Yep, let's do a John Howard and roll back society. But first let's not revise history: I was a student in 1972, I did attend protests but, despite what others might like to remember over a bottle of 1968 Barossa Cabernet most protesters weren't students. There was general community involvement in these issues.

I'm sorry to see the demise of student unions, they offered lots of worthwhile services that will probably be taken up by the private sector but let's not get over romantic about them. They may have fostered lots of politicians but also many worthwhile politicians weren't Union presidents etc. There's also the question as to whether university elites do make worthwhile national leaders.

Lots of time was spent lying on the grass (or smoking it) but not too much was spent in "discussing, analysing and planning for change". For me the alternate idea of gym classes or volunteerism doesn't seem such a bad concept, but then again my views were probably formed in the 70's.

The whole tennant of your article is inward looking and is best summed up in this: "How can you expect business students from Hong Kong to be genuinely affected by Australian troop deployment in Afghanistan?" The answer is: they are people of the world. Are you, or are you just annoyed that your career as a student politician has been stymied?

“When asked to describe UQ’s atmosphere in the early 70s, his response is swift. “It was frantic. If you weren’t drinking or partying, you were shouting each other down in wild ideological debate or attending political rallies.”

Thus we had the worst batch of boofheads ever to come out of universities. The same boofheads, including Negus, are still out there, whining and white-anting anything that doesn’t fit with their warped view of the world.

The double standards of these people are amazing. They don’t wish to comply with many of the compulsory behaviours and rules that keep society together when the rules don’t suit their beliefs; but touch their sacred compulsory unionism – which many of their fellows object to – and, my oh my; the carry-on!

The idea of taxpayer-funded eduction at any level is not to have students playing at politics while they are still wet behind the ears. It is to qualify people for jobs, and to hopefully produce a few who will be of some use to society.

“The loss of the student voice represents a loss for society. In Negus’ view”. No, Nicholas. The sharp reduction in student ratbaggery has been a gain for society. Fortunately, the students you interviewed seem to have more sense than you do. And they probably don’t have to go to a has-been hack like Negus for advice

Yeah, but Peter, you had that choice. In times gone by, students had the luxury of getting involved.
These days, Ausstudy isn't enough to life off, pluse with HECS you face a hell of a financial hangover after university.

Past generations had the luxury of attending university and being financially secure without working a job or two. Those same generations have largely been the decision makers who decided this generation wouldn't have that same opportunity.

Universities are still a hotbed of student activism; of that there can be no doubt. You need look no further than Kylie Moon.

The death of student unionism is symptomatic of Australia's lurch to the right. The mantra now is "I'm all right Jack and stuff the rest". Plus students are too busy working to pay off their HECS debt. Australian apathy will continue to increase and politicians will be able to get away with murder, literally.

The question is, where will our future politicians come from, and what will they have ever seriously thought about before they get to parliament.

We'll end up with more unimaginative, uncreative, backward looking, reactionary politicians, just like Howard. God help us.

In the early 70s conscription would have been a real motivator. Once you finish uni you (or your mates or brothers) may get drafted. As good a reason as any to get your voice heard I imagine.

I studied in the 80s and that issue was far from our minds. Politics was confined to the arts faculty and the only thing that rallied every institute to its feet were Dawkin's threats of administration fees.