcus Coverdale and Wikatana Popata.

(4) Decisions on courses be based on scholarly and social benefits rather than financial.

(5) Security guards be employed for the safety of students, not survailliance. Cops not to be called in response to (non-violent) student activism.

(6) The University management be bound by the government facilitation with the Tertiary Education Union (TEU).

(7) University actively lobby to revoke the VSM bill

(8) Government unconditionally fund student unions, allowing them to be a critical voice and conscience of society, so that corporatisation such as advertising is not necessary on campus spaces.

We are the University

Media Release – 17th September 2011 @ 16:00

Students occupy Auckland University Clocktower

Hundreds of students marched on the University Council of Auckland University this afternoon. Currently a hundred students and some faculty members are occupying the Council chambers in the Clocktower building. The occupation occurred as students attempted, and were blocked from, attending a public meeting to raise students fees. The occupation is currently in discussion with the University council with the aim of continuing the meeting with student and lecturer representation.

Police have surrounded the Clocktower and have brought dog handler units.

The occupation is currently in discussion with the University.

Media are welcome to come into the clocktower, level 2, and join the student discussion.

¶ [NATIONAL EVENTS]

Aotearoa Is Not For Sale demonstration: Saturday 28th April Britomart, Auckland

Neoliberalism in the University: Nicky Hager, Sandra Grey, Paul Thompson Student Union Building, Victoria, Wellington

Teach-in: Ports of Auckland Dispute and the Assault Against Workers LectureTheatre 018, Clock Tower, Auckland University

Folk the Ports – Solidarity with the wharfies – musical fundraiser Thirsty Dog, Krd, Auckland

¶ External Resources

¶ MEDIA COVERAGE OF 2011 PROTESTS

Listen to radio coverage of student protests at the University of Auckland, 2011.

• University Protestors Promise More Disruption
• Student Lock-in – Radio New Zealand
• We are the University interviewed at the Occupy encampment

In defence of public higher education

VSM Bill: http://teu.ac.nz/2011/09/new-rules-for-student-services-funding/ http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1108/S00054/ousa-gutted-the-vsm-bill-is-being-debated.htm http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10694942 http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/columnists/chris-trotter/5652798/Political-vandalism-will-be-death-knell-of-student-representation

Staff under threat: http://teu.ac.nz/2011/08/boycott-of-auckland-university-courses-and-careers-day/

Student Debt: http://www.students.org.nz/ http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1007/S00100/students-agree-with-pm-student-debts-a-disaster.htm http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1002/S00005.htm

¶ University Without Conditions

¶ Reading Karl Marx’s ‘Capital’ img

CAPITAL What lies behind financialisation and the financial crisis, the politics of austerity and the daily economic reorganisation of our lives? Should we string up the greedy bankers, blame corporate greed, lament income inequality, or camp in protest at the insanity of economic injustice today? Practical steps certainly are needed, but it is equally clear that today more than ever we need concepts. We propose here to see what we can think with the concept of capital. The immediate challenge then is to ask what capital is and what it does. To think this will be a challenge of some magnitude, so we will guide our endeavour by starting with the concept of capital that we find in volume one of Capital. The group is open to all, but participation will require reading about 100 pages each week and participating in open, rigorous and generous discussion of the set reading. The task of the group is, after all, to see what it is that we can think and do together Programme Date Content Chapters Pages March 7

1. Introduction, Prefaces, Why Capital? Prefaces 87-120 March 14
2. Commodities 1 125-177 March 21
3. Exchange, Money, Capital 2-6 178-280 March 28
4. Absolute Surplus Value, the Working Day (1) 7-10(4) 283-374 April 4
5. The Working Day (2), Relative Surplus Value 10(5)-14 375-491 April 25
6. Machinery 15 492-639 May 2
7. Absolute and Relative Surplus, Wages, Accumulation 16-24 643-761 May 9
8. The General Law 25 762-870 May 16
9. Primitive Accumulation 26-33 873-940 May 23
10. Results Appendix 943-1084 Time and Location Wednesdays, 2.00-3.30pm, room 901 in the Human Sciences Building, University of Auckland Edition We will use the now-standard paperback translation: Marx, Karl (1976) Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume One, trans. Ben Fowkes. London: Penguin. Contact The group is being coordinated by Dr Campbell Jones, Department of Sociology, University of Auckland. For further details email campbell.jones@auckland.ac.nz Other resources Participants may also wish to consult the recent commentaries by David Harvey (A Companion to Marx’s Capital, 2010, Verso) and Frederic Jameson (Representing Capital, 2011, Verso). These are optional supplementary reading.

¶ UWC and Reclaiming Marx presents ‘Reading Capital with David Harvey’ img

For convenience and accessibility to the hardened and the committed, the regular screenings of David Harvey’s lectures on Capital will now be held on the UOA Campus, in the Craccum Bunker.

If you enter from Alfred Street, we are on the third floor of the Quad, above the Maidment Theatre, where the big Cracum Banner is (number 4 Alfred)…. Here is map http://g.co/maps/k4kaq

Reclaiming Marx is an open study group, run as part of the University Without Conditions. Throughout 2012 we will be reading Marx’s Capital Volume One, guided by regular screenings of David Harvey’s Lectures, and discussion groups. Participants should attempt to read the relevant chapters prior to the screening, and reading is a prerequisite for the discussion groups. There is a small koha for screenings. Everyone welcome. Date Mar 5 Mar 19 Apr 2 Apr 16 Apr 30 May 14 May 28 Jul 2 Jul 16 Jul 30 Aug 13 Aug 27 Sep 10 Sep 24 Oct 8 Oct 22 Content Class 1: Introduction Class 2: The Commodity and the Process of Exchange Discussion Group Class 3: Money, or the Circulation of Commodities Class 4: The General Formula, Contradictions, Labour-Power Class 5: Labour, Valorisation, Constant & Variable Capital, Surplus-Value Discussion Group Mid-Year Break Class 6: The Working Day, Rate and Mass of Surplus-Value Class 7: Relative Surplus-Value, Co-operation, Division of Labour Discussion Group Class 8 & 9: Machinery and Large Scale Industry Class 10: Surplus-Value, Labour-Power, Wages, Transformation Discussion Group Class 11: The General Law of Capitalist Accumulation Class 12: Primitive Accumulation, Industrial Revolution, Colonization Class 13: Conclusion and Debrief Chapters Prefaces 1-2 3 4-6 7-9 10-11 12-14 15 16-24 25 26-33 Location: Lecture Screenings held at The Audio Foundation, Sub-Basement of the Parisian Tie Factory, 4 Poynton Terrace (Off Pitt St or behind St Kevin’s Arcade). Discussion groups will be held in the back room of the Wine Cellar, St Kevin’s Arcade. Edition: The Harvey lectures refer to the Ben Fowkes translation, published by both Penguin and Vintage Books. Facebook.com/reclaimingmarx www.fu.ac.nz

¶ Art and Politics

This course will investigate the link between art and politics; it will ask questions like What is aesthetics in the world today? How is politics aesthetic? How is aesthetics political? Why do people like John Key? etc. We will begin with the final paragraph of Walter Benjamin’s Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction*. The course will be focussed more on discussion than presentation but it will be structured. No prior knowledge of art or politics is required.

• “Fiat ars – pereat mundus, (make art – destroy the world)” says Fascism, and, as Marinetti admits, expects war to supply the artistic gratification of a sense perception that has been changed by technology. This is evidently the consummation of “I’art pour l’art.” Mankind, which in Homer’s time was an object of contemplation for the Olympian gods, now is one for itself. Its self-alienation has reached such a degree that it can experience its own destruction as an aesthetic pleasure of the first order. This is the situation of politics which Fascism is rendering aesthetic. Communism responds by politicizing art”.

The course will be held in Seminar Room C of the Mondrian Building at Elam School of Fine Arts, part of the University of Auckland. Map

The course begins on Tuesday the 6th of March. It is now occuring on Thursday’s at 3pm. Any non-Elam students will need to wait at the door of the Mondrian Building to be let in – it is by access card only.

¶ Writing support network

Writing in isolation can be difficult. There is value in a group of writers supporting each other as they construct a text, giving one another perspective on ideas and flow, and assisting with technical aspects such as spelling and structure.

Starting in May 2012, Robin will be hosting a ‘Writing Support Network’, for anyone who would find value in regularly meeting up with other writers, to discuss and read pieces they are working on. The network is aimed primarily at those writing pieces for a post-graduate, master’s or PhD, or pieces to a similar standard and level of critical engagement, but all are welcome to join in whether they are writing or not.

If you would like to join, please mail Robin on robin@bumblepuppy.org

¶ Current Courses

This is the list of course currently being run at the University. Do you have a course you’d like to organise? Then please do, and let us know here.

