827

THE NAB: EDITOR’S GUARDIAN SOULMATES, PERDITA BLINKHORN DOES TOUGH GUY

Beaver Issue 827 | 10.02.15

the

newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

News Features

LSESU CDF Baroness Royall Takes Place Interviewed Page 7 Page 32

SU Takes No Action Against Feminist and Palestine Societies After ‘Gender and Resistance’ Complaints Jon Allsop Executive Editor THE LSE STUDENTS’ UNION (LSESU) has issued a statement on last week’s ‘Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine’ event, detailing that it will not be taking action against either the LSESU Feminist Society or the LSESU Palestine Society, who jointly organised the event.

The event last Tuesday was subject to complaints after it was alleged that an external speaker “glorified terrorism” by praising acts of violence against Israeli soldiers as “amazing”, “admirable” and worthy of “a standing ovation”. A different external speaker was also the subject of a complaint, after saying that “rape for Israelis was almost a site of war against Palestinian women”.

The fact that the speakers were not LSE students seems to be the crux of the SU’s response, which reads that “although the societies were responsible for organising the event, the individual actions of the panel members at the event are not necessarily the responsibility of the societies”.

The statement continues that “the societies in responding to the event, have been clear that the speakers at the event do not speak on behalf of those societies”. After the complaints were lodged, the Feminist Society apologised ‘unequivocally’ and expressed that it was “truly regretful that we have caused offence”. The Palestine Society, meanwhile, said that “the LSESU Pal-

estine Society does not necessarily share the views held by the speaker”, but did “maintain that she is entitled to them and is free to express her analysis on the issue, whatever that may be”.

The statement, issued collectively by the LSESU’s Sabbatical Officers and based on a transcript of the event, states that the SU is “unable to establish” how the event breached the SU’s policy on anti-Semitism, which was passed after a Union General Meeting a few weeks ago.

There was some confusion about this point, however, after LSESU Jewish Society Presidents Millie Foster and Lianne Mizrachi claimed to The Beaver that they had never submitted a complaint about the event being anti-Semitic. They clarify in the statement below that the allegations of anti-Semitism were only made against remarks made by the chair of the event, LSE Academic Aitemad Muhanna-Matar, to The Beaver in the aftermath of the event. Foster and Mizrachi said: “Whilst we would like to thank the SU for their hard work in investigating the event, we would like to clarify and emphasise that the Jewish Society did not allege that the event itself was anti-Semitic, nor that it violated the anti-Semitism policy, and this was specifically expressed in our letter of complaint. The concern of antiSemitism was raised only in response to the remarks made by the LSE academic who chaired the event. Her equivocation of Palestinian suicide bombers with Jews

Mud runs thicker than water: LSESU Activities and Development Officer Alastair Continued page 9 Duncan participates in the annual RAG Tough Guy near Wolverhampton last weekend

PHOTO

Special page 18

Room 2.02, Saw Swee Hock Student Centre, LSE Students’ Union London WC2A 2AE

Beaver

the

the

Beaver

Executive Editor Jon Allsop

editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Managing Editor Alexander Fyfe

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Established in 1949 Issue No. 827- Tuesday 10 February 2015 - tinyurl.com/beaver827 Telephone: 0207 955 6705 Email: editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk Website: www.beaveronline.co.uk Twitter: @beaveronline

managing@thebeaveronline.co.uk

News Editor Megan Crockett Mahatir Pasha

news@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Comment Editors Ellen Wilkie

comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk

PartB Editors Jade Jackman Vikki Hui

partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The City Editor Mike Morissette

city@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Features Editors Liam Hill George Harrison

features@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The Nab Editor

nab@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Sport Editor Robin Park

sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Design Editor Liam Hill

design@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Online Editor Leen Aghabi

web@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Collective Chair Dorothy Wong

collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The Collective:

A Badwe, A Fraser, A Fyfe, A Howells, A Leung, A Lulache, A Qazilbash, A Santhanham, A Thomson, B Mehta, B Phillips, C Azizuddin, C Holden, C Hulm, C Morgan, C Naschert, D Hung, D Sippel, D Tighe, D Wong, E Wilkie, G Greenwood, G Harrison, G Kist, G Linford-Grayson, G MannersArmstrong, G Rosser, H Prabu, H Toms, I Mosselmans, J Allsop, J Evans, J Foster, J Grabiner, J Heeks, J Jackman, J Momodu, J Ruther, J Wacket, K Budd, K Kalaichelvan, K Owusu, K Parida, L Hill, L Schofield, L van der Linden, L Weigold, M Akram, M Banerjee-Palmer, M Brien, M Crockett, M Domenech Ensenat, M Jaganmohan, M Malik, M Morissette, M Neergheen, M Pasha, M Pearson, M Pennill, M Petrocheilos, M Rakus, M Rakus, M Warbis, N Buckley-Irvine, O Hill, P Amoroso, P Blinkhorn, R Ahlawat, R J Charnock, R Chouglay, R Chua, R Huq, R O’Rourke, R Park, R Serunjogi, R Siddique, R Soni, R Uddin, R Watt, S Ash, S Barnett, S Donszelmann, S Haynes, S Povey, S Richards, S Sebatindira, S Thandi, T Maksymiw, T Mushtaq, T Odayar, V Hui, Z Chan, Z Mahmod.

