Letter from Northern Ireland: our non-movement and what it means
First, a bit of background, and a bit of a caveat. I’m the current deputy president of the NUS’s Northern Ireland wing. Second, I was recently defeated in its leadership elections. Plenty will think of what I write here as a case of sour grapes. I disagree, but it’s important to put that out there.
If you’re reading this, I assume you have an interest in averting total environmental catastrophe, and probably an intertwined interest in moving towards a more just, more equal, more free society. To confound the immensely powerful, deeply entrenched elites who thwart our aims and deceive our populations, we will need to construct genuine movements. Movements capable of authentic, lasting, tangible impact. Movements of millions. Movements vying not simply for a stake in a debate, but a hand on the levers of real power in our world. As far as I can see, no movement remotely resembling this vision exists, or will exist soon, in the UK. We greens and lefties need to break the habit of reflexive movement vanity if these necessary phenomena are to ever arise from the ranks of ordinary citizens. We need to reject student vanguardism as an organising philosophy. We need to stop kidding ourselves that small clusters of motivated, often paid individuals and activists equal ‘movements’.
To take an example, the March for the Alternative was an impressive spectacle, but has not been translated into recurrent political action. In this sense, it was emblematic of the enthusiasm, wit and humanity in the unions and campaign groups, but was also a stark illustration of their distance from authentic, wide-ranging political impact. The myriad occupations, marches and speeches arising from the Coalition’s education cuts and fees increases have, likewise, made for impressive spectacles.
These various actions have, however, had no significant impact beyond isolated, peripheral issues (the forest sell-off, for example). The plummeting fortunes of the Lansley NHS bill owe more to genuine internal Liberal Democrat opposition, vociferous opposition from entrenched professional elites and Lansley’s intense dislikeability as any UKUncut or union action. We can’t be remotely satisfied with the groups and tactics we have: where they work, they do not go far enough. Where they don’t…well, they don’t.
Now, to Northern Ireland. We’ve had some traction in our opposition to fees increases. We have serious, positive commitments from 3 of the 4 largest parties, and no overt talk of a fees rise from any elected member of our Assembly. We face large, troubling cuts to our FE and HE systems, but the department they belong to in our devolved government enjoyed a relatively small percentage cut in current spending. On the whole, in the context of the past year, these are successes. But they are not the result of a ‘movement’. They are the result of that ugly word, ‘lobbying’, carried out by a small group of paid individuals, periodically complemented by highly planned, tightly orchestrated acts of political theatre.
Our national union (NUS-USI) brands itself as “the student movement in Northern Ireland” but can’t find takers for half its executive officer positions. Further education colleges, comprising the majority of our membership, provide almost literally no impact in our campaigns. In the universities (only two), we have some very able, very talented elected officers. Unfortunately, they are in the minority.
The majority are entirely a-political. Unfortunately, this includes many who are smart and capable. A majority are liabilities if exposed to the press. The pervading approach is myopic and amateurish, and dependent on the graft, research and patience of those who are politically motivated and willing to cover for their colleagues for the sake of the cause.
Outside official union structures, no autonomous, authentic ‘movement’ exists. The Northern Ireland Student Assembly, a loose collection of school students and activists, achieved a single, incoherent, disastrous action in central Belfast in December, before withering away to a motley residue of SWP and Socialist Party usual suspects. Including its still-involved school recruits, it numbers no more than 25. I admire the passion of these activists, but this, even in combination with the unions, does not resemble a ‘movement’.
The high point of our work this year was a march in central Belfast. While crowd estimates vary wildly, we got, at a maximum, 3000 people. There are 220,000 students in Northern Ireland, and we had the backing and partial involvement of Unite, NIPSA (our PCS equivalent) and the UCU. Within easy walking distance, at Queen’s University Belfast alone, there are over 20,000 students. Given months of planning and work, 3000 is…unspectacular. This was an essentially hollow political gesture capable only of complementing months of tightly-researched harassment of largely vapid local politicians. We had to essentially beg friends, not just students, to take an interest in their lives, in their society. Given the obvious unfairness of the fees rise, and the insanity of education cuts, this continued bedrock of almost total apathy is disturbing. We got a little of what we wanted, but we did not get it as a movement.