Current courses and discussion groups are listed above, by hovering over the ‘Current Courses’ link in the title bar

Proposed courses / discussion groups

An aesthetic education versus an anaesthetic education. More information to come

¶ Performance Ethics Working Group

The Performance Ethics working group is prompted in part by the fact that many performers lecture or present work within universities that have stringent ethics processes for research on, or involving humans from which performance often is excluded. It also responds to the question raised by the recent Marina Abramovic work for the LA MOCA. Critiqued in advance by Yvonne Rainer for both an (initial) abdication of responsibility by the institution to protect its performers from harm and its exploitative remuneration the dialogue around the work raised the question what ethical responsibilities does a host or commissioning institution hold towards its performers.

The Performance Ethics working group will inquire into the ethics of performance with the intention of creating a series of podcasts for public broadcast and online publishing and developing a document flagging ethical issues and ways to address them – individually and institutionally within a New Zealand context. It will also consider what the advantages and problems of working outside of a formal system of ethics might be.

If you want to be involved in this working group, or be interviewed please contact melissa@melissalaing.com

Click this link for the interview information sheet: performance-ethics-info-sheet

Information about the Research Title of Project: Performance Ethics Lead Researcher: Dr Melissa Laing, University Without Conditions, Auckland, New Zealand. Website: http://universitywithoutconditions.ac.nz/?page_id=201 Email: melissa@melissalaing.com Phone: (+64) 021 1829 451 What am I being asked to do? You are being asked to participate in a recorded interview, you may also be asked to participate in a group discussion. Why the project is being undertaken? The Performance Ethics Working Group, initiated by Melissa Laing, is responding to the fact that many performers lecture or present work within universities that have stringent ethics processes for research on, or involving humans. The purview of the ethics review boards does not often extend to the contemporary arts and its performance practices. Contemporary performance frequently involves direct interaction with audiences, strategies of vulnerability on the part of the performer including the exploration of physical or mental limits, research within communities and engagement with indigenous taonga and traditional knowledge. Individually and as a professional group, performance practitioners and producers have encountered situations which have required them to make ethical decisions or are ethically ambiguous. This research will bring together the experiences of performance professionals to inquire into the ethics of performance. It aims to produce a series of podcasts and develop a document flagging common ethical issues and the considerations in presenting performance – individually and institutionally within a New Zealand context. The research will also consider what the advantages and problems of working outside of a formal system of ethics might be. What will I be asked? The interview will be flexible and respond to your experiences and own ethical concerns around performance practice. However, there are three specific areas that the researcher will raise with you. These are: the responsibilities of a performer, director or producer to external communities, audiences and research subjects; ethical responsibilities within the performance communities; and the benefits and limitations of formal ethics for performance. What will happen with the recording of my interview? The audio recordings collected during the research will be used for two purposes.

1. to create a series of podcasts for public broadcast and online publishing. These podcasts will explore the terrain of performance ethics using the excerpts from interviews with performers, producers/curators and audience members. 1 Performance Ethics : Information about the Research 27 March 2012
2. To produce a document flagging ethical issues and discussion around them. Case studies derived from the interviews may be included in the document. This document would be publically available. The full interview recordings will be archived as audio files together on a dedicated hard drive and individually on CD’s. During the research the files will be held by the Performance Ethics Working Group at the lead researcher’s office. Can a researcher outside of the Performance Ethics Working Group gain access to this material? Unless specifically excluded by the interviewee the recordings will be made available to researchers on request. At the completion of the research the recordings may be deposited with an appropriate archive. You may indicate on the release form if you require that there be no additional access to, or publication of this recording and accompanying material without your prior written permission. Can I withdraw after the interview has taken place? You can withdraw from the process without penalty before the data collection process is completed. To withdraw the contents of your interview entirely, or to exclude an aspect of the interview from publication, you will need to contact the lead researcher Melissa Laing. If you withdraw from the research the interview recording and any derivatives from it will be destroyed. What if I want to be anonymous or share confidential information? Due to the publication format the researchers cannot not offer anonymity. Any confidential information imparted during the interview must be identified prior to the completion of the data collection process so that it can be excluded from the publication. The researchers will respect your right to privacy and not publish or distribute your contact details. Do I get a copy of the research outcomes? You will receive a copy of the podcasts and the report at the conclusion of the research. If you change your contact details before the research is completed you will need to update them with us. Funding This research project currently does not receive funding from any government department, university or other source.

Other references of interest http://theperformanceclub.org/2011/11/open-letter-to-artists/

¶ He Tangata – Wellbeing img

HE TANGATA a free Philosophy course with Philip McKibbin Well-being is an important topic in political philosophy. It is receiving a lot of attention from other disciplines, as well. Like me, you probably think that people are important. If you do, you would probably agree that well-being is valuable. You might even think that well-being should serve as the focus of our ethics… But why, and to what extent, should ‘well-being’ be allowed to inform our ethics? (Most ethical theories mention well-being, but many hold that something else is more important.) In this course, I will argue that by affirming the importance of people, we can legitimate a focus on well-being. I will explain what it is to affirm the importance of people, and together we will discuss just how much can be derived from such an affirmation. He aha te mea nui? He tangata. He tangata. He tangata. Starting soon! When: Friday 9 March, at 10am Where: Albert Park (by the rotunda) After that, we will gather weekly on Fridays at 10am. Everyone is welcome - so come along and bring your friends! email kaiako.hetangata@gmail.com visit www.universitywithoutconditions.ac.nz IMAGE: ‘The prophet Te Whiti addressing a meeting of natives.’ The Graphic, 1881.

¶ Reclaiming Marx reading group summer school (January – February 2012) img

Reclaiming Marx Reclaiming Marx is an open reading group run as part of the University Without Conditions. The group meets regularly to discuss key ideas in the work of Marx and other important theorists in the Marxist tradition. Everyone is welcome. Summer School Schedule The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte Week 1 Jan 17th - Engel’s Preface • Section I Week 2 Jan 24th - Section I| -I|l Week 3 Jan 31st - Section IV - V Week 4 Feb 7th - Section VI - V111 Tuesdays 2.30pm HSB 208 www.facebook.com/reclaimingmarx WWW.FU.AC.NZ UNIVERSITY WITHOUT CONDITIONS

The Reclaiming Marx reading group is a weekly meet to discuss the ideas of Marx and other theorists in the Marxist tradition. The summer school schedule (January – February 2012) involves reading and discussion from the 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, available from your local library, and also online for free. The location is room 208, in the Human Sciences Building of the University of Auckland City campus on Symonds Street. Map

¶ Finance’s Role In Society – Study Group

Currently on hiatus There is growing awareness of the influence of finance in today’s world – an influence extending to all aspects of life. The centrality of finance in our society was demonstrated in the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, but also today as finance wields the power to impose austerity measures unwillingly on populations and appoint unelected officials to the highest positions of political power. From the 13th of January, we will be running an informal study group, to investigate the workings of finance, titled ‘Finance’s Role in Society’. This course is open to all, no prior knowledge required – we will all be starting from scratch.The purpose of the course will be 1) to familiarise us with concepts used in financial and economic literature, that we may be able to make sense of the financial news 2) be able to make sense of this information by understanding the role of finance in the wider functioning of society and the economy and therefore be able to assess whether this information is of any significance to us. The location of the first meet will be in ‘Relax Lounge’, which is on Princes Street opposite Albert Park, on the University of Auckland campus. The topic for investigation will be the Financial Times, regarded as one of the premier financial newspapers. We will read the FT, and research any topics we don’t understand, using resources from the University library, the web, and anything else which is relevant.

Please contact robin for more information.

All welcome.

Time: 3 – 4pm, 13th of January, and every Friday from then on Place: Relax Lounge, Princes Street

¶ WHAT WE ARE

The University Without Conditions, also know as the Free University Auckland Aotearoa, is a free university.

By free, we mean free of conditions. We recognise that education at other institutions is only open to those who are willing to live with debt, and our aim is to not be a burden on those studying with us.

Established in 2012 by a self-organising collective and running without ties to Government or corporations, it exists not to produce ‘degrees for jobs’, but to enable a human being to improve themselves and the society in which they exist.

Between 2012 and 2017 we ran a series of philosophy and sociology courses in community spaces around Auckland’s CBD. Check them out here. Courses are currently on hiatus. If you want to run a course get in touch.

In 2014 we established the Performance Ethics Working Group, a research cluster to explore the role of ethics in contemporary arts.

¶ THE PERFORMANCE ETHICS WORKING GROUP

The Performance Ethics Working Group is research cluster in the University Without Conditions. As the name indicates the core focus of the Performance Ethics Working Group is the intersection of ethics with contemporary performance practices across and between the fields of theatre, dance, live and visual arts.

Led by Melissa Laing the working group’s structure is very informal, coalescing around a question or event.

To date the Performance Ethics Working Group has undertaken two major research projects. These are:

An investigation of the ethical concerns, understandings and practices in performance culminating in 2014 with a podcast series as well as essays, convened discussions and conference papers.