We have elections coming up, so we have updated the Collective. If you have been wrongly taken off the list, or you think your name should be on the list and is not, email collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk.

You need to have written just three times of the print edition of The Beaver to qualify.

Any opinions expressed herein are those of their respective authors and not necessarily those of the LSE Students’ Union or Beaver Editorial Staff.

The Beaver is issued under a Creative Commons license.

Attribution necessary.

Printed at Mortons Printing

Jon Allsop on the ‘Gender and Resistance’ report, a great UGM, and stepping down

2

Executive Editor Election We are electing a new executive editor this week to replace Jon Allsop, who will formally step down after the week 6 edition of the paper. Hustings will take place Tuesday February 10 at 6pm in 32L.B.09. Voting will then be open to members of the collective for 24 hours, until 8pm on Wednesday February 11.

From the Executive Editor I PROMISED MYSELF AFTER last week’s edition that 40 pages was a one-off, but we have so much content again that we have produced our second successive bumper Beaver.

This has certainly been one of the busiest weeks for news at LSE that I can remember in a long while. On Friday night, the report into the complaints relating to the ‘Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine’ event was published by the Students’ Union.

It is difficult to feel anything other than slightly disappointed with the Sabbs’ handling of this affair. This impression stems not so much from the contents of the report itself but from the lateness of its publication.

As I wrote last week, this episode opened up festering wounds on campus that led to a thoroughly disheartening exchange of intemperate criticism and allegations that, whilst extremely serious and relevant, have felt a little ‘tit-fortat’.

It is obviously impossible to know whether or not swifter and more decisive action from our Sabbatical Officers would have defused the situation earlier but I would argue that they should at least have taken a public position in the immediate aftermath of the com-

plaints surrounding the ‘Gender and Resistance’ event. This needn’t have come down on one side or the other of the argument but could have taken a clear lead on working towards a resolution acceptable to all parties. It is at the very least a shame that the strong stance taken over the Men’s Rugby scandal at the beginning of the year wasn’t replicated here. This was a very different issue and much less cut and dried, but the swift public communication of the need to protect all of those who are vulnerable on our campus should have been a priority.

Fortunately, it seems as though this particular episode has been de-escalated for the time being. I was relieved and impressed that last week’s Union General Meeting was handled in such a respectful way. There was clearly a risk that it could have degenerated into a messy slanging match, but we did not hear so much as a single catcall or heckle. Thursday showed UGM at its best: well-attended, lively and above all an opportunity to hold our elected officials to account in a responsible and restrained way. After a troubling week, Thursday was a moment for LSESU to be proud of itself.

It is really only a shame that the

timetabling issues that we reported at the beginning of the year meant that several of the part-time Sabbatical Officers, including the BME Officer Samiha Begum, were unable to attend to present their work and take questions. It is has become increasingly clear this year that the decision to schedule classes during the UGM slot was a premature reflection on the meeting’s growing irrelevance. Thursday proved that during difficult moments, UGM is still a key mechanism for conflict resolution, and everyone wanting to attend should have been able to.

As many of you will already know, I announced last week that I will be stepping down as executive editor of The Beaver after next week’s edition. I am very simply completely exhausted, and need to take time to focus on my dissertation and other modules. This job has been a great challenge and incredibly rewarding. The Beaver is truly an LSE institution, and is woven into the fabric of our campus life in a quite extraordinary way.

The people I work with must be praised above all for their incredible dedication. Producing a weekly publication whilst doing a full-time degree is not an easy task. It is to be hoped that we are never taken for granted.

The Beaver would like to thank the LSE Annual Fund, whose generous financial support will soon allow us to replace our existing hardware. We intend to redistribute our existing Macs within the LSE community, more details to follow.

Kapitalis @renardterrible #LSE student paper calls for buying milk at higher prices to preserve UK milk industry. Ricardo spinning in his grave. Econ fucking school.

The Beaver @beaveronline Next week is Green Week at LSE. Here is our exec editor @jon_allsop in a giant ‘carbon bubble’

From the Managing Editor Alexander Fyfe on the publication of the Inclusivity Report’s final draft THE REPORT PROMPTED by the Men’s Rugby scandal has finally been published, and it makes for decidedly less interesting reading than the interim draft published last November. Less interesting here denotes that fact that it has been tempered by a sense of proportion, and direction.

