Where is SUPA going?

proaches, that .

By Alf Stenberg ©

RADICALS ON CAMPUS

\ YEAR AGO, at a conference in Regina, the
Combined Universities Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament was transformed into the Stu-

dent Union for Peace Action.

SUPA was to be a more militant, action-orien-
tated peace organization than its. predecessor. In
large measure this has been achieved.

_. SUPA initiated and participated in demonstra-

tions around the war in Vietnam. SUPA members

“were involved in organizing the University of

Toronto Teach-In last fall. SUPA produced a
Series of community organizing projects among
Indians in Northern Saskatchewan, in the slum
area of Kingston and among the Negroes of Nova
Scotia. It gained recognition as a dynamic, vocal
force in the Canadian youth community.

Despite its notable achievements, however,
SUPA also developed a number of ideas and ap-
require examination.

tm SAT vows

A note “of

SUPA introduces inaccuracies since there is a
wide variety of viewpoints in SUPA. Nevertheless

it is possible to pick out a number of trends.

SUPA members arrived early at the conclusion
hat many of the wrongs they see in society can
only be corrected by some fundamental changes
in the structure and operation of society.

The student radicals talk about “the Establish-

~ MInent”, The definition of this term remains, un-
fortunately, rather loose. In general it may be

déscribed as those organized structures which

try to maintain’ the present state of affairs in

Society. But the definition has been extended.
Many now see any organizational structure as
Serving this purpose.

Problems in society may be reduced to a simple

lack of democracy; any structure, in their view,
destroys democracy and limits the participation

_ Of people in decisions.

SUPA’s attitude toward an organized structure,
the identification of any structure with the main-
tenance of the status quo, led to a rejection of
any involvement in the recent election. Many
See Parliament as a sham of democracy and reject
Participation in it. :

On the one hand SUPA members recognize the
need for the development of a genuine democracy
1 which people have the power and authority to
control their own lives, and on the other hand
they reject the use of democratic freedoms that
have been won to extend democracy and bring
about genuine changes in society.

The “Establishment” maintains an elaborate
System of organization designed to preserve the
present order and position of the “power elite”,
which it serves. To produce an effective challenge
to this Establishment and {o win real changes
those seeking change must produce their own
Organizations.

The rejection of traditional organizational
forms is accompanied by a rejection of the tradi-~
tional means of conducting an organization. Par-
liamentary procedure is rejected in favor of the
“concensus”, by which everyone present is sup-

caution: any generalization about -

posed to arrive at agreement on a given question.

Many organizations and groups do attempt to
arrive at a concensus when possible; but in SUPA
this is elevated to a principle. It presupposes that
there are no differing points of view or conflicting
interests or objectives.

Where there are differences the attempt to use
the concensus method is. chaotic and even quite
destructive. It has not been unknown for SUPA
meetings to turn into talk fests.

With SUPA’s concern for democracy and in-
volvement of membership in decision making one
would expect the organization to be rather demo-
cratic. In: fact it is not.

Who chooses SUPA leadership? How may it
be changed? What control does the membership-
have over making and changing SUPA policy?

These are questions which have been raised _

and it seems there are no satisfactory answers.
Who is to bring about the social changes?

SUPA members have produced a theory of a
“youth class’. It is the young who have the most
concern for the future and they can be won as
a body for. progressive changes; such is the
theory. What constitutes the youth class? De-
pending on one’s age the cut-off varies from 25
to 30 to 35. Perhaps it should be all those who
drink Pepsi and think young?

. Among generations there is a natural division.

in the approach and style of thinking; but to
suggest that this difference is the fundamental
division in Canadian society only masks the real
problem.

The “New Left” finds it difficult to accept the
working class as the only real force that can
bring about fundamental social change.

The student radical looks on organized labor
in North America in despair. He sees the cor-
ruption and degeneration of the official union
leadership. He sees the economism and crass
materialism of the trade union movement as a
comfortable accommodation to the system he
abhors. He sees the complementary role many
union leaders play to U.S. government policy in
Vietnam and other countries.

The photographs on this page recall the mass _

student vigil before Parliament shortly after the CUCND
came into being. A year ago that student movement
became the Student Union for Peace Action.

Union leaders, especially in the U.S., extoll
Johnson’s war in Vietnam, Teamsters beat up
peace demonstrators in New York. The’ labor
“Establishment” is an integral part of the “Es-
tablishment” of Canada and the United States.

Is it any wonder that the student radicals tend
to reject the labor movement as a decisive or
leading force for social progress?

But there is no possibility of real social change
without the action of the working class. The weak-
nesses one sees in the working class must not
confuse this question. The real problem is that
of winning the working class for decisive changes
in society.

; * x *

ie THE STUDENT movement in French Canada
the situation is rather different. Student radi-
calism there is older and probably more mature.
It came into being around the French Canadian
demand for national fulfilment.

The prevailing philosophy among student lead-
ers is “student syndicalism”. The student is char-
acterized as a “young intellectual worker’. His

studies are his primary contribution to society— _

his work. His organization, his union, has the
responsibility to work for his best interest.

The student often sees himself as an intellectual |

worker and allies himself with the working class,
L’Union Generale des. Etudiants du Quebec
(UGEQ) has raised the demand for working-class
unity, deploring divisions among. workers..

It has projected an alliance of organized labor, —
the students and the farmers as a force capable
of bringing about the revolution Lesage has failed _

to deliver. :

Students in French Canada have demonstrated
support for labor by participating in mass pickets —

to support strikes being fought by various unions,

In the past few years these developments have

pushed English Canadian students in a progres-
sive direction. The demand for “universal acces-
sability” to higher education was stimulated by
similar demands in Quebec.

The concept: of student syndicalism has met

considerable resistance in English Canada, but —

has been the subject of much discussion. The

rejection of a class approach is. the major reason —

for this resistance. It is an obstacle that remains
to be overcome.

In recent months there has appeared to be a
certain decline in the strength and influence of
SUPA. It seems to be incapable of organizing an
adequate response to the continued escalation of
the war in Vietnam.

Serious SUPA members must look, at least in
part, within their own approaches and organiza- —

tion for the reason for this decline.

Student organizations seem to be continuing ©
their general shift in a progressive direction —

(although we must note the disquieting revival
of conservative and ultra-Right elements as well).
Certainly the need for a viable left-wing student
organization is all the greater. If SUPA cannot
meet that need other forms will have to emerge.

March 11, 1966—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 5

7

a
ot
aa