+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? (/showthread.php?tid=2076)
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - Beer Beast - 27th November 2005
The editor of the digger is a Marxist/Trotskyite member of the SWP and as such represents a tiny section of the archarchaeological comunity. Should this political extemist be replaced as the voice of British archaeological community in favour of somebody who represents a more mainstream opinion?
check out the October letters page of the Digger, should the advocation of the burning down of institutional buildings be allowed or should this lunatic be removed from the editorship of a national archaeological journal?
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - kevin wooldridge - 27th November 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Beer Beast
The editor of the digger is a Marxist/Trotskyite member of the SWP and as such represents a tiny section of the archarchaeological comunity. Should this political extemist be replaced as the voice of British archaeological community in favour of somebody who represents a more mainstream opinion?
No...Personally I am very proud to have friends who are members of IS/SWP. Has Beer Beast been seeing a tad too much of Carol Thatcher on IACGMOOH?
I like the idea though that the editor of the Digger might be non representative of the 'arch-archaeological' community. I'd like to volunteer to be in the arch-archaeological community. Go on,let me join....please....Any chance of anyone setting up a SWP archaeological group, 'Red Trowel'.
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - voice of reason - 27th November 2005
no sign of The Digger issue 38 in relevant section of BAJR - 'latest edition' section just leads to the July edition.
Any chance it will posted soon so we cam all sign up for the Revolution?
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - BAJR Host - 27th November 2005
Bugger... I have uploaded to the wrong directory.... get back Monday evening! it will be there.
to quote the letter though...
I'LL CARRY ON WHINGEING
So your correspondent doesn't like the
whingeing. Ahh, bless. Well, there's a lot to
whinge about in archaeology - bad
practice, sh*t pay, poor working
conditions, snobbery, elitism and
downright corruption.
We could have some cartoons in the
newsletter and yes, I like the 'artifact of the
month' idea. What would you suggest?
How about the director#146;s head on a stick,
or a photo of Oxford Archaeology
buildings going up in smoke - I#146;d like that.
Having spent 4 years at college, getting
skint, now owing for my course and still
taking home less than UKP300 a week, I think
I#146;ve got every right to whinge. As for
middle class sh*ts who stroll through their
degrees, amble through their MA's and
then swan into supervisor jobs just because
units are terrified of employing people who
may have 20 years experience (better than
most directors, in my opinion), they too
make me want to whinge.
Did I mention sexism, racism (how many
black, Asian or other ethnic groups do you
see working on digs, let alone in post-ex or
office jobs?), I get a little tired of being
told I've a chip on my shoulder.
There is no investigation at any meaningful
level of crap units, nor is there any real
discussion of the real issues underlying the
decline of development archaeology, which
is becoming an adjunct to the planning
process and is being subsumed by the glow
of technology and 'market forces'. That's
why the Bath unit is closing down -
underbid by bigger units.
I see no hope in UK archaeology - pay will
continue to drop in real terms, conditions
haven#146;t got better in the time I've been
working and the big units continue to drive
down wages and standards.
So, I'll carry on whingeing, if that's all right
with you.
Another day another WSI?
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - kevin wooldridge - 27th November 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Beer Beastsince when does the advocation of burning down of institutional buildings constitute a valid poicy?
My comments were directed towards your suggestion that the editor of the Digger be removed for their possible political affiliation and not the content of a published letter. I am personally appalled by the suggestion that a gang of ruthless archaeological decapitators might behead a unit manager [u]just</u> in the hope of getting a photo in the Digger. However, I somehow doubt that it would happen.
BTW Beer Beast, I wasn't in anyway suggesting that you were a Thatcherite. My point about young Carol was directed toward the reality of the media rather than media-induced reality. I am sure that the Blessed Bed-peer would be one of the first nowadays to disassociate herself from some of her mother's extremes.
PS. During my short career with OA, I was never allowed to play with the matches!!
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - kevin wooldridge - 27th November 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Beer Beast Kevin, your inferential slur was clear. (My italics).
In that case I have no hesitation in apologising. Sorry.
I still think however that your original mail targetted the messenger and not the message. (The point I was trying to put over in a heavy handed, clumsy manner).
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - BAJR Host - 27th November 2005
Quite appauled that off list people think that BAJR is populated by anarchist idiots. It feel it is populated by all spectrums, from anarchists, swp, labour, lib dems and even conservatives. It works tirelessly across the board to ensure that pay increases and is standardised, that the IFA codes of conduct are adhered to and that archaeology moves forward. Not bad for just one bloke backed up by a host of others.
If asked.... do you think a site director should be decapitated I would say NO. If I thought that the letter was a call to burn down OA.. I would be outraged. However I am willing to believe that the person is making a point rather than asking for these actions. It does bring in the concept of incitement.... Does it incite? I would guess from your position in OA that it does, and that is a valid point. What I would also ask is ... why? Why would someone write that? why would someone feel so aggreived? Without this letter you would not be able to know that someone (perhaps many) feel that way.?
Without also looking into this it would be difficult to counter it. If you feel that OA is a paragon of virtue, that the hatred that some feel for it is misplaced and misguided then it is better to explain the positive.... OA is a very large organisation, and often communication will fail (take the latest advert) - this could lead to resentment or misplaced judgements... or they too could be valid. But without looking at what might be wrong in OA (or any other large org for that matter) then how can it grow?
BAJR can't be told what to hold on the webpages... I may not agree with much of it but I will let 99% of it go to allow proper debate and counter arguement... only then can the heart of the matter be found and understood.
I have spent long days, thinking about this letter... I personally think the letter is an angry rant.. and would have been better as a reasonable missive... but it wasn't.... so my question, which may see some answers here. Why did the person feel they should write such a letter? Why single out OA (or was it just an example)
And to those that think that BAJR is full of anarchist idiots... is that better than armchair mumblers? Speak up, come forward and say why... do not skulk and mutter in private, how else will you put your point of view forward?
As a point of order BAJR = one bloke and his 82 year old mum!
BAJR forum = 369 people - I could take as much offence at being called an anarchist idiot, but nope.... I openly invite to find out why?
Views welcome.....
Another day another WSI?
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - Real Job - 27th November 2005
Crikey!
I had no idea that it was now illegal to be a Marxist... Or that it was cause for concern that a mercifully free-thinking archaeological scandal-sheet should publish letters containing humerous hyperbole.
Is there some sort of personal gripe going on here?
Oh, and letters to the digger are traditionally anonymous.
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - the invisible man - 27th November 2005
The letter is drivel IMHO, likely to do more harm than good. But I would defend to the death the right of the writer to write it.
We owe the dead nothing but the truth.
DIGGER, voice for good or SWP polemic? - Beardstroker - 27th November 2005
Presumably the Digger editor would take the view usually expressed in most magazines and newspapers with letter's pages, that the views expressed on them are not necessarily those of the management/ editor?
As for the letter itself, it's basically just a rant. The paragraph about OA is presumably just sarcasm and hardly a exhortation to incendiary action by a rampaging mob of diggers.