Simeon Underwood’s interim draft contained plenty of spice; email surveillance and some worrying threats to free speech.

Thankfully, after a Beaver special report and exemplary efforts by the law department the most worrying clauses have been removed. Definitional issues have

been ironed out, and some more concrete proposals have actually been tabled.

Thankfully, Underwood acknowledges the plethora of issues surrounding mandatory consent classes, refraining from recommending them explicitly. The new task force focussing on Equality and Diversity sounds like a good idea, however, the proof of this particular pudding will be in the eating.

Talking of pudding, you may be wondering how my milk campaign is taking off. Firstly, I need to criticise a member of SU catering staff, who has had a week to reply to my email request for

information. If you’re reading, I’d appreciate if you could check your inbox. Secondly, some twitter user thinks increasing milk prices to save UK dairies is bad economics. I don’t study economics, but I’m pretty sure selling something well below the cost of production is bad economics too.

I shall investigate and report back next week.

Finally, I’d like to take a moment to wish Jon all the best with completing his dissertation. It’s been a pleasure to serve under his editorship, he is by far one of the hardest working students on our campus, and I have loved every minute of working with him.

Rayhan Uddin @Ray_Uddin Great event happening right now with @lsesuisoc for Discover Islam Week in the Faith Centre! @lsesu @beaveronline

3

News

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Section Editors: Megan Crockett and Mahatir Pasha news@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Israeli Ambassador Event Disrupted

by Walkout and Fire Alarm Megan Crockett, News Editor Liam Hill, Features Editor Israeli Ambassador to the United Kingdom His Excellency Daniel Taub addressed the London School of Economics (LSE) in a public lecture in partnership with the LSE Students’ Union (SU) Politics and Forum Society and the LSESU Israeli Society, entitled ‘Israel and the Middle East: challenges ahead’.

The event was threatened by disruption after a group of protesters stood in the entrance of the New Academic Building, partly blocking entrance to attendees, and chanting ‘Free Palestine,’ ‘We are all Palestinian,’ ‘LSE, shame on you,’ and ‘Israel is a terror state.’

The event was chaired by Professor Toby Dodge, who, during his introductory remarks, reminded the audience of LSE protocol, before adding “I won’t welcome heckling or interruption.”

Despite this, the event interrupted when a number of students, some associated with the LSESU Palestine Society, walked out of the event midway through.

The ambassador waited for them to leave before continuing.

Shortly after the walkout, a fire alarm began and a spokesman for events told the room “we will

just confirm if this is a genuine evacuation.” After approximately a minute, it was confirmed that it had been a false alarm, and that the event would carry on.

After the event, an LSE Spokesperson confirmed to The Beaver that the alarm was set off deliberately at the front of the NAB by the glass being broken, adding that “the specific individual who set off the alarm was detained by the police but is not a member of the School.”

Following these events, Daniel Taub told the audience that “One of the things when you come from my part of the world is you realise how valuable a university space is,” adding that: “People who shut down dialogue don’t realise the value of a university space.”

Craig Calhoun tweeted during the event: “Good launch discussion for Democratizing Inequalities (despite interruption by a political protest posing as a fire alarm). #participation” Taub also commented on the event at LSE last week, Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine, at which it has been alleged comments glorifying terrorism against Israeli soldiers and other anti-Semitic and antiIsraeli comments were made. He commented, “I was approached by a number of people saying I shouldn’t come to the LSE be-

cause of an event last week.” He added, referring to the LSESU Feminist Society’s role as co-host of the event: “If you’re a feminist society and you are looking in the Middle East for some country that reflects your values... would you not choose one where women can drive, lead political parties and head the Supreme Court?”

This criticism of the LSESU Feminist Society was met with applause from attendees.

Apart from the walkout and the fire alarm, the event was broadly well-mannered and wellreceived. His Excellency gave the audience, primarily made up of LSE students, an impromptu lecture in Negotiation Theory. He said of Israel’s policy towards ongoing negotiations with its neighbours: “We might not have all of the right answers, but by and large we are asking the right questions.”

Taub also criticised the United Nations Human Rights Council’s record on Israel, saying “It has a pattern of discrimination against Israel,” before adding that it had passed “more resolutions against Israel than [against] all the other countries in the world combined.”

Former LSESU General Secretary Jay Stoll, who attended the event, told The Beaver: “Regardless of petty disruptions, tonight’s event was a great success, the

The ambassador told The Beaver after the event, referring to the ‘Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine’: “Statements glorifying suicide attacks and inciting terrorism are abhorrent and dangerous. It is shocking that they should be given a platform at a British university and I am pleased that the University and the Students Union are rightly investigating them. Personally, I find it staggering that anyone calling themselves a feminist would choose to single out for criticism the one country in the region where women not only vote and drive, but lead political parties, head the Supreme Court and direct leading banks, and where legislation against human trafficking has been praised by Britain’s Home Secretary as a model to be learned from.