An onsite research project On Conversation, alongside the exhibition Share/Cheat/Unite at Te Tuhi focusing on the role and practice of conversation as a tool or formal strategy within contemporary art. A series of group discussions were facilitated as well as individual interviews. The initial findings of the group were published in a research report titled Navigating Conversational Frequency.

¶ Previous Courses

This is the list of course previously run by the University. Do you have a course you’d like to organise? Then please do, and let us know here.

Current courses and discussion groups are listed above, by hovering over the ‘Current Courses’ link in the title bar

¶ Resources

This page lists resources which are inspirational, important or informative in the development of our free university.

Other free universities Copenhagen Free University Melbourne Free University Free University of Ireland Free University of San Francisco Independent University of Moscow Mess Hall Université populaire de Caen University for Strategic Optimism

Published pieces which have been an influence on our university’s development

A piece by Copenhagen Free University, which was the initial inspiration for the University Without Conditions

The inaugural lecture of the University for Strategic Optimism, held inside a newly nationalised UK bank in 2008

Derrida, Jacques (2000) ‘The university without conditions’ in Without Alibi, trans. Peggy Kamuf, pp. 202-237. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-8047-4411-4 In this piece, Derrida talks of how the university as a site of learning should be free to test all forms of existing knowledge, with no limits on what or how it can question and interrogate the world around us. It also provided the working title for our university

Rancière, Jacques (1991) ‘An intellectual adventure’ in The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation, trans. Kristin Ross, pp. 1-18. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-8047-1969-1 Rancière suggests an alternative pedagogical model for education. Rather than the traditional, top-down model preferred by our traditional education system, he advances an argument for self-directed learning, thus eschewing the hierarchical model currently popular in schools and universities, citing the ability of a young child to learn its native language without the apparent necessity of a teacher to impart the knowledge.

Potential course materials

Massachusetts Institution of Technology Open Course Ware Wikipedia Khan Academy http://aaaaarg.org

¶ About

The University Without Conditions is a free university.

By free, we mean free of conditions. We recognise that education at other institutions is only open to those who are willing to live with debt, and our aim is to not be a burden on those studying with us.

We are a self-organising collective, without ties to Government or corporations. We exist not to produce ‘degrees for jobs’, but to enable a human being to improve themselves and the society in which they exist.

Courses are open to all, and anyone can run a course.

We hold lectures, seminars, exhibitions and workshops at a variety of locations, including Tangle Ball, a community workshop and art space near Karangahape Road, and at various public venues through the city, such as Myers Park, Albert Park and others.

¶ LIVING ON WATER STAGE TWO

What are we doing: We are at Stage Two of a multi-year project about/around/with people who choose to live aboard boats in Auckland, with a focus on the Waitematā Harbour. Part sociological and ecological investigation and part creative and aesthetic exploration through the project we will consider the social, environmental, physical, political and emotional aspects of choosing to live part or all of your life on the water. We are both concerned with the specificity of living on the water and how this enables us to reflect on the wider world.

This project will happen in a number of stages, of which this the second one – the development and collection of material phase – film, sound, stories and other strange things that might wash up on the shore. Where we work with you to tell stories of living on water through interviews, distributed sound recordings, mapping of the harbour and filming. To find out about stage one scroll down to the bottom.

We are taking a transmedia approach to the project. This includes a focus on non-linear story telling and presentation across multiple platforms and mediums which means there are multiple pathways through a subject for an audience

From our investigations during Stage One the following lines of focus emerged:

Deliberate living decisions – Why people choose to live on a boat and what that means for them practically and politically Moving around on water – the boating aspects of living on a boat The ecology of the marine environment – the wider environment within which living on a boat happens.

While each of these crossed over with each other they did not, in obvious ways, all intersect at the same time. This is the advantage of a multi work transmedia approach, a collection of works and approaches will weave together to connect these lines of thinking.

Over the next 12 months we will be focusing on the following projects:

1. a distributed field recording endeavour

We will be inviting boat dwellers to participate in recording the sonic environment around the places they both live a pass through and share those back to us. To make this possible we are creating kits with 3 types of mics, contact, hydrophone and omni-directional to send out. From these recordings we will create our ambient soundscapes and also create a repository for participants to create their own from the collectively created audio material.

2. an on water continuously-filmed non-linear-narrative, possibly multi-screen film

Think the Russian Arc by drone. https://youtu.be/ZV1kphEEXn8 We think it would be amazing to collect a dispersed flotilla of boats and film it in a series of continuous shots by drone. Together with you we want to develop a series of vignettes to communicate aspects of living aboard – from the great to the disastrous and on one glorious day go out on the water and film it.

3. sharing the stories

To paraphrase a boat dweller we spoke with – once I started sailing a boat, suddenly I had great stories to tell at parties. As part of both the film development, and also through separate structured interviews as well as group story telling and sharing sessions we want to develop a collection of true, real, tall stories by you and reshare them with the world through written and oral forms – maybe even put the most dramatic or funny ones on a radio show on the ham radio network.

These are just 3 of about 25 ideas that we explored and we still love lots of those other ideas so things may shift or grow

Timeline:

In the first quarter of 2021 we are going to focus on 1 and 3, with a little bit of 2. We think the greatest potential for 2 will emerge out of the relationships and stories we build together through 1 and 3 and that, given it will be a complicated day out we should put a lot of planning into it. But, we’re also down with improv testing of concepts along the way if you are out with your friends and a drone 😛

Our commitments to you for Stage Two:

At all times we will do our utmost to create a safe environment for you, socially and physically. We can’t control the weather, but we can fiercely moderate discussions and make good decisions about safety. We will respect that you will have different capacities to participate at different times and not ask more from you than you can give. If you no longer want to be involved in the project we will respect your choice and remove your material from the project. We will let you know before the end of the project when the final date to withdraw is. Anything you tell us will be treated as confidential* unless you give us permission to use it. When we are filming or recording we will always tell you in advance. If these are group sessions we will give you the option of having your contributions excluded from the public facing part of the project or anonymised. Where we are working with your stories we will consult with you about how they are presented. With your permission, we will acknowledge your contribution to the project. We will keep you up to date with the project over its development, unless you opt out of updates.

• The exception to this is if breaking confidentiality is a serious threat or injury to one or more persons. We won’t do this lightly and our disclosure will be to the most appropriate person who can do something about the threat or injury

Who are we: Melissa Laing is an artist based in West Auckland. In 2013 she built a row boat from a book and has been hanging out on the water in it since then. She’s also a researcher, curator and producer working in community arts and urbanism. You can find out about her here: melissalaing.com

Robin Paulson lives on a boat. He trained as an engineer before realising that humans are more interesting than pieces of steel and timber, prompting a complete re-evaluation of his life and taking the decision to study sociology. He has since extricated himself as much as possible from the dominant capitalist/property system, although this is a work in progress. He currently uses a community workshop “Hackland” to repair and improve his living situation and occasionally makes what one might generously term artworks, in the form of timber sculptures.

This project is currently being created independently of any institution, however it has received support from Creative NZ for Stage One. Over the course of the project we will likely partner with galleries, museums, film festivals and community organisations to develop and present parts of the final project. Some of these organisations will be government or local government funded.

How to contact us: The best person to contact with questions or changes to your participation is Melissa You can contact her on melissa@melissalaing.com or 0211829451.

version 1.02 published 18 December 2020

LIVING ON WATER STAGE ONE What we are doing: We are at the beginning of a multi-year project about/around/with people who choose to live aboard boats in Auckland, with a focus on the Waitematā Harbour. Part sociological and ecological investigation and part creative and aesthetic exploration through the project we will consider the social, environmental, physical, political and emotional aspects of choosing to live part or all of your life on the water. We are both concerned with the specificity of living on the water and how this enables us to reflect on the wider world.

This project will happen in a number of stages, of which this the first one – the scoping phase. Where we work out with other people what form this intellectual, visual and social inquiry might take, what methods it might use and where the words, films, actions and activities arising from it might be shared.

We are taking a transmedia approach to the project. This includes a focus on non-linear story telling and presentation across multiple platforms and mediums which means there are multiple pathways through a subject for an audience

Possible mediums we might use include:

Film and/or video – This can range from creating a documentary film to screened in cinemas, online to creating the cinema itself – a DIY boat cinema in the harbour Print based material – texts written by the collective, photos and pre existing documents Co-created social exchanges, performances, and/or on water actions VR Website containing multi media (films, text, image, audio) 2d and/or 3d creations shown in gallery Things we haven’t yet thought of All of the above

Our commitments to you for Stage One, background and planning:

We won’t predetermine the outcome and creation methods of the project in stage one, we will brainstorm with you to imagine what they could be. We will keep you up to date with the project over its development, unless you opt out of updates. Anything you tell us will be treated as confidential* unless you give us permission to use it. With your permission, we will acknowledge your contribution to the project. If you no longer want to be involved we will respect your choice.

