'No Platform' Policy'

BhoscaCapall

Red_Wake wrote: »

Racism bad.

Sectarianism ok.

Neo nazis are both sectarian and racist, btw.

lol, are you implying the RIRA are sectarian? Do you think this does anything but show up your ignorance?

Reillyman

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

lol, are you implying the RIRA are sectarian? Do you think this does anything but show up your ignorance?

Are you implying that they didn't murder innocent people?

joeKel73

Red_Wake wrote: »

Racism bad.

Sectarianism ok.

The policy doesn't claim to deal with sectarian organisations...

The list of organisations under the No Platform Policy shall be reserved for organisations that are deemed to be fascist and/or racist by the Class Reps Council.

The policy doesn't deal with paedophiles, that doesn't mean the SU considers paedophilia to be ok. :rolleyes:

As bildo said several times, if you want the policy to be extended to cover the likes of the RIRA, contact himself or your class rep!

Reillyman

bildo wrote: »

If you would like to propose a policy that does this then contact your class rep or write one and submit it to me. Personally I would be very wary of reopening such a sensitive issue, the troubles in the north is something I think we all would like to consign to the past and try and move forward from in a constructive manner. Racism however is a very real and present threat, especially to young people and the disproportionate number of non-white people we have in NUIG compared to most of the rest of the country.

I won't propose any policies, I'll wait until next year when FEE are gone from the SU.

The threat from dissident republicans is 100 times more "real and present" than any of the listed groups. You said you don't want to "reopen such a sensitive issue" yet it's fine to bring up racism etc? Your just dodging having to condemn dissidents.

I also notice bildo, that you thanked a post by BoscaCappall that said

but I'd find it hard to take seriously any person who didn't at least appreciate the number of mysterious circumstances and events that led up to and followed the bomb.

The only positive a take from all this is as an earlier poster said, thank god ye're not in any form of government, the politics of the far-left will never prosper in Ireland thank god.

BhoscaCapall

Reillyman wrote: »

Are you implying that they didn't murder innocent people?

.... that literally has nothing to do with what I said. You're not very good at this discussion thing are you?

Reillyman wrote: »

I also notice bildo, that you thanked a post by BoscaCappall that said

The only positive a take from all this is as an earlier poster said, thank god ye're not in any form of government, the politics of the far-left will never prosper in Ireland thank god.

If taking all facts into account when forming an opinion is a "left-wing" ideal, it is little surprise you are full of criticism for it.

Reillyman

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

.... that literally has nothing to do with what I said. You're not very good at this discussion thing are you?


If taking all facts into account when forming an opinion is a "left-wing" ideal, it is little surprise you are full of criticism for it.

They were two separate points.

Tell me BoscaCapall, who do you think is a more real and present danger in Ireland today, the RIRA or the listed groups?

Red_Wake

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

lol, are you implying the RIRA are sectarian? Do you think this does anything but show up your ignorance?

HAve you any involvement in SF?

Raging_Ninja

Red_Wake wrote: »

HAve you any involvement in SF?

SF don't have much to do with RIRA. The better question is if he has anything to do with 32CSM.

BhoscaCapall

Reillyman wrote: »

They were two separate points.

Then make your point separately, not after quoting something I've said.

But to answer your question, I'm afraid I don't know enough about the 'murders' (inverted commas optional) attributed to the RIRA to say.

Reillyman wrote: »

Tell me BoscaCapall, who do you think is a more real and present danger in Ireland today, the RIRA or the listed groups?

As with most economic downturn, racism and fascist ideology is on the rise, so yes I do think many of these groups pose a more significant danger to students in Galway than a dissident Republican paramilitary group carrying out sporadic attacks in the North.

Red_Wake wrote: »

HAve you any involvement in SF?

I have a few of their biros from Socs Day, but none of them seem to do what they promised me they would. Funny that.

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

SF don't have much to do with RIRA. The better question is if he has anything to do with 32CSM.

I once bought a copy of their Saoirse publication. Maybe I should have spent the money on a pizza delivery

Reillyman

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

But to answer your question, I'm afraid I don't know enough about the 'murders' (inverted commas optional) attributed to the RIRA to say.

You should do some research so.

Maybe start with this page. http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/omagh/dead.html

BhoscaCapall

Reillyman wrote: »

You should do some research so.

Maybe start with this page. http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/omagh/dead.html

Oh you're still talking about that. Embarrassing. This 'discussion' clearly isn't going anywhere. You know you're not exactly making a good case for why the University should give people like yourself a platform.