It is no less disappointing that anyone claiming to be a supporter of Palestinians would so insultingly betray the courageous Palestinian teachers and parents who resist the culture of incitement and hatred in Palestinian schoolbooks, and raise their children to respect the sanctity of human life and cherish the prospect of peace.”

Ambassador was well received and his audience were engaged.

What is clear though, is that the UK is currently seeing a battle for intellectual space where certain groups on campus try to silence opinions they disagree with - this must be challenged. If we win this battle, it will be as much to the benefit of those who want to criticise the powerful, as for those who want to hear their representatives speak.”

David Tamman and Josh Seitler, Co-Presidents of the LSESU Israel Society, told The Beaver: “We would firstly like to thank the LSE for hosting such an informative and engaging event. Its success should be celebrated. It took a lot of effort on the part of all the organisers, including Chris [Hulm], for this event to happen. We strongly believe that engagement, debate and discussion is what’s necessary to move any conflict towards a solution. We think it is a shame that certain attendees felt it necessary to leave. We were also very disappointed that the event was disrupted by the setting off of the fire alarm. We hope the university will investigate the matter thoroughly in the spirit of free speech.”

Further statements have been received since this article was originally published.

LSESU Politics and Forum President Christopher Hulm told the Beaver: “Tonight’s event with His Excellency Daniel Taub highlighted the importance of open dialogue and frank debate. While some try to entrench division between opposing views, and others can shy away from the harsh reality, the event underlined why negotiation and agreement can only be fostered by facing up to

the difficult questions. I applaud the Ambassador for his honesty and integrity this evening.”

The LSESU Palestine Society sent the Beaver a slightly cutdown version of a post that had already circulated on their facebook page: “The Palestine Society would like to express its dismay at the fact that Daniel Taub, the Israeli ambassador to the UK, has been provided with such a prestigious platform to speak by the London School of Economics and Political Science. Taub has also been notoriously disparaging of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, showing disdain for any concerted international effort to hold Israel to account for its heinous violations of basic humanitarian law. The LSE should be ashamed for allowing segments of its student populous who have lost friends and family to the brutality of Israel, to endure the presence of an individual who shows a callous disregard for humanitarian law.As a society, we are strong proponents of freedom of speech, but when this freedom is afforded to individuals who openly support the abduction of similar freedoms from innocent individuals, we cannot help to show our disgust. We hope than an apology will be made to the Palestinian students currently at LSE who do not feel that this invitation to Daniel Taub is worthy of such a world-renowned institution.”

Yiftah Curiel, Spokesperson of the Embassy of Israel, told The Beaver after the event, and referring to students who chose to walk out: “It’s a shame that students on a UK campus choose to emulate extremist groups in the Middle East, which reject dialogue and compromise.”

News

Tuesday February 10, 2015

4

In Brief US Ambassador Delivers ‘Diplomatic’ Speech at LSE, as Hosting Society Pays over £1,000 for LSE Security

LSE Research Groups Ranked Amongst World’s Best Thinktanks

TWO LSE RESEARCH GROUPS, the foreign affairs centre LSE IDEAS and political analysts/consultants the Public Policy Group, have jointly been named the second best university think tank in the world in a global survey.

They are ranked second only to Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs in the 2014 Think Tank and Civil Societies Program league tables. This is the third year that LSE IDEAS has ranked highly in this table, and the second year that the Public Policy Group has featured.

LSE IDEAS is also ranked 7th worldwide in the category of ‘think tanks to watch’, while its 2014 report of the LSE Expert Group on the Economics of Drug Policy, “Ending the Drug Wars” is named the 10th best policy study produced by a think tank worldwide.

What Would Happen Without the Hardship Fund?

LIVING ON A STUDENT BUDGET is challenging enough from constantly checking your bank account to creating weekly budgets to having to sacrifice on a regular basis. But what happens when something goes seriously wrong? The LSESU Hardship Fund is here is help and can make a huge positive impact on those facing difficult financial circumstances.

It may be a surprise to hear that the LSESU Advice and Support Services has a wide range of resources available for students dealing with financial hardship. From housing help to emergency funds, it’s important to familiarise yourself in case you or a friend have unexpected difficulties.

The funds have just been doubled this year thanks to an increase in sQuid contributions, now rising to £30,000.

New Online Tool Helps Us Explore Low Carbon Worlds THE CLIMATE OUTCOMES OF different lifestyle and energy choices can now be explored by anyone, thanks to an online tool. Dr Erica Thompson of LSE’s Centre for the Analysis of Time Series (CATS) was the lead climate scientist for the project, which draws on the latest scientific results from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to highlight the range of possible impacts resulting from different energy choices.