• The exception to this is if breaking confidentiality is necessary to avert a serious threat to someone’s health or safety. We won’t do this lightly and our disclosure will be to the most appropriate person who can do something about the threat.

Who we are:

Melissa Laing is an artist based in West Auckland. In 2013 she built a row boat from a book and has been hanging out on the water in it since then. She’s also a researcher, curator and producer working in community arts and urbanism. You can find out about her here: melissalaing.com

Robin Paulson lives on a boat. He trained as an engineer before realising that humans are more interesting than pieces of steel and timber, prompting a complete re-evaluation of his life and taking the decision to study sociology. He has since extricated himself as much as possible from the dominant capitalist/property system, although this is a work in progress. He currently uses a community workshop Hackland to repair and improve his living situation and occasionally makes what one might generously term artworks, in the form of timber sculptures.

This project is currently being created independently of any institution, however it has received support from Creative NZ for Stage One. Over the course of the project we will likely partner with galleries, museums, film festivals and community organisations to develop and present parts of the final project. Some of these organisations will be government or local government funded.

How to contact us. The best person to contact with questions or changes to your participation is Melissa You can contact her on melissa@melissalaing.com or 0211829451.

version 1.01 published 29 July 2020

¶ THE PERFORMANCE ETHICS WORKING GROUP

In March 2014 the Performance Ethics Working Group released its first episode in a series of podcasts flagging ethical issues in performance and ways to address them – individually and institutionally – at the Festival of Uncertainty. The nine podcasts both make reference to the international performance contexts and draw on the specific history of New Zealand/Aotearoa as a country which is still grappling with a history of colonisation and on going structural inequalities affecting the indigenous people.

The following people were interviewed for the podcasts: Christopher Braddock, Sally J Morgan, David Cross, Tru Paraha, Alexa Wilson, Stephen Bain, Craig Cooper, Sally Barnett, Rose Martin, Mark Jackson, Murray Edmond, Louise Tu’u, Becca Wood, Brent Harris, Val Smith, Sean Curham, Mark Harvey, Alys Longley, Carol Brown, Moana Nepia, Kalisolaite ‘Uhila, Hadleigh Averill, Alison East. You can read about them here.

The episodes include:
Episode 1: What is ethics? launched at the Festival of Uncertainty, 23 March 2014
This first podcast introduces the idea of ethics as a daily practice and philosophical enquiry, exploring what participants think the broad concept of ethics covers.

Episode 2: How we treat our audiences Published April 8, 2014
In this episode we discuss what responsibilities performers and producers have towards their audiences and how these can conflict with the conceptual integrity of the work. We also talk about what can be considered offensive and who gets to decide this.

Episode 3: Reviewing performance art and ethics historically Published April 11, 2014
During the interviews a number of historical examples from performance art were reviewed. This episode explores the ethics and impact of these works.

Episode 4: The ethics of community engagement Published April16, 2014
This episode explores the issues which research and residencies in and with communities brings up and how community arts projects and relational aesthetics projects can be approached

Episode 5: Ethics of working with traditional and indigenous knowledges Published April 24, 2014
Recognising that the performing arts in Aotearoa New Zealand are structured and understood through dominantly western paradigms this podcast explores the complexities of decolonising performance

Episode 6: How we manage the ethics of money Published May 2, 2014
In this episode we discuss fiscal ethics and how they can operate the performing arts. The culture of internships, alternative economies and decommodification of art are among the topics discussed.

Episode 7: Working relationships within the performance community Published May 8, 2014
This podcasts deals with questions of ethical relationships between performers and institutions, festivals, curators, directors and choreographers. It addresses a history of poor labour relations and and sometimes outright abuse in the field of dance as well as questions of collaboration and authorship, and the protection of the performer from real physical risks.

Episode 8: The University ethics process Published May 22, 2014
Many of the people who participated in the interviews hold positions at Universities across New Zealand. This podcast explore how these performers, directors and researchers negotiate a University ethics process initially developed for medical, sociological and anthropological research.

Episode 9: Authorship in collaboration Published May 28, 2014
This bonus episode focusses on how we handle authorship in collaborative processes. It brings together the participants thoughts on the topic from debunking the myth of solo authorship and recognising the positivity of influence, to adequate programme credits and audience or community participation. 

Related Media:
Listen to the lead researcher Melissa Laing talk with Eva Radich on Upbeat, Radio NZ Concert.
Listen to Melissa Laing, Tru Paraha and Louise Tu’u talk about the project with Lynn Freeman on Standing Room Only, Radio NZ National
Blog post on the Artists Alliance websiteEssay on Pantograph Punch http://pantograph-punch.com/slippery-questions-the-role-of-ethics-in-art/
Podcast of a conference paper delivered at the 2014 Cultural Studies Association Australasia conference, University of Wollongong

~

The Performance Ethics Working Group is prompted in part by the fact that many performers lecture or present work within universities that have stringent ethics processes for research on, or involving humans from which performance often is excluded, or when included poorly understood. It also responds to the question raised by the 2011 Marina Abramovic work for the LA MOCA. Critiqued in advance by Yvonne Rainer* for both an (initial) abdication of responsibility by the institution to protect its performers from harm and its exploitative remuneration the dialogue around the work raised the question what ethical responsibilities does a host or commissioning institution hold towards its performers.

Through talking with people participating in contemporary performance across the fields of theatre, dance and the visual arts ** the Performance Ethics Working Group is developing an understanding of what ethics has to do with performance. The first publication of this research is the Performance Ethics Working Group podcasts, release in 2014.

* Sarah Wookey later wrote an open letter declaring herself as the artist referenced in Yvonne Rainer’s critique and stating her position on the matter.
http://theperformanceclub.org/2011/11/open-letter-to-artists/

** This includes creators, directors, curators, producers, researchers and audiences.

If you want to be involved in this working group please contact melissa@melissalaing.com

¶ ON CONVERSATION

There has been a well documented rise in the use of conversation in contemporary art. As a result conversation as a tool and medium is now embedded in our collective understandings of art. But more often than not when discussing a work we acknowledge that conversation took place and its outcomes without delving into the nature of the conversation or its formal properties.

This gathering of a Performance Ethics Working Group sought to go deeper and examine the specific aesthetic, ethical and social/political aspects of conversation in art. It plans to build a better understanding of the skills and considerations that artists bring to bear on the act of conversation, situating this practice within the increased interest in the role of conversation in contemporary society.

To begin this research the Performance Ethics Working Group was invited to undertake an onsite research project, alongside the exhibition Share/Cheat/Unite at Te Tuhi. The onsite part of the research was conducted during September 2016, in a (rather self reflexive) open conversational manner alongside some public talks and interviews which will go towards a new podcast series.

Stage Two: Monthly meet-ups to build and share knowledge taking place through 2017, hosted by Audio Foundation, Auckland CBD.

Actions to date:
The discussion and collaboration group – Negotiating Conversational Frequencies – met between 2pm and 4pm Thursdays September 8,15, 22 and 29 at Te Tuhi. Participants in the discussion group included: Melissa Laing, Leon Tan, Jeremy Leatinu’u, Tosh Ahkit, John Vea, Xin Cheng, Chris Berthelsen, Amy Weng, Andrew Kennedy, Grace Wright, Raewyn Alexander, Grace Wright, Kelly Carmichael, Ivan Mrsic, Sean Curham, Kaoru Kodama.

In July 2017 we published a zine report Negotiating Conversation Frequency

In 2019 a reflection on the discussions was published as: Some parallel discussions in Bruce E. Phillips (ed) 2019 Share/Cheat/Unite vol 4, (Auckland: Te Tuhi Centre for the Arts)

Interviews:
The following people and groups have been interviewed about the role of conversation in their practices. Mark Amery and Sophie Jerram (Letting Space, Urban Dream Brokerage), Ella Grace McPherson-Newton, Mark Harvey, Tosh Ahkit, Balamohan Shingade, Public Share and Tuafale Tanoai aka Linda T.

¶ ‘What is Equality?’ at Occupy Auckland this Friday 28th October img

Posted on October 22, 2011 by robin

As part of ‘Occupy Auckland‘, which is ongoing in Aotea Square, next week there will be a series of events under the title of ‘Learn@Occupy Auckland’.  These events will cover a range of topics, one of which will be lead by the University Without Conditions.  See the flier below for more details.  All welcome.

