Hi All:
One suggestion is that, in addition to limiting the number of presenters, we restrict them to 10 minutes each. I have done this at
an academic conference and it works very well. It’s surprising how well people can express their main points when they have less time than usual. Anyone who has participated in or seen a Pecha Kucha (20 slides, 20 seconds each) can attest to the efficacy of
short presentations.
julie
From: 1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca
[mailto:1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca] On Behalf Of James Naylor
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 10:37 AM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Hi everyone,
I recognize Paul’s point about the size of the panel. My own thought is that, if we accept it, we simply tell them that it has to fit into a 105
minute slot and urge them to they reduce the number of speakers. We could suggest, for instance, that if she’s coming, Melanie Panitch moderate the disability session instead. That said, I would suggest putting it into the second morning slot on Thurs. or
Fri. This is the kind of panel that could provoke lots of talk and be hard to reign in. If it went over, it would go over into the lunch period, and it would be up to audience members whether to get up and leave.
I’m happy to go with a conference call. Since the program committee is meeting tomorrow, can we do it later today? At 5:00 or after dinner? I
realize that not everyone will be able to join it, but we will have as many voices as possible.
Jim
James Naylor
Professor
Department of History
Brandon University
270 18th Street
Brandon, MB R7A 6A9
Canada
Office: 204 727 9664
Cell: 204 720 2117
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca <1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca>
On Behalf Of Paul Moist
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 10:23 AM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Hi everyone.
I recognize that meeting again poses challenges especially for out of town folks. We might consider a one hour conference call for those able to participate
in order to fully discuss matters that go far beyond the program sub-committee.
First, I assume everyone thinks there is merit in the proposal? I certainly do, and have not seen anyone in opposition to it.
Having said this there are practical issues. Counting the proposed panel chair, there are 10 people in total, this is more than problematic in terms of time.
If we had a chance to talk we might agree that this needn’t be a 10 person panel. We put our mind to many of the issues that this new panel plans to tackle.
For example, disability. We have a three person panel devoted to this, we likely could live without Melanie Panitch’s contribution to this new panel.
The new group is one year late in submitting its proposal. I think we should talk this through and agree to something but we needn’t agree to a 10 person panel
in an agenda that is jam packed already.
Straw polls and talking in this medium is not the way for our group to deal with this properly. I would like to see us agree to a 5 or 6 person panel and I would
like some discussion on how we fit even this size of panel in and where we put them.
Paul
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca [mailto:1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca]
On Behalf Of Julie Guard
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 10:03 AM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Hi All:
It might be possible to take a straw poll by email rather than meet again so soon after the last meeting. Jim M and I are setting aside time tomorrow to work
on revising the program again, and if we can find a way to fit in a large panel, that might be useful information upon which we can evaluate whether to accept a large and attractive but extremely late panel.
I suggest, however, that in the interest of not completing wearing out the program committee, we all agree that we will accept no more panels, however attractive.
When revising the panels – and fielding many emails about new proposals -- begins to take up many (research) hours every week, your program committee members start to wonder whether they can continue in that role or if they should hand the task over to someone
else. I am sure no one wants to take advantage of committee members’ willingness to serve by overloading them with work that is essentially invisible.
Best,
julie
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca
[mailto:1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca]
On Behalf Of James Naylor
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 3:12 PM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Hi all,
I agree with most of Paul’s sentiments: it is annoying when it came in, and it is a very good session. I’m strongly of the opinion that we should
not say no to it. It would be a huge draw.
But the issue now is whether we should meet to discuss it. If so, it should be this weekend. Perhaps people could weigh in on both issues: the
session, and whether we should meet.
Jim
James Naylor
Professor
Department of History
Brandon University
270 18th Street
Brandon, MB R7A 6A9
Canada
Office: 204 727 9664
Cell: 204 720 2117
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca
<1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca>
On Behalf Of Paul Moist
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 2:43 PM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Hi everyone.
I would like to suggest we meet to discuss this. I agree with others that it is an attractive proposal, the issues I would like a face to face discussion on
include:
1.
We set a deadline of February 2018. I recall being advised we had to do this in order to attract funding from various sources.
2.
I don’t know where Leo got that we are continuing to receive submissions for panels? We just published a jam-packed agenda and our call for proposals
of a year ago I am certain made it to him and others on his list.
3.
We have a practical problem that I don’t think should be decide by e-mail. We have a proposal for a 10 person panel which will need at least 90 to
120 minutes. At this juncture there is no space in our agenda, which is already pretty full.
4.
I propose we have a meeting and that we have a published agenda in advance.
Lastly, while this is an attractive proposal I expect it won’t be the last in terms of last minute suggestions. We need to discuss how we deal with these given
the commitments we have made to dozens of folks who took the time to apply by our deadline. Again, I like the content of the Panitch proposal but I think given the 2.5 years we have donated to pulling this conference together that we not just say ok and leave
the details to be worked out later.
Paul
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca
[mailto:1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca]
On Behalf Of Julie Guard
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 2:31 PM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Hi Paul:
I understand your confusion.
