Jump to content

Talk:Federation of Conservative Students

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

£14,000

[edit]

What evidence does anyone have for the £14,000 figure? I was at that conference, and the only damage that any of us know about was two broken doors, one discharged fire extinguisher and a number of vomit-in-the-bed incidents The FCS Treasurer at the time told the delegates from Leeds University Union that he was required by the University to forfeit £1400 of the deposit to pay for damages - could this figure have been inflated? chrisboote 10:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually plenty of evidence, which is more authoritative than some Tory making unsubstantiated claims like you are.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.117.115 (talk • contribs)

First, sign in. Second, cite it. JASpencer 19:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've signed my question, but yes please, can someone cite a substantiation for that figure? Thanx chrisboote 10:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was actually responding to this comment by this user. Sorry for the confusion. JASpencer 21:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced slogans

[edit]

"Execute Arthur Scargill" and "Smash the NHS" removed as they really should have a source. Hilariously "Smash the NHS" was a slogan associated with the young dynamic Tory politician Alan B'Stard. JASpencer 22:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about 'Hang Nelson Mandela'? That was a slogan adopted by some FCS leaders and displayed on badges and posters. Nice people these FCS types.

Please sign yourself in next time. Hang Nelson Mandela is already in there, although there should be a citation.

Lloyd Beat

[edit]

'Lloyd Beat hanging himself'

'Married, dad-of-two Lloyd Beat, 36, hung himself after he was accused of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy. He left a suicide note to Scottish Tory leader David McLetchie. Beat contested Sir David Steel in his Borders constituency.'

That's what the Scottish Media Monitor has to say about it. Beat portrayed himself as a ladies' man, whilst all the while he might have been a paedo. Here's the link;

http://www.scottishmediamonitor.com/articles2.cfm?ID=73

if anyone wants to add it to the article.

I asked for a citation on Lloyd Beat being a leading FCS activist about two months ago, but nothing arrived. Leading would mean holding high office in the FCS. I'm now removing the following text:
Another former leading FCS activist{{fact}}, Lloyd Beat, committed suicide whilst being investigated for alleged paedophile offences.<ref name="beat">"Married, dad-of-two Lloyd Beat, 36, hung himself after he was accused of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy. He left a suicide note to Scottish Tory leader David McLetchie." [http://www.scottishmediamonitor.com/articles2.cfm?ID=73 Scottish Media Monitoring] from ScotsGay</ref>
Now removed.
JASpencer 19:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove that from the article text? It is cited.

He wasn't cited as a leading FCS activist. I've removed the text again until there's a citation for Lloyd beat as a "leading FCS activist". JASpencer 16:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and please sign yourself in. JASpencer 16:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed this again. The problem is not that Lloyd Beat killed himself, it's just not clear whether he was in the FCS. JASpencer 18:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yet again removed. If you want to restore it then please cite something that says that Lloyd Beat was influential in the FCS. If you can't cite it then please don't enter in the infomration. JASpencer 22:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think gives you the right to censor this article? Give me one good reason why I shouldn't report you as a vandal.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.122.108.189 (talk • contribs) .

Because there's no citation of him being a vice chairman of the Scottish FCS. Provide that and you're in the clear. JASpencer 21:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Authoritarian Faction

[edit]

This text was removed by User:Aaron Brenneman for being unsourced. I'm not criticising this but the role of the Authoritarian faction was still fairly important and should be expanded with sourced information:

There was an alleged but unproved crossover between the membership of the authoritarian faction and the membership of both the [[British National Party]] and the [[British National Front|National Front]]. These originated from the links between the authoritarian faction and the [[Monday Club]] and the short-lived membership of prominent authoritarian, [[Stuart Millson]], in the BNP. Others have argued that the 'authoritarian' faction was the only grouping in the FCS that had any such tendency and represented less than a third of the Federation.
The authoritarian faction was often seen as a kingmaker in FCS contests, sometimes siding with the wet faction while at other times propping up the libertarian faction. It was probably the weaker of the three main factions, although its influence tended to be enhanced by its "swing" status.
Former leaders of the authoritarian faction, who do not share the all-round Americophilia of the libertarians and now tend to be highly sceptical of both [[United States|American]] cultural influences on the UK and the policies of [[George W. Bush]] (especially the "[[war on terror]]" and occupation of [[Iraq]]), have tended to promote [[nationalist]] ideas in right-wing groupings such as the [[Conservative Democratic Alliance]] and the [[UK Freedom Party]]. They are also highly influential on [[Right Now!]] magazine.