The Global Calculator is an interactive tool for businesses and individuals, NGOs and governments.

Sophie Donszelmann Staff Writer ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 4th, the Ambassador of the United States of America to the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland, Matthew Barzun, spoke to an audience of London School of Economics (LSE) students at an event hosted by the Grimshaw International Relations Club. Chaired by Professor Peter Trubowitz, Co-Head of the US International Affairs Programme at LSE IDEAS, the ticketed lecture was attended by just under four hundred students.

The ambassador’s diplomatic and tactfully made speech was a discussion of metaphors.

He argued that it was not a pendulum, nor a forward moving bicycle nor a tightrope that served as an accurate representation of the US government and its responses, but rather a human body and its arteries; delivering supplies throughout its judicial circuitry with capabilities for self-correction. As the official envoy of the United States, the ambassador consistently communicated President Obama’s policy positions and referred to the US as a peacebuilder among nations.

After his brief speech, Ambassador Barzun opened the floor for questions, welcoming “criticism” and promising to engage in meaningful discussion on a nation that is “engaging in the world to monitor peace and prosperity.” The ambassador took the questions in his stride while gracefully

tip-toeing around any definitive answers. In responding to a question on anti-Americanism, he referenced the movie “Love Actually”, using it as proof that people across borders shared values. When questioned about his career shift from business executive in the tech industry to campaign advisor, the ambassador chose to discuss the innovative thinking of Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia. Students posed questions about USCuban relations, the UK leaving the European Union and China’s rising influence, all of which were skillfully managed by the speaker. Barzun even mocked his own uncommitted responses, joking “how’s that for an unsatisfying diplomatic answer?”

While Barzun was successful in eliciting laughs from the audience and involving attendees with straw polls on current affairs, several students agreed that the lecture was enjoyable despite its lack of substance.

The event was followed by a ticketed meet-and-greet reception for the Ambassador in which LSE Director, Professor Craig Calhoun, was in attendance.

However, the planning for this event that had been three months in the making was less lighthearted than the event itself. Gregory Kist, President of the LSE Students’ Union Grimshaw International Relations Club and main organizer of the event, informed the Beaver that the event was a challenge to carry out.

In booking the venue, the society president was informed

by LSE Conferences that the event required additional LSE Security, despite the ambassador being accompanied by his own embassy security detail.

The costs of this additional

security was to be born by the Grimshaw Club, a student society which is currently unsponsored to maintain political neutrality and funded solely by membership fees. These costs would range between £1,000 to £1,500, which could be increased if there were protests on the day.

According to Kist, while LSE Conferences and security were very professional, these additional costs to be funded by student societies “dissuades societies with smaller budgets to be ambitious and invite high profile speakers.” The Grimshaw Society could only afford these fees thanks to an accumulation of funds from previous years. Had the society not had this luck, a student organization whose founding purpose is to “ stimulate debate on a wide range of subjects relating to international relations” would have had to decline the ambassador’s visit.

5

Tuesday February 10, 2015

New Theatre Packed For LSESU Islamic Society’s Flagship Event Tooba Mushtaq Staff Writer LO N D O N S C H O O L O F Economics (LSE) Students’ Union (SU) Islamic Society hosted its major speaker event on Friday 6th February at 6.15 p.m., in the New Theatre. The event, titled, “Is Islam the Underlying Cause of Extremism?” was part of LSESU ISOC’s Discover Islam Week, which aims to encourage non-Muslim students on campus, to discover more about Islam. The speaker addressing the packed audience, comprising of both Muslims and non-Muslims, was Abdullah Al Andalusi , an Islamic activist, alongside the School’s Pro-director for Teaching and Learning, Professor Paul Kelly.

Andalusi started off by defining the word ‘extremism’, and referred to Quranic literature explaining how it prohibits the killing of civilians in times of war, and how the Quran and the teachings of Holy Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H), explicitly commands Muslims to treat nonMuslims with kindness and equality

and forbade Muslims to be a source of harm and misery to them.

Andalusi then explained the research claiming that convicted Muslim terrorists have never cited core Islamic text as their reason for committing acts of terrorism. Revenge, answer to oppression and retribution have been the main reasons behind the acts of violence. He stated that utilitarian ethics and the secularist agenda had been the motivation behind extremism. He referred to another piece of research that claimed that democratic Muslim nations were found to have less crime rates for murder and rape when compared to democratic Western countries.

He moved on to describe major

historical movements like Zionism, Irish Nationalism, even the first suffrages, which have been motivated by some form of injustice or tyranny in their use of violent or even terror tactics. The lecture ended with Andalusi stating that the more pious and practicing Muslims are, the less likely they are to become terrorists and that the Muslims need to become more fundamentalists in that sense.

