> Why not just join the Royal Statistical Society.  If we remove all
> mention of anything radical or progressive form our aims then all we
> are left with is an apolitical methodological critique of official
> statistics.  The RSS can do this itself.  In what way do you think
> Radical Statistics should differ from the RSS or do you think
> we should
> merge?


This question is really interesting.    It looked for a number of years as
if Radstats had taken over from the RSS its original interest in statistics
as facts about society.   But that oversimplifies.

For one thing the RSS is changing.  Denise Lievesley, current RSS President
(and former Director of the Data Archive), and the RSS Official Statistics
Committee have been pressing the RSS to revive its interest in statistics as
facts about society.  There does not seems to be any opposition to this idea
- only a bit of inertia.   (BTW the President elect is Peter Green at
Bristol University.  You guys down at Bristol should not miss opportunities
to stimulate his interest in statistics as facts about society.)

The real difference is between what is seen as facts about society.   The
RSS is very influenced by both the academic training of statisticians and by
the GSS.   Academic statisticians and professional statisticians have great
difficulty in understanding the idea of social or organizational
construction of statistics.  This concept is not part of the syllabus.   The
RSS will always have great difficulty therefore in distinguishing between
facts about society and official statistics.

For Radstats and the social sciences that distinction is crucial.  Official
statistics are largely facts about government, as was pointed out in the
Demystifying book and that by Ruth Levitas and more implicitly in many
different Radstats writings. Radstats and the social  sciences must always
be concerned about the extent to which official statistics give misleading
pictures of society, Radstats and  the social sciences should be concerned
with adaptions of official statistics to give a better picture, and with the
construction of alternative statistics that give a better picture.

Again the RSS and professional statisticians are not really interested in
the uses made of statistics.   The professional orientation is one of
serving a client or being a consultant.   There is little political
awareness.   The alliance between statisticians and the eugenicists provides
and important historical example.  Claus Moser seems to be the only head of
the GSS who had a strong interest in policy matters, and, if I read his 1980
Presidential address right, he recognised that his influence on policies
depended upon his personal qualities, not upon the statistics he produced.

So the whole area of uses of statistics - such as the use of performance
indicators and the uses of statistics for the allocation of resources - fall
within the ambit of Radstats, but are hardly likely to stimulate more than
technical interest by the RSS.

Ray Thomas, Social Sciences, Open University
Tel: 01908 679081 Fax 01908 550401
Email: [log in to unmask]
35 Passmore, Milton Keynes MK6 3DY

******************************************************
Please think before you press the 'Reply' button!   Note that if you press
the 'Reply' button your message will go the individual who posted this message
not to the list.  With many mailers you will have a 'Reply-to-All' button that
will send automatically to the list address of <[log in to unmask]>.  The
Radstats list is set up for public discussion so please be generous with your
thoughts and share them us all.
*******************************************************