Reillyman

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

Oh you're still talking about that. Embarrassing. This 'discussion' clearly isn't going anywhere. You know you're not exactly making a good case for why the University should give people like yourself a platform.

How is it embarrassing? Where have I asked that the University give me a platform?

Robmeister2011

Howdy Folks,

Just thought I'd let you know that we are now down to our last 20 signatures.

These signatures will be handed to the General Manager of the Students Union on the 2nd of February so that this referendum will coincide with the Full Time Elections and other referenda, should there be any.

Of course my friend and I will be staying out of the debate and the campaigns, we just wanted to make sure that the Students' Union knows who controls it. This has been accomplished and so our work is done.

Thank you to all who signed and thank you once again to anyone that actually came with us collecting the signatures.

Our total collecting time was 4 and a half hours and only 3 of the 480 students we've met thus far had heard of the policy.

We feel that justice has been done and we wish those who would campaign for the retention of the policy the best of luck in their campaign.

As we've stated, we're not against it, we're against the Executives decision to take the easy route, despite the objections.

It's YOUR Students' Union, paid for by YOU.

Skopzz

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

As with most economic downturn, racism and fascist ideology is on the rise

I hope you can back that up because that is patently FALSE.

Skopzz

Robmeister2011 wrote: »

Howdy Folks,

Just thought I'd let you know that we are now down to our last 20 signatures.

These signatures will be handed to the General Manager of the Students Union on the 2nd of February so that this referendum will coincide with the Full Time Elections and other referenda, should there be any.

Of course my friend and I will be staying out of the debate and the campaigns, we just wanted to make sure that the Students' Union knows who controls it. This has been accomplished and so our work is done.

Thank you to all who signed and thank you once again to anyone that actually came with us collecting the signatures.

Our total collecting time was 4 and a half hours and only 3 of the 480 students we've met thus far had heard of the policy.

We feel that justice has been done and we wish those who would campaign for the retention of the policy the best of luck in their campaign.

As we've stated, we're not against it, we're against the Executives decision to take the easy route, despite the objections.

It's YOUR Students' Union, paid for by YOU.

Shouldn't you be more concerned about your studies or is NUIG so laxed that it's giving students the time to engage in this militant leftism.

TBH, I support the right for any organization to be given the chance to visit NUIG.

One more note: I hope those signatures aren't made public because no American company will hire you if they see you're signnature under this subversive anarchism.

I know someone who did this before and they cannot secure a job with an employer. They deeply regret putting their signature on this 'no platform' stuff.

Reillyman

Skopzz wrote: »

One more note: I hope those signatures aren't made public because no American company will hire you if they see you're signnature under this subversive anarchism.

I know someone who did this before and they cannot secure a job with an employer. They deeply regret putting their signature on this 'no platform' stuff.

So "American Companies" would frown upon people putting their name on a petition to establish fair democratic procedures?

Red_Wake

Skopzz wrote: »

Shouldn't you be more concerned about your studies or is NUIG so laxed that it's giving students the time to engage in this militant leftism.

TBH, I support the right for any organization to be given the chance to visit NUIG.

One more note: I hope those signatures aren't made public because no American company will hire you if they see you're signnature under this subversive anarchism.

I know someone who did this before and they cannot secure a job with an employer. They deeply regret putting their signature on this 'no platform' stuff.

Hardly.

Holding their elected officials to account would be more accurate.

Skopzz

Reillyman wrote: »

So "American Companies" would frown upon people putting their name on a petition to establish fair democratic procedures?

Since this thread draws the most amount of posts, I think the SU would let some of the bad apples just die before caving-in to the anti-democratic bolsheviks. You appear to fit in with that camp.

If an employer sees your name under this, I would pull the trigger. It's not too late for people to remove their signatures from this petition. Can you imagine the ramifications of your College getting a hold of this info or potential employers?

Skopzz

Red_Wake wrote: »

Hardly.

Holding their elected officials to account would be more accurate.

I would like to know how many of the long term unemployed are being hampered by a previous event that got them into trouble and therefore unable to secure a job because of it... Anyone who gets involved in leftist protests against visitors to NUIG is making a BIG mistake.

Being unemployed long term is a terrible, terrible place to be.

Robmeister2011

Skopzz wrote: »

Shouldn't you be more concerned about your studies or is NUIG so laxed that it's giving students the time to engage in this militant leftism.

TBH, I support the right for any organization to be given the chance to visit NUIG.

One more note: I hope those signatures aren't made public because no American company will hire you if they see you're signnature under this subversive anarchism.

I know someone who did this before and they cannot secure a job with an employer. They deeply regret putting their signature on this 'no platform' stuff.