WANT TO LEARN SOMETHING THIS WEEK? MONDAY 24 OCTOBER, 4-5PM LABOUR DAY NOW AND THEN DR PAUL TAILLON AND JOE CAROLAN TUESDAY 25 OCTOBER, 4-5PM OCCUPATION SITES/ SITES OF OCCUPATION DR STEPHEN TURNER WEDNESDAY 26 OCTOBER, 4-5PM WHO AM I? JAZ SANGHA THURSDAY 27 OCTOBER, 4-5PM SEXUAL VIOLENCE PREVENTION FOR MEN MIRIAM SESSA AND CHRIS ZACK FRIDAY 28 OCTOBER, 4-5PM WHAT IS EQUALITY? THE UNIVERSITY WITHOUT CONDITIONS LEARN@OCCUPYAUCKLAND IS AN OPEN FORUM FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO LEARN. SESSIONS HAVE A DESIGNATED FACILITATOR BUT ARE OPEN TO PARTICIPATION FROM ALL. FIND OUT MORE AT WWW.OCCUPYAUCKLAND.ORG AOTEA SQUARE, CENTRAL AUCKLAND, AOTEAROA LEARN@OCCUPYAUCKLAND

¶ # This week’s Understanding Finance meet – Who owns Greece?

Posted on March 1, 2012 by robin

In a change to the usual format for the finance course, this week we are carrying out some research into bond ownership, rather than reading and comprehending an article from the Financial Times.

It has been noted by numerous commentators that the so-called ‘bailout’ of Greece is more about paying back the private owners of Greek Government bonds rather than helping the Greek people.  So, we decided to investigate “Who owns Greece?”.  This article at the Guardian proved to be a good starting point, which then led here. We now have an idea who is being looked after, and at first glance it doesn’t appear to be the Greeks, although the National Bank of Greece and Greek public sector funds are present.  This is a start, we will look further from these points and attempt to uncover what is really happening in the Euro at the moment.

This week’s meet is Friday, 2nd of March at 3pm, at Relax Lounge on Princes Street, Central Auckland.

All welcome.

¶ New course Art and Politics starting tomorrow

This course will investigate the link between art and politics; it will ask questions like What is aesthetics in the world today? How is politics aesthetic? How is aesthetics political? Why do people like John Key? etc. We will begin with the final paragraph of Walter Benjamin’s Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction*. The course will be focussed more on discussion than presentation but it will be structured.  No prior knowledge of art or politics is required.

• “Fiat ars – pereat mundus, (make art – destroy the world)” says Fascism, and, as Marinetti admits, expects war to supply the artistic gratification of a sense perception that has been changed by technology. This is evidently the consummation of “I’art pour l’art.”  Mankind, which in Homer’s time was an object of contemplation for the Olympian gods, now is one for itself. Its self-alienation has reached such a degree that it can experience its own destruction as an aesthetic pleasure of the first order. This is the situation of politics which Fascism is rendering aesthetic. Communism responds by politicizing art”.

The course will be held in Seminar Room C of the Mondrian Building at Elam School of Fine Arts, part of the University of Auckland.  Map

The course begins on Tuesday the 6th of March, and will run every Tuesday from then onwards, from 3pm until 4pm.  Any non-Elam students will need to wait at the door of the Mondrian Building to be let in – it is by access card only.

¶ Learn at the Domain Rotunda

Posted on March 7, 2012 by melissa

The University Without Conditions Presents
Learn at the Domain Rotunda
Saturday March 17, 4pm

The phrase ‘the commons’ has gained currency in recent years as a
concept to be defended, defined and exploited. But what does ‘the commons’
mean, where does the concept originate from and what problems hide behind
the idealistic deployment of the phrase? Billy Aiken, Robin Paulson and
Abhishek Reddy present three different perspectives on how the
concept of the ‘the commons’ is used in contemporary society.

The Commons

Billy Aiken: a conception of the commons from a historical perspective
Robin Paulson: immaterial labour, and the digital commons
Abhishek Reddy: the ethics of free software

Learn @ The Domain will take place this Saturday, March 17 at 4 pm in
the Band Rotunda in Auckland’s oldest public park, The Domain. Learn is
an ongoing series of public discussions initiated during the first weeks
of Occupy Auckland. It is now presented by the University Without
Conditions and is open to all. If you want to present a Learn session contact melissa[at]melissalaing.com

Download the pdf Learn in the Park
Learn @ The Domain will take place in the Band Rotunda, on Domain Drive]

¶ Current discussions at the University Without Conditions

We are delighted that we currently have five courses and discussion groups running in a variety of locations in the city.

‘Reading Capital with David Harvey’, Mondays, 5 – 7 pm, The Audio Foundation_Capital_ (presented in association with UWC), Wednesdays, 2 – 3:30 pm_,_ Human Sciences Building, University of Auckland__Art and Politics,__ Thursdays, 3 – 4 pm, Elam School of Fine Art_
He Tangata_, Fridays 10 am, Albert Park
Finance’s Role in Society, Fridays, 3 pm, Relax Lounge, Princes Street

All are welcome to participate.

¶ Alternate strategies in thinking the university, Saturday 28 April, Midday, ST PAUL St Gallery

Melissa Laing and Jai Bentley Payne from the University Without Conditions are taking part in a discussion about alternate strategies in thinking the university.

Saturday, 28 May, Midday
ST PAUL St Gallery,
40 St Paul St
Auckland

Alternate strategies in thinking the university brings together representatives of four different initiatives, The Free University (1970) Night Art School (2008), We Are the University (2011 -), and the University Without Conditions (2011 -). These initiatives reflect on and often aggressively criticise the university as a neoliberal institution. In various ways they argue for recognition of the position that the university belongs to us, those who teach, learn, research, council, clean, and create community.

ST PAUL St Gallery has invited Mike Hanne, Rebecca Steedman and Jai Bentley-Payne to join with Melissa Laing in discussing how we might re consider education through the practices of activism and the creation of alternatives.

The Free University ran regular day long discussions out of the St Pauls Church Crypt in 1970.

The Night Art School was an evening art school run out of a local hall. The N.A.S. curriculum was created by a community of artists and designers and sought to promote an exchange of ideas and learning that is interesting, useful and relevant.

We Are The University, holds its kaupapa it its name. It is a community of students and staff who are committed to the University as a site of intellectual expansion and academic freedom. We believe the University should function as the ‘critic and conscience of society’ and as an open space for expression of dissent.

The University Without Conditions is a free university and self-organising collective, that holds lectures, seminars, exhibitions and workshops at a variety of locations. It seeks to be open to everybody, fearless and critical without restriction as described by Derrida, in the essay from which it draws it’s name: the University Without Conditions.

¶ Special lecture this week…

Posted on May 7, 2012 by philip

PUBLIC LECTURE

From ‘People’ to ‘Well-Being’
Philip McKibbin

This week!

When: Wednesday 9 May, at 12pm
Where: Albert Park (by the red rotunda)

Well-being is an important topic in political philosophy. It is receiving a lot of attention from other disciplines, as well. Like me, you probably think that people are important. If you do, you would probably agree that well-being is valuable. You might even think that well-being should serve as the focus of our ethics… But why, and to what extent, should ‘well-being’ be allowed to inform our ethics? (Most ethical theories mention well-being, but many hold that something else is more important.) In this lecture, I will argue that by affirming the importance of people, we can legitimate a focus on well-being. I will explain what it is to affirm the importance of people, and together we will discuss what can be derived from such an affirmation.

He aha te mea nui?
He tangata. He tangata. He tangata.

** Please note that this lecture has been cancelled.

¶ The university as an idea.

A PIECE BY GENERAL INTELLECT WELLINGTON

It is a commonplace amongst critically minded academics that the university, or a certain version of the university, needs saving. It needs saving from its own internal markets and the markets imposed on it by research-based funding, from the creation of a competitive environment, a logic of point scoring that measures research quantity at the expense of quality and forces academics into unsustainable work regimes.

We know that the university needs saving, and what it needs saving from, but we are unclear what it is that we are saving. Critics of the academy might accuse its defenders of nostalgia for some mythical Oxbridge, one that guarantees its staff (and by no means all of its staff) the right to uninterrupted and unadministered research time.

Such time can be, from the outside, embarrassingly difficult to distinguish from leisure, and not only because the reader of a ‘hard’ book might look similar to the reader of an ‘easy’ one. We can’t distinguish academic work from leisure by its difficulty. Leisure itself, after all, can be as strenuous as any work, as evidenced by all the ambitious home renovators or amateur sportspeople grunting their way about the tennis court.

More importantly, the confusion between research and leisure arises because it is because it is not clear how research, especially research of a ‘pure’ variety, contributes anything more to society than anyone’s weekend activity. Reading books and being paid for it? Writing words that hardly anyone reads? Few goods are produced for others’ consumption and enjoyment; few bones set or bridges built (medical or engineering schools being, we might guess, not quite the university we are talking about). All of the standard defences of the other university, as critic and conscience of society, are correct, but tend to have a hollow and nostalgic ring to them. Who, outside the institution, ever asked for such a conscience?

This is the source of the jealous rage directed against academics, not least from their own administrations. This anger provides much fuel for the regimes of audit and bureaucratic demand currently being assembled.