To get what we want, we need to be much less baselessly optimistic in how we’re pursuing progressive ends. We shouldn’t be afraid to confront the inadequacy of snail’s pace progress in UK progressive politics. This includes the cause of the Green Party.
We need to build mass movements. To build these, we could start by not cheapening the word, applying it to every little blossom of political action in the name of a good cause.
We need to socialise and politicise vast swathes of society who, right now, are behind all but the shallowest of tabloid tropes in their formal political understanding. We need to think very hard about how we can do this, and we need to think fast. The fate of the most vulnerable people on our planet, and in our own society depends on it.
Thanks for the response Lorcan. Yes, absolutley people need to get involved.
The problem is that different people want to get involved in different ways. Not everybody feels comfortable taking part in a protest or occupation, but they may still want to feel part of a wider movement and contribute towards the cause in other ways. I
think we also have to be realistic as to people’s available time and how these things fit around life’s other priorities, like work and family.
So, what are the options available to people who want to be involved, but who can’t or won’t be part of a public protest?
Surely the way to build a larger ‘movement’ of people, outside of the usual suspects, that can actually start influencing change, is to start by making it as accessible as possible for people from ‘all swathes of society’ to get involved in whatever way they can or feel comfortable to. Offer alternatives for involvement that can allow people to feel part of a movement. This way you are starting to build a critical mass of people, from which you can then perhaps start to encourage a greater level of involvement over time, which can actually make a difference.
I know its very easy for me to sit here and write this, but contributing my comments on this blog is one of the only ways I currently feel like I can be involved, given both what I feel comfortable doing, and what my time allows. I’d certainly be keen to get involved in other things too that are more accessible to my life’s schedule, and would perhaps add more value!
Cheers.
Adam, on the subject of apathy, I agree. I suppose I over-generalised, using ‘apathy’ as shorthand for the more nuanced description of that underlying problem you gave above.
Matt, I think if the values are a given, the only option is to get involved. We need to build mass movements capable of sweeping change, but equally, can’t sit back and only ponder the ideal course of action to the detriment of legitimate defensive acts…somehow doing both is the key, but doing neither would be the greater tragedy.
Manishta, thank you: as to the ‘how’, I don’t have an answer for that myself. Hopefully the piece will provoke a bit of thought on how we can get to a better…er…how.
I agree with Adam’s perspective on apathy and on the Lib Dems’ opposition to Lansley’s bill. Having read the above – I really like it but one thing that I think is not addressed is the how of creating a movement. And I think that is a massive challenge.
As someone still very much on the periphery of the green/progressive ‘movement’ who is looking in and trying to decide quite what he thinks about it all, I think your piece sums up things up extremely well and addresses my main concerns about getting more actively involved. It’s not the values that are the issue, they’re a given – it’s the things are done that doesn’t always sit quite right.
Although I also absolutley agree with Adam’s comment re: perceived apathy actually just being a lack of faith that the proposed actions will work.
Thanks for this Lorcan – in general, I agree. However, I don’t think apathy is the right word. Apathy implies that people don’t care about their communities, their friends or even themselves. I would argue that the problem isn’t apathy, it’s alienation – people don’t feel like they can have an impact on the decision. The reason they don’t come to protests is that they don’t think it will work. They don’t believe they can change anything. And so they don’t bother trying, and build for themselves a thick shell of cynicism that can appear as apathy.
And, in that context, I also disagree about the NHS. I agree that there was genuine Lib Dem opposition, but there has been genuine opposition from many Lib Dems to many of the proposals coming from the government. Seems to me that the reason they stalled on this one is because of the scale and intensity of opposition from the public – MPs who were against were emboldened by the genuine knowledge that they were risking losing their seats (thins makes arguing with whips much easier) and were to a certain extent educated in the extent to which they were risking ripping up an institution they held dear. So, I think in this case, the campaigning has had a huge impact.
However, I do agree that there is a big difference between organisations with a small number of staff managing to mobilise huge numbers to protect the most loved institution in the country, and a mass movement which can genuinely change the country.
Adam