I don't normally post on here because this kind of thing happens, but I have to ask, what on earth are you talking about? I'm in no way affiliated with any left wing organisations, nor am I considered left wing in any way.

The Policy was passed, we called a referendum on it. The other option was to just accept it. This in no way reinforces nor condemns the policy. I really think you've gone off half cocked there.

Won't be posting again, because I'm not getting into this, its total bull screaming through computer screens.

Edit: The signatures will not be made public, obviously. That's completely unnecessary. You've really got me stumped buddy.

Ficheall

Skopzz wrote: »

Can you imagine the ramifications of your College getting a hold of this info or potential employers?

I can indeed!
No one would give a toss.

Lockstep

To clarify, Robmeister is not a member of any subversive group.

Personally, I really doubt any employers would care. And that's if the list was made public.

RolandIRL

Skopzz wrote: »

I hope you can back that up because that is patently FALSE.

1923 - Beer Hall Putsch failed
1929 - Great Depression
1933 - Hitler's rise to power (and we all know what he stood for)

Hmmm...certainly no co-relation there

Skopzz wrote: »

Shouldn't you be more concerned about your studies or is NUIG so laxed that it's giving students the time to engage in this militant leftism.

TBH, I support the right for any organization to be given the chance to visit NUIG.

One more note: I hope those signatures aren't made public because no American company will hire you if they see you're signnature under this subversive anarchism.

I know someone who did this before and they cannot secure a job with an employer. They deeply regret putting their signature on this 'no platform' stuff.

Anarchism is defined as
"1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
2. Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority"

Well you can certainly see the students going round the college inciting terror in people and wanting to abolish the government, can't you? They're in no way following democratic processes like petitions and peaceful protests to oppose this policy or the government, am i right?

Skopzz wrote: »

Since this thread draws the most amount of posts, I think the SU would let some of the bad apples just die before caving-in to the anti-democratic bolsheviks. You appear to fit in with that camp.

If an employer sees your name under this, I would pull the trigger. It's not too late for people to remove their signatures from this petition. Can you imagine the ramifications of your College getting a hold of this info or potential employers?

Opposing the Student's Union (that's a very right-wing fascist organisation, innit?) through a democratic process is certainly a bolshevik thing to do, isn't it?


***Disclaimer: The above contains excessive levels of sarcasm. If in doubt, consult your doctor.***

Skopzz, just in case you haven't read it, the charter says the following:

Flaming
Lower your vitriol. It gives you wrinkles. Personal attacks, general abuse and flaming/trolling will be met with consequences...report any posts you think a moderator needs to look at. Don't respond in-thread.

I'd take heed of it. The NUIG forum doesn't exist for you to have a go at students and the college in general. Think about that next time you post here. Wouldn't want ya to be getting crow's feet now, would we?

Ficheall wrote: »

I can indeed!
No one would give a toss.

Oh Ficheall, you stole the words right out of my mouth. Though tbh, I couldn't give a toss right now.

Raging_Ninja

Skopzz is exaggerating. Employers probably wouldn't care about who signed a petition about revisiting a ban on who people are or are not allowed to talk to on campus.

What they might care about on the other hand is stirring up mobs against political figures. I'm thinking about what happened when Bertie Ahern was invited to speak at a Lit & Deb event which had to be cancelled. People can be vindictive.

Bootstraps

Skopzz wrote: »

Since this thread draws the most amount of posts, I think the SU would let some of the bad apples just die before caving-in to the anti-democratic bolsheviks. You appear to fit in with that camp.

If an employer sees your name under this, I would pull the trigger. It's not too late for people to remove their signatures from this petition. Can you imagine the ramifications of your College getting a hold of this info or potential employers?

Signing the petition says nothing about your opinion on the issue it merely says you would like a chance to vote on the issue.
Signing says literally nothing about your feelings on the motion apart from the desire to have your say as opposed to having it brought in pure sneaky.
I highly doubt a company is going to use a desire for democratic process as a reason for "pulling the trigger" if they even cared about it in the first place.

I just hope I'm never interviewed by you!!!!

Oh and as a point of interest, only the general manage can see the signatures for the referendum. I'm not even sure the president would be allowed to see them, though I'm not one hundred percent sure.

I think you are scaremongering a wee bit in fairness.

Quinntan

Skopzz wrote: »

Since this thread draws the most amount of posts, I think the SU would let some of the bad apples just die before caving-in to the anti-democratic bolsheviks. You appear to fit in with that camp.

If an employer sees your name under this, I would pull the trigger. It's not too late for people to remove their signatures from this petition. Can you imagine the ramifications of your College getting a hold of this info or potential employers?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, probably am as I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't that be covered under the data protection act?