All of the university’s models, and their rhetorical hesitations and failings, relate to this problematic Oxbridge image. Is the university primarily a teaching institution? Research would then certainly be relegated to (currently non-existent) spare time, funded from the surplus to be accumulated from income based solely on student enrolments. The shortcomings of this idea were felt in New Zealand throughout the nineties, through the genuine suffering of research, but also through the universities’ elitist terror at no longer being distinguishable from the polytechnics.

The answer to this—the acceptance of the universities’ special status as research institutions—also owes much to the Oxbridge image. The importance of research was acknowledged, and this set the universities apart once again. The concern that this apartness should not lead straight to elitism was appropriate: research work could only be different in kind, not in status. It would be one kind of work among many, and therefore subject to the same work pressures as all: the rationalisations and output drives associated with performance-based research funding. All this at least funds research, and comes still with far less strings than the most immediately likely (and already extant) alternative: the drive to find external funding from industry.

The question then, is whether research is work or leisure: which it most resembles, and in what ways. It is a charged question, leading to the most elaborate defences and heated attacks. Let us then be brave enough in the midst of this to defend the university as an idea.

The university as an idea is threatening because it resists the instrumental logic of measurement, equivalence and competition that controls so much of the world (in much the same way that corporate research labs in the Fordist era did, and many arts institutions and public services still, imperfectly, do). The assault on free research is consistent with the assault on any perceived inefficiencies, any apparently idle capital, and their increasing subjection to the discipline of markets, however artificial or internal these might be.

Resisting this will mean keeping in mind, against the jealous anger, that faded old image of research, free of measurement, assessment or competitive pressures. Research time should be precisely the time to freely and collaboratively enquire, critique and invent. In one sense this might mean that the university, narrowly considered as an institution, is primarily about teaching, provided it is also about time not teaching, the time off (and material infrastructure) sufficient for research’s leisure.

Do we become elitists by defending this? Certainly not by comparison to the genuine elites, our tiny and inbred international class of political and business ‘leaders’. Attacks on the elitism of academics serve partly to deflect attention from this class. Nonetheless, a defence of academic freedom would be elitist insofar as it would be a freedom limited to academics, and no defence of their right to research time based on training or expertise would make it less so. We should allow ourselves to be infected with a hint of the jealous rage after all, and hate this small elitism along with the larger one.

This is why our claim should be: we insist on the right to freely and collaboratively enquire, critique and invent… and we insist on this right, not just for academics, but for all.

This is not to say we insist on it all at once, or expect it any time soon. The university as an idea is also a vision of society that shares and extends the university’s (remaining) freedoms, and such a society is by no means imminent. It does mean, however, that if academics are to defend their rights they, and their institutions, should be prepared also to promote similar rights wherever they exist or might emerge.

We should then avoid the melancholy that values the university only as a last bastion of critique and freedom against the encroachment of administration and commerce. A genuinely non-elitist idea of the university would reverse the historical sequence, seeing itself instead as an outpost, the first small step of a far broader tendency. The university as an idea would be universal. It would extend beyond the walls of the campus. Academics within the institution, who can despite everything claim something of that right, can only defend it with any justice by championing it for all. This means letting go of our monopoly
on good ideas, and on critique, and allowing that others outside the academy may have different and equally valid critiques of their own.

The question now for the academy—for academics and for universities themselves—is: can we be brave enough to embrace such a utopian idea? It is an idea that, in the short term, can of course seem so impractical as to lead only to strategic deadlock. Against this defeatism, we should let it inform all of our dealings, rhetorical, to be sure, at first, with the university and its relation with the rest of the world.

General Intellect Wellington

GeneralIntellectWellington@gmail.com

¶ Enter 2015

We’re at the beginning of 2015 and we’ve got some great plans for the year. We’re currently developing a series of monthly talks and discussions on ideas of self determination, the first taking place on February 18 revisiting and refining the kaupapa of the free university movement and the Aotearoa Free University / University Without Conditions.

We’ll be continuing our reading group, moving on to a new text in the next month which is always an opportunity for new people to join us in reading and discussing.

More information on both of these will be up soon.

¶ Living, making, together

We’re currently planning a new series, five gatherings exploring ideas around livelihood, how we relate to each other and other beings on this planet, and forms of self-organisation. They will start on Monday June 20 and go for 5 weeks (27 June, 4, 11 & 18 July)

We will take bites off these books as starting points for the discussions:

• Week 1 – Kyohei Sakaguchi: Build Your Own Independent Nation (Chapter 3: Trade by Expression, with Attitude Your Currency, download here) Optional homework: bring an example of attitude economy from your daily life to share next week.
• Week 2 – Charles Eisenstein: Sacred Economics, Introduction. (Optional text from the same author: Disruption, from The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know Is Possible)
• Week 3 – David Abram: Becoming Animal http://wildethics.org/essay/key-quotes-from-becoming-animal-an-earthly-cosmology/ (download the full text in epub here, or pdf here)
• Week 4 – Discussion on stories and threads across the previous three readings and Charles Eisenstein: Disruption, from The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know Is Possible (Note: one-offspecial location at WG building, AUT, meet 6pm at NewsFeed Cafe)
• Week 5 – Tim Ingold: Making, C_hapter 7: Bodies on the Run_ (download a pdf here)
  George Monbiot: Rewilding, Chapter 2: The Wild Hunt (download the chapter in pdf here, or the whole book in epub here)

The discussions will take place in RM’s lovely reading room on the first floor of 3 Samoa House Lane, Auckland. To get to it you have to go around the back via Beresford St, down Samoa House Lane and up one flight of stairs. All the sessions will start at 6:00 pm and run for an hour and a half.

The gatherings are open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading, discussing and experiencing specific sections each week, and experimenting how we can use them in our daily lives. The group is facilitated by Xin Cheng [xin at makeshifting.net] who will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

Xin Cheng would like to acknowledge the support from New Zealand Japan Exchange Programme (NZJEP) for the “research and doing” tour in Japan, which enabled the encounter with Sakaguchi’s text.

¶ Undercommons

“when we say that we organize in the shadow of the university, we mean that we organize with those who have been used and abused by the university-as-such: students and workers of color who endure institutional racism while having their images used in the name of diversity; precariously employed adjunct faculty who must rely on social or communal assistance for survival; exploited graduate teaching fellows still urged to play the rigged academic game; custodial and food services staff who are treated as disposable in patriarchal and racist divisions of labor; so-called “dropouts” who’ve been ejected from the university because they can’t stand its discipline; students and former students who will be haunted by debt for decades; and organizers who educate, study, and research outside and in spite of the university’s present configurations.”

https://roarmag.org/essays/undercommoning-collective-university-education/

¶ On Conversation

The Performance Ethics Working Group is pleased to announce a new research initiative ‘On Conversation’ focussing on the specific aesthetic, ethical and social/political aspects of conversation in contemporary art. The first part of this research will take place alongside the exhibition Share/Cheat/Unite at Te Tuhi during September 2016.

Read more about it here

¶ Making and Talking Temporary Objects Series

“They ease back into Earth and allow people to keep creating, rather than be tied to the objects that already exist.”

“We all know the pleasure of making things and making temporary things is an excellent, low-impact way to pass the time. Imagine a world full of such things – it would have so much more creative possibility and beauty than the world we live in now.”

(Niki Harre – Temporary Objects)

In Making and Talking Temporary Objects we will see what we can learn by creating temporary objects together and imagining a pleasurable and beautiful “world of such things” with some help from relevant texts and other materials.

Continuing and collaborating with Xin Cheng’s Living, Making, Together series [1] [2] this series meets in the living, ever-changing, decomposing Organic Making Space in Mairangi Bay, near the Mairangi Arts Centre.

Each meeting we will experiment and play with making temporary things with resources at hand and encounter a short passage of text (a quote or paragraph from a longer text) to be pulled out of a hat to use as a foothold for a roaming discussion.

Various snacks will be provided but feel welcome to bring something frugal and hand-made to snack on together, and a word, quote or short passage of text that you think is relevant to add to our lucky dip of text-based inspiration. Any other interesting stuff also welcome.

Ideas and suggestions for activities most welcome.

Location: Mairangi Bay Park (the end near the tennis courts) (5mins walk from bus stop in Mairangi Bay Village, free parking available for drivers) – MAP
Time: Drop in any time between 5.00-7.00 most Mondays in December (5, 12, 19) 2016 and January (9, 16, 23) 2017.
Transport: If you are coming from the CBD the 86X Bowns Bay (e.g. from Wellesley St Opp Albion) will get you there in around 28 mins. If you prefer the Northern Express Chris can pick up/drop off a group at the Constellation bus station.

The gatherings are open to anyone who wishes to participate – children, people with or without ‘gold’ cards, various abilities… –  and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks.

The caretaker of this series is Chris Berthelsen (chris@a-small-lab.com / 022-0854-866 – http://a-small-lab.com | http://small-workshop.info) along with Xin Cheng (http://xin-cheng.info) who transmits powers from Hamburg.