Our deadline of February 2018 was unusually early, and either Leo assumed we had made a mistake on the date or is pretending he thought that. As it happens, in
reality, we had no firm deadline. We continue to accept proposals as they arrive.
julie
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca
[mailto:1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca]
On Behalf Of Paul Moist
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 2:06 PM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee
Subject: Re: [1919-Conference] proposal for panel
Jim, is his comment correct that we have a February 2019 deadline for panel submissions? I thought the deadline was February 2018??
Paul
From:
1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca
[mailto:1919-conference-bounces@lists.umanitoba.ca]
On Behalf Of James Naylor
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 12:37 PM
To: 1919 conference organizing committee <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: [1919-Conference] FW: proposal for panel
Importance: High
From: Brandon University 1919strikeconference
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 12:34 PM
To: '1919 conference organizing committee' <1919-conference@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: FW: proposal for panel
Importance: High
Hi everyone,
Well, here’s something out of the blue!!!
It is, of course, annoying getting this now. But I do have to say, it’s attractive. Indeed, it’s the type of thing that I had hoped to solicit
from the beginning but didn’t know how. It would also be a very big draw for Winnipeggers. I await your comments. We should try to discuss this, as much as possible, on the listserv rather than wait until our Feb. 9 meeting to address it.
Jim
James Naylor
Professor
Department of History
Brandon University
270 18th Street
Brandon, MB R7A 6A9
Canada
Office: 204 727 9664
Cell: 204 720 2117
From: Leo Panitch <lvpanitch@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 10:39 PM
To: Brandon University 1919strikeconference <1919strikeconference@BrandonU.CA>
Cc: Meyer Brownstone <meyerb@look.ca>;
Greg Albo <albo@yorku.ca>; Lawrie Cherniack
<cherns@mts.net>; Cy Gonick <gonick@cc.umanitoba.ca>;
Sam Gindin <sam.gindin@gmail.com>;
Melanie Panitch <mpanitch@ryerson.ca>;
Jim Silver <j.silver@uwinnipeg.ca>;
gail singer <zingerfilm@sympatico.ca>;
Donald Swartz <Donald_Swartz@carleton.ca>;
lvp >> Leo Panitch <LVPanitch@gmail.com>
Subject: proposal for panel
Dear James Naylor,
A rather large group of us have consulted and would all very much like to come to the conference, for which are proposing the following panel. It would be in the format of a round
table with each participants addressing the theme outlined below with an opening 5 minute statement followed by discussion.
The Legacy
What was the legacy the 1919 strike in terms of the political culture it spawned for those who grew up in the following decades? Winnipegers and ex-Winnipegers who were born
and grew up there in diverse circumstances and different parts of the city from the 20 to 60s (some of whom still live there, some long since in exile) will discuss what propelled them - through their various experiences with the contradictory class, institutional
and cultural nature of that legacy (including not only that of the ILPers, CCFers, CPCers or the labour movement but also the specific ethnic and gendered dimensions of that political culture) - into doing the various kinds of work they subsequently engaged
in so as to try to build on but also get beyond those limits and contradictions.
Participants:
Greg Albo, political economist, York University, co-editor
The Socialist Register, co-author of In and Out of Crisis: The Financial meltdown and Left Alternatives
Meyer Brownstone, former Deputy Minister, Saskatchewan CCF/NDP governments, emeritus professor University of Toronto, Chair Emeritus Oxfam Canada
Lawrie Cherniak, former Winnipeg city councillor, lawyer, yiddish oral historian, author of
Rebel without a Pause
Cy Gonick, founder and editor of
Canadian Dimension, emeritus professor University of Manitoba, author of
Canada Since 1960: A People's History
Sam Gindin, former Research Director CAW, co-author of
The Making of Global Capitalism and The Socialist Challenge Today
Melanie Panitch, School of Disability Studies, Office of Social Innovation, Ryerson University, author,
Disability. Mothers and Organization: Accidental Activists
Jim Silver, Urban & Inner-City Studies, Merchants Hotel Campus, University of Winnipeg, co-author of Indians Wear Red: Colonialism,
Resistance and Aboriginal Street Gangs
Gail Singer, Filmmaker,
True Confections, first feature film on growing up in Winnipeg; documentary You Can't Beat a Woman on the culture of violence
screened PBS and CBC
Donald Swartz, emeritus professor Carleton University, co-founder Ottawa Committee for Labour Action, co-author of
From Consent to Coercion:The Assault on Trade Union Freedoms
Chair, Leo Panitch, emeritus professor York University, co-editor
The Socialist Register, author of Crisis of Working Class Politics and
Renewing Socialism
We hope you will be as excited about this as we are. We really appreciated the online deadline of early February for panel submissions which made it possible to take the time
to get a group like this on board. We see the panel's importance not only in terms of discussing the limited "diversity" of Anglo, Italian and Jewish communities in a radical political culture from which indigenous people were largely excluded or at least
marginalized, but also the contradictions of growing up with prominent labour leaders (e.g. Donald Swartz, the grandson of John Blumberg) as well as the contradictory experiences with disability and gender discrimination in the context of a working class,
trade union and socialist culture that could be positively built on yet also needed to be transcended.
Looking forward to hearing from you. I will be happy to take on the responsibility of making sure everyone gets registered in good time. Since you already have a draft program
up so much ahead of that deadline, I hope you will to be able to indicate, especially for those of us having to make flight arrangements, when this session would be slotted into the program.
Thanks so much for taking on the hard work of organizing this terrific conference.
Best regards,
Leo Panitch