The floor was then opened for questions. Many questions were asked by non-Muslim attendees of the event. The questions ranged from “should people be more careful before equating terrorism with religion in general?”, to “how jihad is interpreted?”

Andulasi stated that all religious texts, be it Quran, Bible, or Torah, condemn violence, and that the purpose of a Muslim’s life is to live righteously. He said that Jihad can never be used to enforce Shariah, the Islamic Jurisprudence, but only to fight oppression, citing the examples from Caliphate where non-Muslims lived under Shariah regime while practicing their religion peacefully and how it was only the regime changed when Muslims conquered foreign lands.

The talk ended with Andalusi concluding that Muslims need to sort their problems themselves, without a Western invasion as it has caused more harm than good.

E-mail Surveillance Bus Collision Outside Dropped From Inclusivity LSE Leaves Five Injured Report Final Version Alexander Fyfe Managing Editor THE FINAL REPORT SETTING out the proposals for action in response to the Men’s Rugby scandal has been published. Produced

by Academic Registrar Simeon Underwood, the report supersedes the interim report circulated in November 2014.

Notably, after The Beaver covered the interim report in detail, proposals for increased email surveillance have been dropped. In addition, concerns raised by the Law department that the interim report may imperil freedom of expression have been addressed.

The scope of the report has also been broadened as a result of representations made by students and staff during the Town Hall meeting on the 4th November. It was pointed out that whilst expedient to limit the report to just sexism and homophobia, a culture of discrimination needed to be tackled. As one respondent said, “We don’t need an adjustment, we need a gestalt shift.”

The final report also includes details of the schools extensive

agenda to tackle systemic inequalities, and a commitment to create a new task force to identify Equality and Diversity issues within the school. The task force will conduct a ‘root and branch’ review of such issues. It will also analyse the current strengths and weaknesses of Equality and Diversity initiatives.

Despite lengthy discussion, there is no definitive conclusion on the introduction of ‘consent workshops’ at LSE. Underwood outlines the complexities of such a proposal; including media misrepresentation of existing workshops at other institutions and whether workshops would have mandatory status. Nona Buckley-Irvine has her view that workshop attendance should not be tied to school funding of the athletics union reiterated. The possibility of workshops at halls of residence is also mooted; citing increasing numbers of reports of discriminatory behaviours in halls.

Overall, the final report outlines some more concrete proposals for tackling equality and diversity issues at the LSE, but it is clear considerable work is still to be done.

Mahatir Pasha News Editor

THE 91 BUS TO TRAFALGAR Square had its roof ripped off by overhanging branches of a tree outside Kingsway at around 1pm today.

Transport for London (TFL) said they are launching an investigation into the collision of the double-decker bus, which left 5 people injured. Two of those injured have been taken to St Thomas Hospital, in Westminster, for facial injuries.

According to passengers on board at the time, there may have been as many as 20 people on the upper deck of the bus during the collision.

Ethan Meade, an LSE student

turned around upon hearing the crash and said “I saw the roof fall down off the side of the bus and the glass shatter everywhere.

“The passengers seemed to be sitting there pretty stunned, as you’d expect. Police seemed to handle it very well,” he continued.

London Fire Brigade (LFB) station manager Gary Squires said at the scene, “those involved are very lucky to have escaped serious injury.”

Police have cordoned off the area with traffic being diverted in both directions. A recovery vehicle was at the scene trying to remove the bus from the street.

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “We await further details,” and “Enquiries are under way to ascertain the circumstances of the collision.”

News London Uni Round-up KINGS VOWS TO TAKE national lead on sexual assault at universities. KING’S will launch a consultation into sexual assault, harassment and consent on campus after Roar approached managers with historic allegations involving a current King’s professor.

The university wants to lead nationally with a major campaign, education vice principal Evelyn Welch told the paper in an exclusive interview last week.

The College is also determined to play a larger role in creating a healthy culture of consent on a national stage in the UK, and to set it high on the agenda.

BRUNEL ALUMNI LAUNCH ‘Trip Advisor for student accommodation’ on the same day as ARC’s Housing Fayre (Monday 19th January).

The website ‘Stars Key and Hutch’, is designed as a social network to help British and International students find the best rental accommodation. Three Brunel MBA students founded it, each with their own reasons for setting up the site.

With around 15,000 students and just 4,957 places for on-campus accommodation, many students choose to live in off-campus housing. This includes those sought through the housing office, private landlords, local estate agents and even lodging with families in the nearby area.

AN EMAIL WAS SENT OUT this week to all second year physics students, apologising for the department’s response to a series of exam blunders that went uncorrected.

An assessed problem sheet (APS) featured a mistake in one of the questions, and after students raised the issue, was told to “take it on the chin…it’s a drop in the ocean.”

