Communists argue against sectional politics – but the attacks on the organisational structrues for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people within the NUS must be resisted. By Nigel Davis

The formation of gay liberation movements during the 1970s reflected a rising level of radicalised anger among marginalised LGBT minorities, influenced most clearly by the 1969 Stonewall Riot in New York. This followed a raid on a gay drinking establishment in Greenwich Village, as punters turned their attention to the invading police force and met the routine harassment with resistance. The Stonewall Riot would influence the formation of gay liberation movements within both America and the United Kingdom.

Despite the eventual deradicalisation of the gay liberation movement, under the pressure of conflicting internal differences, its influence remained. Its legacy is expressed within NUS, albeit in a partial form, in gay and lesbian officers and reserved seats. As the NUS document Liberation officers in every union notes, while there existed no “formal national campaign” during the movement’s height, by 1971 the “first explicit policy on lesbian and gay liberation was passed by annual conference” and by the mid-1990s a specific LGB campaign had been formed.¹

A degree of representation of minority groups has previously been ensured by utilising organisational structures for this purpose; regular LGBT conferences are meant to “democratically set the policy that gives the political direction to the campaign”, alongside the election of LGBT officers.²

However, the overwhelming majority of students do not even know that this – and other ‘liberation campaigns’ – actually exist within NUS. The limited scope and visions they express are hardly inspiring. Further mismanagement of these campaigns is assured by a situation in which so-called ‘independents’ have been able to secure election as LGBT officers.

The organised left is doing little to challenge the apolitical and narrow basis of these campaigns. No wonder that not even LGBT students are getting involved in the increasingly sectional, individualistic and apolitical politics pursued.

Still, communists oppose the attacks on these campaigns included in the so-called governance review of the NUS leadership. Proposals include attempts to split the existing NUS national executive into a “board” and a “senate”, in which the senate will include representatives of each liberation campaign. In contrast to that, the ‘non-political’ board will meet a limited number of times a year and be comprised, in part, of external appointees. The board has been created to oversee “legal policies”, the “strategic planning framework”, the wages of senior management, development of budgets and estimates, scrutiny of financial performance and of senior management and appointments”.³ According to the plans in the review, no liberation officer is ensured a place on the board that will scrutinise their work.

Communists oppose these attacks just like we oppose any other attacks on democracy. And, of course, we also defend the right of marginalised sections to organise autonomously. However, we would prefer these issues to be thoroughly discussed throughout NUS as a whole rather than sectioning them off to ‘special interest’ conferences.

After all, unless heterosexuals take up and fight for LGBT rights, there is a danger that they will remain not much more than empty phrases, even if NUS conference votes for them. The same goes for women’s rights – unless men get involved in the fight, for example, for free abortion on demand, it is unlikely that the campaign for it will become powerful enough to make a real difference. Most important of all, such movements must be viewed as part of the fight for universal human liberation, which only the working class can lead.

Notes

1. http://tinyurl.com/3yuwx5

2. Ibid.

3. www.free-education.org.uk