anti-intellectualism and the potentials of students

While this is true, it's also true of those who receive dole money or pensions, disability benefit etc.

~J.

Where I'm from that's not the case at all, most students live on a combination of government loans and part-time work.

Yeah I think that's what most posters on here would be familiar with.

To be honest i hardly think it matters anyways. I had student loans and part time jobs at uni, but my folks would always help me out when i needed it. Thats what families tend to do, i mean my gran never owned her own place and my grandad was long term unemployed before he died, but she still helped my dad out with his mortgage even when he was in his 30's,
Devrims analysis is pretty much a joke anyway, its just some embarassingly awful excuse for marxism cobbled together with some bollocks he inherited from class war. .

Yeah pretty spot on, it's pretty normal for families to help each other out, even when they had next to nothing.

I think university is a point where class lines really begin to get drawn, between those who work part-time jobs and those who don't, those with secure employment prospects when they finish and those without and so on... Being a student doesn't make you working class but I think its a time when many people are forced to decide which side of the fence they're on... if they have that luxury of course.

well theres that, and the fact that if you stick 10,000 young people with access to education in a small area theres usually a good chance you get a fair bit of radicalism.
The more the better i think
http://www.essex68.org.uk/2.htm (good photo that)
http://www.essex68.org.uk/may68-e.html

I don't think it has anything in common with what Class War said about students. I see really that there are only three possible positions to take on this question.

1) That students belong to a particular class by virtue of being students.
2) That students class status is dependent on something other than their being students.
3) That students have some sort of 'declassé' status.

I think that the first one is plainly absurd. Students obviously come from different classes, which makes me incline towards the second.

Some students come from the working class and some from the upper class, which is essentially what I argued.

But just because most posters on here are from the UK doesn't mean that it is any more valid than my example, which I think if you looked at the world as a whole would be the prevalent condition.

Devrim

I actually know both kinds here in Israel, neither is uncommon, though whenever there's a students` strike, the media is full of people whinging about those "lazy whiny students".

To me, this looks like flaming...

Flaming left communists is allowed on Libcom.

Devrim

Actually,

I've found it's possible to get generally respectful behavior on Libcom if you ask for it.

I don't mind rough or curt comments but it "crosses the line" when someone just piles insults together for their retort.

Libcom seems to have become a pretty good resource lately and I hope it stays that way.

The problem Devrim is that your trying to frame the of question as if class its heredity, which seems to run quite counter to your initial assertion that your class is determined by your relationship to the means of production. Where I'm from its almost impossible to survive as a student without a part-time job, and from what I understand many other parts of the world are similar. Whether or not students come from working, middle or upper class families isn't really relevant. If they're working I don't see how they could be classified as anything other than workers and if they're not working then chances are they're dirt poor.

Very few actually receive substantial assistance from their parents, even wealthy ones (in my experience). The situation may well be different where your from, so for this reason the way we classify students will have to vary depending on place and context. I'm just pointing out that in many places students are workers, not simply in spite of the fact that they're students but because its extremely difficult to survive nowadays as a student.

Olly

This is a somewhat facile arguement. The ''upper'' class generally makes up a small percentage of society. Given that at least 40-50% of people do some form of higher education in the UK, the vast majority of students would logically be from proletarian backgrounds.
So the majority of students work part time or full time whilst at uni, and most will be from lower-middle/upper working class backgrounds (ie proletarian), so whats the point in pointing out that a small minority don;t work or happen to be from posher backgrounds. It'd be like pointing out that some teachers might have well off partners and don;t really need to work, its just reducing class analysis to the pointless sociological maze of individual classification, much like class war would do in fact.

.

I think that the main point is that a struggle in the "student" field of play will work to benefit that tiny minority of non-proletarian students, just like a struggle in the national field of play will benefit the tiny minority of non-proletarian citizens. This has nothing to do with sociological classification of individuals and everything to do with the need for a class analysis of what goes on in the universities, rather than talking about the "student".