This follows a similar incident that took place last term, after students relayed to another member of staff that a multiple choice question in a revision maths test didn’t have a correct answer. Again students were told it was too insignificant to be rectified.

7

News

Tuesday February 10, 2015

China: An Ambivalent Rising Power Jie Wang CDF Reporter ON 17TH FEBRUARY 2015, the seventh London School of Economics (LSE) Student Union (SU) China Development Forum inaugurated in the Sheikh Zayed Theatre. Themed with “paths to modernisation”, the forum addressed a wide variety of issues which encompasses economy, diplomacy, urbanisation, philosophy, literature, corruption, soft power, social policy and Shanghai Free Trade Zone.

An intriguing video clip revealed some of the challenges that China is faced with: economic slowdown, demographic collapse, growing tension with its neighbours, closedown of Confucius institute among others. Above all, Shinzo Abe and Xi Jinping’s frosty handshake in APEC meeting last year received applause and laughter.

Admittedly, China’s path to modernisation is beset with difficulties. The sheer size of the country means any change it makes would impose significant influence to the world. To reform or to remain the status quo, the cost of either looks daunting.

Burdened with five-thousandyears of history, China is reluctant to abandon its tradition; to cling to its past or to follow the West, neither option seems perfect. As China ascends to the international stage, China must decide whether it is willing to join international order. This raises concern of the whole world. Is China going to be a responsible stakeholder, or a resentful rising power what seeks to overtake the current norm? Such ambivalence is perhaps the growing pains that China has to suffer.

Scholars or policy makers, liberalists or Marxists, speakers in the forum shared their insight on problems that China faces.

In the opening speech, Adair Turner, a senior fellow in the Institute for New Economic Thinking, addressed the macro challenge of China in a global context. Lord Turner, demonstrating with pictures and graphs, said that China learnt a lesson from the 2008 economic crisis: the U.S. was not reliable; Chinese economy could not solely rely on the demand of the rest of the world. The stimulus plan was therefore launched to boost domestic consumption.

Local governments borrowed money from banks and entered an infrastructure competition game. Lord Turner said that when he travelled to China, local officials would always tell him proudly that they had built new

convention centres, new railway, new roads. While infrastructure contributes significantly to the growth of GDP, it also gives rise to a dangerous financial cycle of “more credit -rising asset price -more credit”. The short-term boom may eventually result in bad debts and spare capacity. It was argues that it is time for China to cool down its infrastructure obsession.

Piao Jianyi, director of NorthEast Asia Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, lectured on China’s neighbourhood diplomacy. In recent years, conflict with its neighbouring countries has threatened China’s security. China thus shifted its emphasis from “big power relations” to “relations with its neighbours”.

It is against this background that China proposed the very policy.

Piao said it was important to identify who are our neighbours.

China could categorize countries according to geographical distance. Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia, Russia and Mongolia were among the first tier neighbours.

The U.S. and Australia were among the second. The UK, he said, was among the third, if not fourth. Piao also said that while distance was a major concern, strategic relation was equally important. Therefore there was the notion of a “lesser neighbourhood” referring to China’s close neighbours and “greater neighbourhood” referring to countries of strategic importance.

Although Piao pointed out at the beginning of his speech that China’s neighbourhood policy was not the revival of the tributary system. The categorization did create a sense of déjà vu. A member of the audience asked the professor if this categorization indicated Sino-centrism, as opposed to Euro-centrism. It was a shame that Piao did not seem to have get her point. Most countries have the tendency to believe they are sitting at the centre of the world. It is sensible for China to realise that it should work with its neighbours more closely to achieve regional peace; egoism can go wrong.

Feng Wei’s speech was impressive. Feng is a professor of history at Fudan University. His specialty is Japanese studies. The climax of this presentation came when a student asked “how to avoid a war with Japan?” Again, the question won applause as well as laughter. Feng answered straightforward, “I can assure you that there is no possibility of war.” He argued that modern warfare is remote-control. Mutual-destruction is almost guaranteed. For Japan, restricted by its constitution,

it is not in a position to start a war. As for China, decision makers have not even thought of it.

He said his argument was backed by top secret meetings. Above all, the U.S. would not allow a war between China and Japan to happen. “The aim of U.S. government is to keep China and Japan quarrelling like feminine Shanghai men, rather than fighting like masculine Manchuria men.”

Sino-Japan relation is complex. Two wars in modern history have traumatised the memory of Chinese population. Japan, on the other hand, never apologised properly. China always quotes the kneeling of German chancellor Willy Brandt to humiliate Japan.

Japanese officials’ visits to Yasukini Shrine are regarded as provocation for China. The Diaoyu Islands, or Senkakus called by Japanese, is another source of hatred in the bilateral relation. Feng said his fear was that nationalism in China would go extreme and even out of control.