¶ Performance Ethics Working Group Overview

The Performance Ethics Working Group is research cluster in the University Without Conditions. As the name indicates the core focus of the Performance Ethics Working Group is the intersection of ethics with contemporary performance practices across and between the fields of theatre, dance, live and visual arts.

Led by Melissa Laing the working group’s structure is very informal, coalescing around a question or event. To date the Performance Ethics Working Group has published podcasts and essays as well as convened discussions and given papers on ethics and performance.

In 2016 The Performance Ethics Working Group has been invited to undertake an onsite research project, alongside the exhibition Share Cheat Unite at Te Tuhi. We are currently constructing the research question and framework. At the moment we know we want to focus on the role and practice of conversation as a tool or formal strategy within contemporary art.

The University Without Conditions is a free university and self-organising collective, without ties to Government or corporations. It exist not to produce ‘degrees for jobs’, but to enable a human being to improve themselves and the society in which they exist.

¶ Summer Reading: Friederich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morals”

We are doing a Summer Reading Group focussing on Friederich Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals (or Morality depending on your translation)

On the Genealogy of Morality (1887) is considered Nietzsche’s most important work on ethics and politics. He initially conceived of it as a ‘small polemical pamphlet’ that might help him sell more copies of his earlier writings The book offers a critique of moral values and traces the historical evolution of concepts such as guilt, conscience, responsibility, law and justice. Although the Genealogy is one of the darkest books ever written, it is also, paradoxically, a book full of hope and anticipation.

(summary based on Keith Ansell-Pearson introduction to the 2006 Cambridge University Press publication of ‘On the Genealogy of Morality’. available as a pdf at http://www.inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Thought/GeneologyofMorals.pdf)

All meetings will take place between 6:00 and 7:30 pm at the Auckland Domain Band Rotunda, off Domain Drive.

Week 1: Wednesday 18th December, 2013:
Preface and First Essay: Good and Evil, Good and Bad

Week 2: Wednesday 8th January, 2014:
Second Essay: Guilt, Bad Conscience and the Like

Week 3: Wednesday 22nd January, 2014:
Third Essay: What do Ascetic Ideals Mean? parts 1 – 14

Week 4: Wednesday 5th February, 2014:
Third Essay: What do Ascetic Ideals Mean? parts 15 – 28

About the reading group:

The reading group is open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading and discussing essays each fortnight moving through the book. The group is facilitated by Melissa Laing [melissa@melissalaing.com] and Robin Paulson [robin@bumblepuppy.org] who are not experts in Nietzsche, rather will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

You can download a pdf poster advertising the reading group here

¶ Luce Irigaray – The Speculum of the Other Woman

**Note ** the January and February Sessions are now happening a week later than originally advertised 14, 28, & 11th in Albert Park, by the D shaped sculpture

Reading Group
Book: Speculum of the Other Woman by Luce Irigaray
Location: Auckland Central Library, Te Marama Room,
level 1, 44 – 46 Lorne St, Auckland CBD
Fortnightly, Wednesdays, 6 – 7:30 pm
Begins 12 November, 2014

About the book:

Speculum of the Other Woman by Luce Irigaray was first published in 1974 in French. Originally a student of the Jacques Lacan, after the publication of Speculum of the Other Woman Irigaray lost her university appointment at the prompting of Lacan himself. The book has been described as one of the most important works in feminist theory to have been published in this generation. In it Irigaray argues that for the profession of psychoanalysis female sexuality has remained a “dark continent,” unfathomable and unapproachable; its nature can only be misunderstood by those who continue to regard women in masculine terms.

Reflecting on the book’s significance in 2009 on the Times Higher Education websiteChristine Battersby wrote “Speculum is a brave and original book that does indeed deserve its place among the “baggy monsters” of “the canon”.”

We will read the book over 7 fortnightly sessions

Schedule:

12 Nov: Session 1
THE BLIND SPOT OF AN OLD DREAM OF SYMMETRY
Sections 1 – 6 (p 11 – 65)

26 Nov: Session 2
THE BLIND SPOT OF AN OLD DREAM OF SYMMETRY
Sections 7 – 13 (p 66 – 129)

10 Dec: Session 3
SPECULUM
Sections 1 – 6 (p 133 – 189)

24 Dec: Session 4
(date or time of this session may change and will be discussed the fortnight before)
SPECULUM
Sections 7 – 10 (p 191 – 240)

14 Jan: Session 5
PLATO’S HYSTERIA
Sections 1 – 4 (p 243 – 282)

28 Jan: Session 6
PLATO’S HYSTERIA
Sections 5 – 9 (283 – 329)

11 Feb: Session 7
PLATO’S HYSTERIA
Sections 10 – 13 (p 330 – 364)

About the reading group:
The reading group: is open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading and discussing specific sections each fortnight moving through the book. The group is facilitated by Melissa Laing [melissa at melissalaing.com] and Robin Paulson [robin at bumblepuppy.org] who will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

¶ Four experimental novels

This reading group will explore four experimental novels ranging from post colonial literature to theoretical horror. The four books are Sembene Ousmane’s, Xala (1974), Renata Adler’s Speedboat (1976), Reza Negarestani’s Cyclonopedia (2008) and Vanessa Place’s Statement of Facts (2008). All of the books are known for their exploration of the socio-political context they are situated in and their experimentation with literary form.

We will read and discuss a book each fortnight.
The reading group takes place on a Thursday night 6 – 7:30 pm at Rm on K’rd and the Auckland Central Library

September 3: Session 1.
Sembene Ousmane, Xala, 1974
Location: Rm, 1st floor, 307 K’Road, Newton, Auckland. Entry from Samoa House Lane

September 17: Session 2.
Renata Adler, Speedboat, 1976
Location: Auckland Central Library, Te Marama Room,
Level 1, 44 – 46 Lorne St, Auckland CBD (far corner behind the Level 1 assistance desk)

October 8: Session 3. (date changed from 1 Oct)
Reza Negarestani, Cyclonopedia: Complicity with Anonymous Materials, 2008
Location: Rm, 1st floor, 307 K’Road, Newton, Auckland. Entry from Samoa House Lane

October 22: Session 4. (date changed from 15 Oct)
Vanessa Place, Statement of Facts, 2008
Location: Rm, 1st floor, 307 K’Road, Newton, Auckland. Entry from Samoa House Lane

About the books
Sembene Ousmane: Xala
Chicago Review Press, 1997 (1974)
Download a pdf here: http://www.artsrn.ualberta.ca/amcdouga/Hist247/winter_2014/resources/Xala%20-%20Sembene%20Ousmane.pdf

First published in French in 1973 and later translated into English in 1976, Xala is the story of El Hadji Kader Beye, a Muslim business man living in Dakar, Senegal, and his obsession with the impotence he suffers after his third marriage. The novel follows several weeks in El Hadji’s life and his “rapid decline from affluence to total humiliation and ruin.”

Reza Negarestani: Cyclonopedia: Complicity with Anonymous Materials
Repress 2008
Download a pdf here

Cyclonopedia is theoretical-fiction novel by Iranian philosopher and writer Reza Negarestani. At once a horror fiction, a work of speculative theology, an atlas of demonology, a political samizdat and a philosophic grimoire, Cyclonopedia is work of theory-fiction on the Middle East, where horror is restlessly heaped upon horror. Reza Negarestani bridges the appalling vistas of contemporary world politics and the War on Terror with the archaeologies of the Middle East and the natural history of the Earth itself.
(description http://re-press.org/books/cyclonopedia-complicity-with-anonymous-materials/)

Renata Adler: Speedboat
New York Review Books, 1976
This book is available at the public library

Told by Jen Frain, a journalist, Speedboat is a fragmentary and frequently hilarious novel about what it was to be an urban American in the 1970s. Here we have a narrator whose “I” looks out, not in. Frain describes her friends and work so keenly that at times she is almost effaced from her own narrative. Made out of seemingly unrelated vignettes—tart observations distilled through relentless intellect— it adds up to an analysis of our brittle, urban existence.
(description http://www.nyrb.com/products/speedboat?variant=1094931377)

Vanessa Place: Statement of Facts
Ubu editions, 2008
Download a pdf here: http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/place/Unpub_042_Place.pdf

*** Warning – this book uses transcripts taken from sexual assault cases ***
Vanessa Place’s Statement of Facts project involves reproducing Statements of Facts from some of her appellate briefs and representing them as poetry. A statement of facts is a legal document which sets forward factual information without argument. These documents are used in a variety of legal settings, ranging from appeals to filing vehicle registration paperwork.
(description from http://www.insertblancpress.net/products/vanessa-place-statement-of-facts)

About the reading group:
The reading group: is open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading and discussing a new book each fortnight. The group is facilitated by Melissa Laing [melissa at melissalaing.com] who will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

¶ Being and Time by Martin Heidegger

Reading Group
Book: Being and Time by Martin Heidegger Division 1
Location: Auckland Central Library, Te Marama Room,
Level 1, 44 – 46 Lorne St, Auckland CBD (far corner behind the Level 1 assistance desk)
Fortnightly, Wednesdays, 6 – 7:30 pm
Begins 8 April, 2015

We will be reading Division 1 of Martin Heidegger’s Being and Time over 7 fortnights.