I agree with Devrim

being a student clearly doesn't define your class status

thats as silly as saying being a school child makes you working class because you own no capital

and students are definetly on average from higher class backgrounds than the rest of society Im surprised people are denying this

even where this is just a split between wage workers (although it isnt just this), Students without doubt come from more prieledged backgrounds (on average). Although its not very important in revolutionary terms we shouldn't act as if they are no differences within the proletariat in terms of wealth and priveledge

Im sure a lot depends on the Uni though in terms of class compostion

I don't think anyone's saying students are workers simply by virtue of their being students. At least that's not what I'm saying.

I don't think anyone's saying students are workers simply by virtue of their being students. At least that's not what I'm saying.

Yes, it is a small minority, but not an insignificant one. I think that the figure was that 14% of university students in the UK went to public schools, which is double the number of those who attend public schools in the general population. I don't think that saying students are working class as students really explains anything.

You are right about the 'pointless sociological maze of individual classification', which I agree has nothing to add to the subject. I am not interested in classifying this or that individual.

Devrim

Again, basic maths tell us that this is exactly what you'd expect if almost all private school kids go to uni, and almst half the general population does

The university is a place where many workers gather however, I mean despite having degrees many graduates go on to carry on the kind of wage-labour which really requires no qualification (a friend of mine works with many such people in a call center). In fact I suspect many people only go to university in order to avoid full-time wage-labour for a few years, to be frank that's part of the reason I'm there.

Also the reality today is that organizing struggle in the workplace just isn't possible for many people. For example the restaurant I work in is extremely close nit, the boss holds enormous personal sway, his sister works there too and together they have defacto control over the entire workplace. I mean if I tried to organize a struggle for wage rises (we're all on minimum wage, including a guy who's been working there 2 years now) it would almost certainly just result in me being ostracized socially and given far less shifts (shifts I desperately need). How, then, should students who are workers try and organize against exploitation? It just seems that bringing class struggle to the university would be a very practical decision for many workers who are/or have been studying. I admit this is rather vague though, I just bring it up because many students are in the same boat as me and as such some possibility does seem to exist.

University is a place of contradictions though, many students will go on to become future class rulers. So talking of student struggles or students as a class is a bit pointless if we don't put that in context with the wider class struggle.

Olly

p.s. this is not in response to anyone in particular, just something I've been mulling over and felt I should share.

About 90% of graduates I know have done significant time in callcentres/mindless admin/shop work that required no education beyond basic schooling.

my worst nightmare is basically being stuck with exactly such a job for the rest of my life after years and years of specialized academic training.

Just go with the flow... I'm already getting used to it

Well, humanities students aren't alone...

Given the permutations of global capitalism, it seems no skill guarantees professional success at this point. In my "profession", computer programming, the number of jobs available has actually been shrinking in the US for a number of years. There's a serious lawyer surplus. Dentists are a dime-a-dozen, Carpenters, architects and construction specialties were killed by the end of the housing boom etc.,

America's bloated health care industries seem to be the main source touted as offer hope for well-paid jobs today. But even this bubble will burst at some point and that point might be soon. And the health racketeers who are driving this "boom" naturally aim to de-skill and disenfranchise as many lowly workers as possible to maintain the growth of their monopoly profits.

Almost makes you want to become a Marxist or something ... hey wait...

You guys are so depressing.

Yes you said this before, and I didn't get what you were saying then apart from the maths being wrong anyway.

If 7% of the population take 14% of the places. That means that 93% of the population is left with 86% of the places. Then you have to minus the 13% of foreign students (as discussed on page 2), which leaves 73% of the places. Now if 50% of kids go to university and state school attenders make up 93% of the population, but only take up 73% of the university places that means that less than 40%, which is considerably different from 'almost half' of non-public school kids go to university. This of course doesn't mean working class children as there are lots of children of the petit-bourgeois who go to private schools, who we would expect to have more access to higher education. I would imagine the real figure is somewhere nearer to a third.

Anyway, it supports both of my points that students are not working class as a group, and that many working class people perceive universities as 'elite' institutions as they are much more likely to encounter people from other classes there than in the general population, let alone their social circles.

Devrim

Is it somehow worse for you than for those who don't have ' years and years of specialized academic training'?

Devrim