V.U.W. Anarchist Association

Over 50 people were present at the inaugural meeting of the V.U.W. Anarchist Association held on Monday, July 31. The large attendance was gratifying to the enthusiasts who had initiated the move towards the formation of a group dedicated to the cause of anarchism and was probably the result of extensive and provocative propaganda.

Since anarchism implies freedom of the individual in society no officers were elected except a nominal president, empowered to sign the appropriate forms for affiliation purposes. The meeting was conducted on a "free" principle, without any chairman or order of speakers. We must admit too that as far as order went the meeting ran very well on these lines.

The Association believes in the ideal of a completely free society based on a principle of mutual aid which would be provoked by the responsibility of each individual.

To open the meeting, Mr Vinycomb, from the London Anarchist Group, addressed the meeting. Unfortunately whatever else Mr Vinycomb may be he is neither a very able nor provocative speaker. For this he may be excused but I as an introduction to the principles of anarchism his talk added very little.

However the limitations of the first speaker by no means restricted the discussion that followed. Despite the fact that there was no order of speakers and no chairman the ensuing debate was both orderly and reasonably free. Some levelled the criticism that founder member Dwyer had too much to say and too long to say it in, but I think that most of those who had points to raise got a reasonable hearing . . .

O'Regan: Contested the ideals outlined by anarchists Dwyer and Hawkins on the grounds that it made the presumption that man is inherently good. An invalid premise he claimed.

John Parkin: "Anarchism represents a threat to the working man. As such it shall get no support from the Socialists."

Dwyer, in another context: "Man it wise, would not surrender his liberty to the State."

Voice: "What would you do if you had Gall Stones? See a doctor?"

The anarchists present were then pressed to give their solution to particular problems that many thought would emerge.

Peter Blizard: "How would you get people to work down the mines if they did not have to through purely mercenary reasons?"

Most of these practical objections were not solved although in all fairness to the anarchists, they did not claim to be able to "blueprint the new society'" but were rather striving towards an ideal on which the eventual blueprint would have to be based. This process would have to take place through gradual education.

Voice: "what about the people who don't want to be anarchistically educated?"

Dwyer admitted that the possibility of violence could not be ruled out entirely. Hawkins however maintained that the process of education would be sufficient since its effects would be cumulative, and that man was purely a product of the environment in which he lived.

Floor Speaker: "Would you say that all racehorses are born equal? Are all horses born equal? If so, do they all win?"

Mr Gillion then attacked Mr Dwyer's proposition that the ideal of full production could be obtained by the abolition of expenditure on armaments. More than the mere transfer of capital wealth was needed to achieve this. More natural resources perhaps? Voice: "The rates of reproduction exceed those of production."

The meeting closed at 10 p. m and even those people who came through curiosity rather than faith had had most of their thirst for knowledge satified.

However cranky the ideas may sound to some the meeting was one of the most stimulating yet. There seems to be adequate support for the formation of what will obviously be an active group. It seems only a pity that Stud. Ass. should have seen fit to refuse affiliation. For although the association applied for no grant they did want affiliation so that they could take full part in the Varsity campus. Full privileges are not sufficient and the anarchists are sponsoring the move for a Special General Meeting at which the matter of affiliation will be raised. To them the refusal seems an outstanding example of the power motivated society against which they are revolting. (See elsewhere, Salient, regarding the S.G.M.)

Nuts to the Executive member who promised, verbally, enthusiastic support, but sold them down the road at Executive meeting.

—Exodus/C.B.