Martin Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit, Being and Time is one of the significant philosophical texts of the 20th Century. First published in 1927, the book has exerted a huge influence on both philosophy, and other areas as diverse as architecture, contemporary art, social and political theory, psychotherapy, psychiatry and theology. Hubert Dreyfuss* described Being and Time as “both a systematization of the existential insights of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche and a radicalization of Husserl’s phenomenological account of intentionality”

In the book Heidegger set himself the task of the “destruction” of the philosophical tradition, inventing new terminology and ways of thinking stating that “our aim in the following treatise is to work out the question of the sense of being and to do so concretely.”

Heidegger, himself is not unproblematic, one of a number of German philosophers who joined the Nazi Party, he never explicitly renounced National Socialism. The recent publication of his Black Notebooks has underscored Heidegger’s embrace of anti semitic attitudes and reignited the debate on the value of his work.

Schedule
Week 1 April 8
Introduction
pp 21 – 64 (H2 – H40) (43 pp)
Dennis Beech from the College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University provides a list of Greek and Latin translations for the Introduction that can be found here and here

Week 2 April 22
Division 1 Chapters I – II
pp 65 – 90 (H41 – H62) (25pp)

Week 3 May 6
Division 1 Chapter III Sections 14 – 20
pp 91 – 127 (H63 – H102) (36 pp)

Week 4 May 20
Division 1 Chapter III Section 21 – Chapter IV
pp 128 – 168 (H102 – H129)  (40 pp)

Week 5 June 3
Division 1 Chapter V  Section 28 – 33
pp 169 – 203 (H130 – 167) (34 pp)

Week 6 June 17
Division 1 Chapter V Section 34 – Chapter VI Section 41
pp 203 – 241 (H160 – H196) (pp 38)

Week 7 July 1
Division 1 Chapter VI Section 42 – 44
pp 241 – 273 (H196 – H230) (32 pp)

The page numbers refer to the Macquarrie and Robinson translation (with H# referring to pagination in later German editions)

You can download a scan of the text here

*Archive.org has preserved the recordings of Hubert Dreyfus’ 2007 lectures on Heidegger. You can access them here

About the reading group:
The reading group: is open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading and discussing specific sections each fortnight moving through the book. The group is facilitated by Melissa Laing [melissa at melissalaing.com] who will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

¶ Anti Oedipus Reading Group 12 June – 30 October

Reading Group
Book: Anti-Oedipus, Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari
Location: Alphabet City, 71 Mt Eden Road, Eden Terrace, Auckland (near the Power Station music venue, and Galbraith’s pub)
Fortnightly, Wednesdays, 7 – 8:30 pm
Download a printable schedule here:  schedule

About the book:
Anti-Oedipus, published in French in 1972 and English in 1982, is the first of two books Deleuze and Guattari wrote under the subtitle Capitalism and Schizoprenia. Described as a radical philosophical analysis of desire that shows how we can combat the compulsion to dominate ourselves and others, Anti-Oedipus has influenced many thinkers since its publication, in fields including litereary analysis, art, sociology and architecture.
An online version of the book can be found as a pdf here
http://1000littlehammers.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/anti-oedipus-fixed.pdf

About the reading group:
The reading group: is open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading and discussing specific sections each fortnight moving through the book. The group is facilitated by Melissa Laing [melissa at melissalaing.com] and Robin Paulson [robin at bumblepuppy.org] who will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

Schedule:
Session 1, 12th June
Preface (Michel Foucault)
1.1 Desiring-Production
1.2 The Body without Organs

Session 2, 26th June
1.3 The Subject and Enjoyment
1.4 A Materialist Psychiatry
1.5 The Machines

Session 3, 10th July
1.6 The Whole and Its Parts
2.1 The Imperialism of Oedipus
2.2 Three Tests of Freud

Session 4, 24th July
2.3 The Connective Synthesis of Production
2.4 The Disjunctive Synthesis of Recording
2.5 The Conjunctive Synthesis of Consumption-Consummation

Session 5, 7th August
2.6 A Recapitulation of the Three Syntheses
2.7 Social Repression and Psychic Repression
2.8 Neurosis and Psychosis

Session 6, 21st August
2.9 The Process
3.1 The Inscribing Socius
3.2 The Primitive Territorial Machine

Session 7, 4th September
3.3 The Problem of Oedipus
3.4 Psychoanalysis and Ethnology
3.5 Territorial Representation

Session 8, 18th September
3.6 The Barbarian Despotic Machine
3.7 Barbarian or Imperial Representation
3.8 The Urstaat

Session 9, 2nd October
3.9 The Civilized Capitalist Machine
3.10 Capitalist Representation
3.11 Oedipus at Last

Session 10, 16th October
4.1 The Social Field
4.2 The Molecular Unconscious
4.3 Psychoanalysis and Capitalism

Session 11, 30th October
4.4 The First Positive Task of Schizoanalysis
4.5 The Second Positive Task
Introduction (Mark Seem)

Alphabet City is a community art space in Eden Terrace, Auckland focused on the written word: letterpress printing, bookbinding, zines, printmaking, book arts and related forms. http://alphabetcity.org.nz/

¶ After Finitude An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency By Quentin Meillassoux

We’re starting our next reading group on Wednesday 16 July in RM’s lovely reading room on the first floor of 307 K’rd. To get to it you have to go around the back via Beresford St, down Samoa House Lane and up one flight of stairs. All the sessions will start at 6:30 pm and run for an hour and a half.

We will be reading After Finitude An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency by Quentin Meillassoux.

Meillassoux’s first book Après la finitude (2006) introduces an entirely new option into modern philosophy, different from Kant’s three alternatives of criticism, scepticism, and dogmatism. In the preface Alain Badiou writes “It is no exaggeration to say that Quentin Meillassoux has opened up a new path in the history of philosophy, understood here as the history of what it is to know … This remarkable “critique of critique” is introduced here without embellishment, cutting straight to the heart of the matter in a particularly clear and logical manner. It allows the destiny of thought to be the absolute once more.”

We will discuss the book over five fortnights as follows

Week 1, 16 July Ch 1. Ancestrality
Week 2, 30 July Ch 2. Metaphysics, Fideism, Speculation
Week 3, 13 August Ch 3. The Principle of Factuality (now happening at Rm)
Week 4, 27 August Ch 4. Hume’s Problem
Week 5, 10 September Ch 5. Ptolemy’s Revenge

Location: Rm, 1st floor, 307 K’Road, Newton, Auckland. Entry from Samoa House Lane

You can download a copy of the book here: http://ge.tt/8QoTHBL/v/0

¶ Cosmopolitics I, Isabelle Stengers

The first reading group of 2016 will focus on the initial three volumes of Isabelle Stenger’s Cosmopolitics which were published in English in 2010.

Cosmopolitics explores the role and authority of science in modern societies and the ways it defines and claims objectivity, rationality, and truth. It neither accepts nor dismisses the claims of either philosophy or science rather it works to “renew our definition of what it is ‘to belong’ or ’to pertain’ to the world by diving deep into the sciences in order to extract their hidden cosmopolitcs” (Bruno Latour).

Isabelle Stengers, Cosmopolitics I, trans Robert Bononno, 2010

The reading group takes place fortnightly on either Wednesday or Thursday (day to be confirmed soon) night 6 – 7:30 pm starting in Albert Park and moving indoors as the weather cools, commencing on February 17/18.

February 17/18: Session 1
Book I. The Science Wars ch 1 – 3
Location: Albert Park Band Rotunda

March 2/3: Session 2
Book I. The Science Wars ch 4 – 6
Location: TBC

March 16: Session 3
Book II The Invention of Mechanics: Power and Reason ch 7 – 9
Location: TBC

March 30: Session 4
Book II The Invention of Mechanics: Power and Reason ch 10 – 14
Location: TBC

April 13: Session 5
Book III Thermodynamics: The Crisis of Physical Reality ch 14 – 17
Location: TBC

April 27: Session 6
Book III Thermodynamics: The Crisis of Physical Reality Ch 18 – 20
Location: TBC

You can find a pdf of the book on Monoskop Log http://monoskop.org/log/?p=6740
You can read reviews of the book here: http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=401 and here: http://www.radicalphilosophy.com/reviews/individual-reviews/history-flows-through-some-problems

About the reading group:
The reading group: is open to anyone who wishes to participate and we encourage you to forward this invitation to your networks. We will be reading and discussing specific sections each fortnight moving through the book. The group is facilitated by Melissa Laing [melissa at melissalaing.com] who will be learning alongside and with everyone who participates.

¶ Everything’s Fucked: But the Point is to Go Beyond That (2017)