JASpencer 08:53, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Sources

[edit]

Sunday Supplement on the Westminster Hour on the FCS: [1] JASpencer 21:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claims

[edit]

I've asked for quotes for the following:

  • At that conference many of the libertarian faction were elected officers.<ref>{{request quote}} Timothy Evans, ''Conservative Radicalism: A Sociology of Conservative Party Youth Structures and Libertarianism 1970-1992'' (Berghahn Books, 1996), p. 36.</ref>
  • Members had rampaged through the dormitories, knocking down doors with fire extinguishers and shouting "Kill the wets".<ref>{{request quote}} Andrew Hosken, ''Nothing Like a Dame: The Scandals of Shirley Porter'' (Granta Books, 2006), pp. 228-9.</ref>
  • Two members had a fight over a girl and her pet rabbit was gutted and nailed to a door.<ref>{{request quote}} Ibid.</ref>
  • There were also reports that a discussion of Thatcherism in a Berlin bar led to the assault of a German student.<ref>{{request quote}} Ibid.</ref>
  • After hearing of the media reports of these incidents, [[John Gummer]] immediately suspended the FCS's £30,000 annual grant.<ref>{{request quote}} Evans, p. 36.</ref>

I'll replace these with {{fact}} tags after a couple of days and then delete the text, again after a couple of days.

JASpencer 21:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Hosken claim on the conference has been removed as Tim Hames Radio 4 programme makes out that the claims were actually the "result of an astute spinning operation". JASpencer 21:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've also removed the citations on the remaining claims and replaced them with fact tags as above. We really need quotes here (I've probably got the Evans book buried somewhere, but I haven't got Hoskens). I really should go by WP:BLP rules but as there are no names mentioned I will wait for a few days before deleting the unreferenced claims. JASpencer 21:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BLP Removals.

[edit]

I've removed the following two sentences:

Two members had a fight over a girl and her pet rabbit was gutted and nailed to a door.{{fact}} There were also reports that a discussion of Thatcherism in a Berlin bar led to the assault of a German student.{{fact}}

As these presumably involve living people, even if not directly mentioned, it's probably best to take these out. They were both backed by this citation:

<ref>Andrew Hosken, ''Nothing Like a Dame: The Scandals of Shirley Porter'' (Granta Books, 2006), pp. 228-9.</ref>

I have no idea whether this is a reliable source or not (in fact as a previous Hosken quote was removed as it had been directly contradicted by a more reliable source, I have some doubts), but at the least we need a quote from the book to judge the nature of the allegations, which was requested on 14 August - almost two weeks ago.

JASpencer 08:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why BLP is relevant

[edit]

Although this is not a biographical article a lot of the information about the FCS does tend to be biographical. As WP:BLP says "These principles also apply to biographical material about living persons in other articles." That's why I'm going to reinsert the BLP template.

JASpencer 22:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

[edit]

I have no problem with the edits that have been made by the anonymous contributor, as long as they are sourced.

If there are any questions please put them here.

JASpencer 00:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm making a list of the information that came in from the three edits, if these can be sourced then they can be included:
  • In the late seventies the libertarians and authoritarians were together in a "Thatcherite" faction.
  • When controlling the FCS, the Moderates/left opposed Thatcher and systematically excluded the Right.
  • The FCS was allied to the Communists when under the Moderates
  • The right took control in 1980
  • Many of the left faction went to join the SDP
  • A Party faction arose which had no interest in ideology
  • A large part of the Authoritarian faction (the 210 group) tactically supported the left to stop a libertarian takeover
  • The left took back control for some time in 1983
  • The Authoritarians were insignificant after 1983
  • The Sound faction was not purely libertarian, and that this was an epiphet invented by their opponents
  • The wets called themselves "Conservative Student Unionists"
  • Thatcher sent a note of congratulations to a celebration dinner twenty years later
I don't have a problem with the information as such but it should be sourced. Especially in a grudge magnet like this article.
JASpencer 12:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the author of these amendments. Demanding that they should be sourced to citable references is too high a threshold because they are uncontroversial descriptive remarks that do not mention individuals. I am the source because I was an elected official of FCS through part of that time. Student leaflets, minutes etc are ephemera and to say that they must be found somewhere before uncontoversial empirical information can be reposited on Wikipedia would be massive disservice to learning. Please reinstate them. Without them the article was so glib it was considerably inaccurate.Cymro61

Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm sorry but WP:V is not really something that will bend on this. This is especially the case with the FCS page - as some people seem intent on defamation (see some of the edits above) - I'm certainly not including you on this.
Where are the particular cases of inaccuracy? We'll see if we can work on them.
JASpencer 11:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aberystwyth and BLP

[edit]

