Louvain 2009 counter-conference shows both the possibilities and problems of the European student movement

Hundreds of students converged on the ULB university in Brussels, Belgium on 25 April 2009 to discuss coordinated European defence against fees, cuts and efforts to turn education into a commodity, but the event was not without it's problems. John from South London reports

Hundreds of students converged on the ULB university in Brussels, Belgium on 25 April 2009 to discuss coordinated European defence against fees, cuts and efforts to turn education into a commodity.

The conference was held as an alternative to the nearby Louvain 2009 conference, a meeting of politicians and big business discussing how to implement the ‘Bologna Process’ – a coordinated move by politicians and big business to turn education into a commodity, putting profit above education.

Arriving on Friday evening, students attending the counter-conference were greeted by a huge banner at the university gates condemning the Bologna process. A wind band dressed in pink played 70s pop classics in front of a beer tent, behind which was an even bigger banner proclaiming the building it rested on as ‘occupied’. Speaking to a few students outside, it appeared that there was something of a division over the occupation that had taken place. Some students felt the occupation was important to show student control during the Louvain meeting. Others however did not think it would go down well among students in the university.

Despite Belgium actually being a country of very militant workers struggles, it seems the student movement is very conservative. In the past, some students have used violence against occupiers to force their way into lessons, and despite the importance of the Louvain conference, few Belgian students were taking part in actions and planning against it.

On Saturday, the first day of the counter-summit, a small group got to the main lecture hall on time but the meeting was held up until a reasonable number had arrived. After some delay, a modest timetable for the conference was proposed, consisting of students from different countries explaining about their previous struggles – and where next. It was proposed that after this, workshops should be held on various different topics, which would be both educational, political and action focussed. After this we would report back with reports and proposals from the workshops.

Whoever proposed the timetable clearly tried to make it as uncontroversial as possible, but this failed disastrously and hours of debate ensued over timings, workshops and the rest of it. Some students began to get irate as it was clear no decision would be made. Most students, following the ‘consensus’ model were opposed to a decision being made by democratic vote and the conflict could not be resolved. The ‘straw that broke the camel’s back’ was when the conference was asked if some French student activists could film the proceedings for an activist documentary. This led to well over an hour’s further argument. Some started to leave the room, soon followed by many more. A translator left the platform stating that the room was not going to reach agreement. The students went back to the occupied space.

Eventually, we started on inspiring and interesting reports from the student movement across Europe albeit to a much dwindled audience. French students spoke about their impressive mass struggles, and the need to keep momentum going. An Italian speaker addressed the room with harrowing statistics on the poverty facing Italian students, living in accommodation unfit for human habitation. The British delegation spoke of cuts, fees but also how the Gaza occupations inspired the internationalism of students and had formed a base for struggling on other issues through the British student coordination. Danish speakers outlined the impressive grants given to students, and free education. Another said that this relatively privileged position of education in Denmark and been hard fought for and won by the working class. However this is being rolled back. The comrades had been involved in an occupation in Copenhagen university to keep education as a universal right for all students. Spanish students spoke of their only very recent success in coordinating locally, regionally and nationally to fight against the corporatisation of the Bologna process – a major step forward. After this, it was late and time to socialise back at the occupation.

During the night though, black block anarchists, probably infiltrated by police started smashing up vending machines in the corridor. Woken up in the early hours of the morning, we had an uncomfortable nights sleep in the doorway of some lecture theatres on a different campus.

The next day was packed full of different workshops on Bologna process issues. The British student delegation went to an in-depth educational workshop on the reasons for the implementation of the Bologna process. The workshop was excellent, with some clearly very well informed individuals contributing, including some lecturers who have done in-depth analysis into what the process is. Issues raised and discussed included the way that education is cut back to what is necessary for capitalism – learning to labour rather than learning for the sake of education and cultural development. Also discussed was the way that educational institutions are attempting to compete for the most intelligent or economically useful students on a world level. The Bologna process was designed to coordinate the major European economies in achieving this on a world scale. However, strangely absent from the discussions was relating the Bologna process to the economic crisis and how that might effect education. I made one of the very few interventions relating the issues which received mild agreement, but the lack of awareness of what this crisis of capitalism means for us did to some degree characterise the conference.

We also attended a workshop organised by the International Student Movement collective that recently held a successful ‘global week of action’ which saw occupations take place in Croatia and Copenhagen, countries which are not used to a high level of student struggle. This should be counted as a major success for the initiative. We decided to go for another, bigger global week of action in November and various website and translation facilities were also agreed upon.

After the workshops came the report-backs in a plenary session which started late. But disastrously the room was to close and lock automatically at 8pm. An argument yet again delayed proceedings further as some in the room did not wish to hear the workshop report-backs favouring discussion on direct action against the Louvain conference for the demonstrations on Monday. After hours more argument we were forced to vacate the room and attempted to start the discussions against later on in the occupied space. There was yet further argument and eventually the room split down the middle between those who wanted to plan the demonstration and those who wanted report-backs.

A section of those in the demonstration planning group then started causing havoc, embarking on a rampage of destruction through the occupied building, setting up barricades in case the police raided. These are classic ‘black block’ tactics – provoking the wrath of the state onto other activists who have priorities other than constantly fighting the police (like building an international student movement for example). Whilst this was happening we at least managed to decide upon some people to draft an alternative statement to the Bologna process, before having to vacate the building and once again sleep in a doorway.

Overall, the Louvain counter-conference showed us the similarities between the struggles currently going on all over Europe to protect our education. It showed that uniting and struggle together on these issues is possible and that there are many activists out there wanting to do just this. In addition everyone present learned a huge amount, and made friends and allies of student activists in many different countries. However, for the expense and time that goes into organising such an event this was an insufficient outcome.

The conference also showed real weaknesses in the international student movement. Hostility to political parties and organisations was dominant and obsession with ‘new’ forms of ‘organising by consensus’ reigned, and proved in the end, a disastrous failure when people couldn’t reach agreement. The conference could have got through twice as much with simply the election of a presidium, the agreed timing of different items and voting taken on issues where no consensus could be met.

Nonetheless, socialists should look at the potential of what took place and what could take place in the future. Coordinating student struggles across Europe is not just a nice idea but absolutely necessary to defeat the attacks of the European ruling class on our education. Everyone who agrees with this needs to work together to achieve it, but this will require acceptance of political differences, the freedom to debate ideas whilst maintaining unity in action.