Secondly, why would an employer, apart from yourself of course, particularily care if someone signed a petition in college? It just seems bizzare that it would be more important than whether the potential employee is actually suitable for the job in question.

Hegemonic Overlord

Hello, I've been reading this thread...and it is pretty interesting.

Just to get it out there, so please ignore my post if knowing this next piece of information inclines you to do so, I was (and still am) a part of the group of people in NUIG who have an old liking for left-wing politics. I work there now so it's interesting to see this whole employer/blocking TDs debate...I was part of the Free Education for Everyone branch at the time who blocked Bertie....and I haven't been out of work for 7 years...doesn't do much for me putting myself in the shoes of those on the dole, but I do because being on the left (duh duh duh!) requires you to have a heart and to have empathy. Speaking of the 3 elected SU members who were also involved in FEE, only one of them could be described as marxist, while the other 2 are lefty-liberals...a nice bunch of lads.

On the actual policy. The SU, once you strip away all the fancy things it does, is a Union. When Nick Griffin was invited to Trinity to speak...SIPTU and other Unions opposed his invitation. The NUIG SU is simply being mandated to do the same. Now, as for all the bureaucratic nonsense surrounding this policy and its implementation....I really don't know. It's scary to think that people are arguing on this thread about whether NUIG SU should support fascists speaking in NUIG, when fees have gone up by another €250...when our parents are cutting the cost of the weekly shopping everyday (well mine are)...and when there really are no jobs available. However, I just realised something...and I wished I realised it last years...and the 2 years before that. What I've realised is that the people arguing on this thread represent in no way the majority of students in NUIG. Be that those who are being labelled far-left (excuse me ifI laugh) and those who are denizens of the right.

Since moving from being a student at NUIG to a worker (said in a thick Dublin accent), I have realised that a lot of the stuff I cared about as a student doesn't really cross the mind of a lot of students. It's not that they don't care, far from it...it's more that they are either uninformed, misinformed or lacking the confidence to express their real view. As an activist in FEE, I have realised that the majority of students know little about the campaign group and if they do its "oh they do activism...grand". Thank God (as a firm believer in God, I feel it necessary to mention him from time to time), FEE has grown from strength to strength in the past year largely due to a more representative membership...and a more improved relationship with the SU. FEE doesn't run the SU, it works alongside it and often within it...but mostly without it.

Something has struck me...why am I talking about FEE in a no platform thread??? A sizeable minority of activists in FEE oppose the policy...they argue that whole freedom of speech thing....liberals, pah!

Anyway, back to the policy. It is true that other organisations should be on it. However to be a fascist, one has to be against women, homosexuals, black people, muslims, half-breeds (me ) etc....and I don't know of any "far-left" groups that do that....because then they wouldn't be left-wing...but anyway....

As for how the signatures have been collected, I'm going to say straight out that its just point scoring in the SU between people who have fallen out on previous issues. I'd name names, but I won't. It's silly guys...it's taking our efforts away from fighting fees, defending the grant and stopping the commercialisation of education.

Please in future, if you perceive something as "left-wing" and it something being advocated by the "far-left" in the SU...don't immediately associate it with FEE. We don't really give an Enda Kenny about what the SU is pushing through its councils....unless its related to education, grants, fees etc. That's just reminded me...SU Council, tomorrow at 6pm on the funding of higher education...BE THERE...I will...and I'll wave at you...

So yeah, I'm fully behind the no platform policy, wasn't at the Council that adopted it so can't really comment on that, but yeah, unfortunately "political" point-scoring has pushed it to a referendum (one wonders about how people were asked to sign for it to go to a referendum....shut up Joe)....so I will be campaigning for it to stay.

Please guys, be aware of the de-politicisation of the student body, the scaremongering around left-wing politics (we're young people, we're hardly Stalinists...we just want to change things...sure I've never even read a book by marx, lenin or trotsky...I just thought it as natural to be a socialist)....and realise that what is important is fighting for free education.

FREE EDUCATION...NOTHING LESS

Carlos Orange

bildo wrote: »

BTW you do realise I am English yeah?

I didn't. Should it matter?

BhoscaCapall

psinno wrote: »

I didn't. Should it matter?

When other people are implying that Republican groups are sectarian, and mention them in the same breath as overtly racist organisations, a British person telling you they disagree is a noted opinion.

Reillyman

Hegemonic Overlord wrote: »

I've never even read a book by marx, lenin or trotsky...I just thought it as natural to be a socialist).

Not really, Capitalism would in my opinion be most natural, survival of the fittest, evolution etc.