The NUS President’s mea culpa today that he and his careerist cronies have been “spineless” in their approach to students taking direct action is a simple bid to grab back his status as leader and curb activity into more “constructive” (read: ineffective) avenues.
Apt name, Porter. From the start of the student struggles he’s been carrying the sputtering flame of “reasonable” dissent on his shoulders. Nice neat rallies, fun for all the family and of about as much use as a Stop The War march in stopping the government from doing what it wants.
His role has been totally overturned and he himself utterly ignored since he misjudged the mood of the mass in deriding the Millbank occupiers on November 10th, sparking a picture of his smiling mug going viral online with the word “despicable” underneath — a refence to his snivelling media appearance. Since then his “vote out the Lib Dems” (in 2015) campaign has fallen flat on its face while he and the NUS have been left behind by the spontaneity and speed of events.
For Porter, this is a major problem. Part of the role of NUS president is to funnel student dissent into safe channels and wherever possible, into a vote for the Labour Party they are seeking to get a future job from. So today he’s had a go at getting back in the driving seat, telling occupiers at University College London that:
For too long the NUS has perhaps been too cautious and too spineless about being committed to supporting student activism. If I’m going to be critical of myself, perhaps I spent too long over the last few days doing the same.
Good start there Aaron, go on...
I want to be clear and unambiguous right now — where there is non-violent student action, the NUS should and the NUS will support that because what we are facing is utterly disgraceful.
Ah, see that does raise a couple of questions. What do you regard as “non-violent?” Would that exclude, for example, people putting a few windows through at a party headquarters? Spray-painting “pig” on a cop-car perhaps?
One of the big bugbears of the liberal press in the last few weeks has been precisely along these lines, attempting to drag the meaning of the word “violent” away from “hurting people” to “damaging property” and restricting its legitimacy to the less overtly brutal of police beatings. If I’m pushing (non-violently) against a kettle and then get smacked in the face by an overenthusiastic PC Bob, am I allowed to act in self-defence in your eyes Aaron? Or is that too radical?
The word liberal is key here, because that is what Porter is hoping to represent to the powers that be, nice liberal protests under his more sanitised banner. His language has shifted to the left and towards the word “action” (he’s still not big on the “direct” bit), but he remains the stooge of the Labour Party - itself a body long bereft of its spine.
The worst thing that could happen to the student protests now would be if people fell back into the habit of letting this mendacious little creep act as their spokesperson. Only by continuing to ignore his gabbling and taking the power to - and responsibility for - changing things will this wave continue to roll and drown our government.
Edit: Ah the Guardian has now picked up on this (haha beatcha :P) and oh look, doesn't he just fall over himself to delineate between "good" and "bad" protesters?
I stand by calling acts of violence 'despicable'. I think it is and I think it does undermine our cause. I'm much more interested in talking about the majority of students who came out to make a serious and important point and they did so in a tremendous way.
Comments
nice, couldnt agree more. we
nice, couldnt agree more.
we need to drop banners saying 'Aaron Porter Resign'.
Quote: This is a verbatim
interesting how these things go, innit?
We need to drop the pretence
We need to drop the pretence that the NUS has anything to offer students at this time. Dropping banners calling for Aaron Porter to resign is sowing illusions in the NUS and diverting energies into bureaucratic channels of impotent complacency. The NUS are now desperately trying to re-establish their stranglehold over the movement and to demobolise its militancy into ineffectual 'protest'.
The only demand to make of
The only demand to make of Porter is to FOAD.
Good post Jason- I agree.
He also 'clarified' at a
He also 'clarified' at a meeting yesterday that he did not oppose any 'peaceful' occupation of Millbank :-)
Should be read in tandem with
Should be read in tandem with this article on the NCACF. Basically, sort this stuff out direct and don't let any self-appointed smartass "do it for you."
Quote: Part of the role of
Oh look, he's going for a safe seat and is likely to win. Talk about a shallow pool of talent, Labour's is looking more like a puddle...
that artical wrote: Leader of
that artical
what! "leader of protests", "spearheaded" wow
"Provided that it’s followed
"Provided that it’s followed up with uh, uh, another day of action, and, and then uh, you know, in the run up, to the, to the vote"
Wants to become an MP - people need to be making this clear, preferably students-to-students and I think that will be a pretty big nail in his coffin. I cannot find a single person who likes any MP now.
Rob Ray wrote: Quote: Part
Rob Ray
nah, even though it's a safe labour seat he's not got a chance of selection as he's running against ed milliband's best mate. plus, he's absolute box office poison at the minute. he'll be out in the political equivalent of siberia for a couple of years yet (think tank probably).
in fact he's already back pedaled quite furiously and is claiming on his twitter he didn't want to stand anyway after all so ner. he really is comically bad at this.