I'm going to leave the Aberystwyth allegations up for a couple of days because it does cite Private Eye. However I'd like to see a quote for this. Otherwise it should come down under WP:BLP. JASpencer 14:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The original piece in Private Eye, entitled Right Morons, states the following: "At UCW Aberystwyth in the late 1980's, FCS Students paraded around campus in Springbok jerseys (to show their support for apartheid in South Africa), which could be dismissed as the excesses of a bunch of morons just coming out of adolescence. However, when they racially abused a barman at the Students Union and went on the town to celebrate the anniversary of Hitler's rise to power, the vast majority of students then backed the idea of 'no platform for racists or fascists' and these morons were banned from using the student facilities". 217.38.66.40 15:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that. Which section of Private Eye was this in and what was the context of this? JASpencer 19:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not under any section as such, it's just a small piece of a few paragraphs next to Educashun News, Signal Failures and a piece on Northern Ireland. It's about some senior Tory adviser who was a member of FCS (not in Aberystwyth I don't think) who recently claimed that Student Unions in the 80s used 'No Platform for Racists and Fascists' as an excuse to ban anyone who wasn't left-wing from speaking at some universities, including members of the FCS. Private Eye are basically saying that these events are the actual reason why FCS members were banned from speaking and that there is no evidence of it happening outside of Aberystwyth. This Tory is also claiming that various controversies involving FCS, such as the 'Hang Nelson Mandela' t-shirts, may have been deliberately concocted by the FCS to provoke a reaction from left-wing students and that the members of FCS probably didn't really hold such extreme positions and were just trying to wind up leftists, a claim that Private Eye suggests is absurd. 217.38.66.40 16:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The student left in those days was so lacking in a sense of humour that they would routinely attack anything which distantly smelled of Conservatism. Indeed, they didn't need much provocation: ministers such as NI secretary Peter Brooke, and Defense sec Tom King would be routinely barracked, had eggs thrown at them, and denied to right to address student audiences on campus onder such "no platform" policy across the country. The definition of "a racist" in those days was anyone who would not support "postive discrimination" (aka quotas in favour of racial minorities). Of course, more high profile ministers chosen often to bait them; "Hang Mandela" posters, would also achieve the intended effect of wind-up, like a red rag to a bull, so it takes no imagination to see what effect wearing a Springbok shirt would have. Ohconfucius 08:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Amazingly enough, that is almost word for word the claims of the aforementioned ex-FCS member in Private Eye, right down to accusing left-wing students of having no sense of humour. Private Eye states that these claims are total nonsense designed to whitewash the FCS and to be fair, the claim that members of the FCS printed out thousands of 'Hang Mandela' posters purely for the purposes of winding-up left-wing students is rather absurd. I have seen some of these posters and flyers about Mandela, Nicaragua, South Africa, etc., and they strike me as being very serious in nature, sometimes featuring rather lengthy arguments as to why Nelson Mandela was a dangerous subversive and the apartheid government of South Africa was one of our most cherished allies in the fight for freedom and liberty and so on. I see no reason to believe the extraordinary claim that this was all a somewhat expensive joke, bearing in mind that sections of the main Tory Party held precisely these views on all these issues, and probably still do. Is it really that surprising that some members of the FCS would hold these views too? Hardly. It's rather like trying to argue that Labour Party youth groups never contained any Communists and their members only prentended to be Marxists in order to wind-up young Tories. Whether wearing Springbok jerseys and holding parties in honour of Hitler was intended as a bizarre joke I have no idea (though racially abusing bar staff at the union bar clearly wasn't a joke), but the claim that none of this literature or these posters were serious and that FCS never actually contained any racists or extreme right-wing loons who held these views is ridiculous, and rightly ridiculed by Private Eye, who incidentally have asked for hard evidence that any speakers were unfairly blocked from speaking and are claiming that the only people who were blocked had all made plausibly racist statements or held the aformentioned views, so if you have some evidence, then I suggest you provide them with some. Private Eye have published pieces further on the subject since, and in addition to suggesting that there is strong evidence that the FCS in Aberystwyth was infultrated by the NF, they are claiming that Aberystwyth FCS's swing to the right only occured in the early 1970's after a certain Neil Hamilton took over, previously it had been fairly moderate. Hamilton was leader of both the University's Student Union and it's branch of the FCS, and he opened his campaign for Union leadership dressed as Hitler and accompained on stage by two heavies dressed as S.S. officers. After election, he changed the masthead of the Student Union newsletter to a mock-Third Reich typeface. While all this was seen understandably as a joke, the FCS later paid for Hamilton to spend several days in Italy attending a meeting of the Italian Fascist Party, as the FCS's 'official representative'. Maybe the FCS sending Hamilton to spend a couple of days in the company of Mussolini sympathisers and Holocaust deniers was all an expensive and highly elaborate joke designed to wind up a few leftists, eh? In any case, by the time of Hamilton's departure, other students and present and former members of that branch of the FCS itself were complaining that under Hamilton their organisation had changed from a moderate Conservative youth group into a extremist right-wing, fascist sympathising clique with moderate Tories leaving in disgust and being replaced with thugs who openly proclaimed their support for the NF. Perhaps some of this might be worthy of mention in the article. 217.38.66.40 22:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Hoile

[edit]

Why does David Hoile redirect to this page? He was a member of the FCS from what I can gather but this is no reason for him not to have his own page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianiii (talk • contribs) 14:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Federation of Conservative Students. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Federation_of_Conservative_Students&oldid=1212581006"