Li Chengyan, director of centre of anti-corruption studies, Peking University, reported China’s anti-corruption campaign enthusiastically. But his remarks were controversial. “The end of CCP will be the end of China.” “The paramount leadership of CCP cannot be changed; otherwise an Arab Spring will take place in China.” Li spoke as if he was a prophet, not a scholar. Li kept assuring his audience that CCP was doing the right thing and plead students in the hall to trust him that he was correct in saying so.

In LSE, where students are taught to know the causes of things, Li’s preaching was far from satisfactory. It was even worse that there was no time left for any question.

Fortunately, Mayling Birney, assistant professor from the de-

partment of international development LSE, made some constructive points. She said it was important to study why officials commit corruption in the first place. Dr. Birney suggested that lack of absolute standard and too much discretion was the reason.

In China, officials have to follow orders from above, not law. But obeying order can sometimes mean the violation of law. Law in China is often too idealist to follow anyway. Whether to follow order or law, there is no absolute standard. On the other hand, officials have too much discretion to achieve their policy objective.

This allows chances for corruption. To make more sensible law, China needs real legislators, she recommended; the National People’s Congress needs to work. To supervise the behaviour of officials, China needs more transparent information. All these could be done within the current Chinese political apparatus, without overturning CCP leadership, Dr. Birney said.

Chinese culture is extensive and profound, but how could it be accepted by the whole world is another question. Göran Malmqvist, Emeritus Professor of Sinology at Stockholm University, surprised the audience with his eloquent Chinese and rich knowledge about Chinese literature. China has produced great literature masterpiece long before Europe, he said. But these pieces need to be translated to be accepted as part of world literature.

Luo Lisheng, China director for Confucius Institute for Business London (CIBL) was very cautious when he was making the speech. He spent a long time making advertisement of CIBL’s Mandarin courses and events and

lectures to show that they were doing things different from media criticism. He opined that the recent closedown of a few Confucius Institute was due to the fall of demand and indicated that he was not in a position to comment on other Confucius Institute.

During the Q&A, a younglooking Chinese student asked, “What can students do to propaganda (China’s) soft power?” The student, who apparently used the wrong word, shocked the whole audience. “Rephrase it!”

Someone shouted. An Europeanlooking attendee, who identified himself as a language teacher, said that he understands why the boy used the “P-word”. “It’s just a word.” He said. The dirty connotation of that word does not exist in other language. He commented that learning a foreign language help see and understand other people’s world. Another attendee asked about the tightening of academic freedom in China. But none of the speakers responded to it.

Despite the slowdown, the sheer size of Chinese economy is enormous. China is entering a period of adjustment. Nevertheless, China’s growth story has not ended yet. The prospect for RMB as an international currency is positive. Huo Rongrong, head of China & RMB business Development, HSBC, has been travelling around the world to convince her clients that they should purchase more RMB. Zhou Hanmin, vice chairman of CPPCC Shanghai Committee, came to the forum with his beloved project, the Shanghai Free Trade Zone. The pilot is being used as a testing ground for a number of economic and social reforms. He welcomes LSE students to work in the Zone.

News

Tuesday February 10, 2015

8

Questions for Anti-Racism Officer over ‘Islamophobic’ Instagram at Best-Attended UGM of Academic Year Megan Crockett News Editor THURSDAY 5TH FEBRUARY SAW yet another Union General Meeting (UGM). Despite there being no official motions The Old Theatre played host to an hour of questions put to the Sabbatical and Part-time Sabbatical Officers.

At what appeared to be the best attended UGM of the year, AntiRacism Officer Esther Gross was quizzed on her representation of Muslim students on campus after facing criticism earlier in the week for an Instagram post labelling a headscarf-wearing individual as the ‘local LSE terrorist’, which many students claimed was Islamophobic.

BME Officer Samiha Begum, absent because of a timetabling clash, for her part faced questions over her claim that Gross has ‘white privilege’ and fresh allegations that she had shared tweets that it has been claimed breach the LSESU’s policy on anti-Semitism.

After round-ups from parttime officers, the floor was opened for questions, but before any were taken Uddin reminded the audience that “UGM is a safe space and questions must remain respectful”.

The first question asked was directed at Gross, “How does the Anti-Racism Officer aim to reconcile with the BME Officer?”.

Buckley-Irvine answered on Gross’ behalf, expanding on the mediation planned between the two officers so that both parties’ issues can be discussed, they can set their differences aside and focus on the bigger issues on campus.

Gross was then probed as to what the issues were exactly, if it was “not too awkward”. Once again, Buckley-Irvine took the question, commenting on the event ‘Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine’ held by the LSESU Feminist and Palestine Societies last week and the open letters both Officers wrote in its aftermath, which presented conflicting views. Buckley-Irvine then stated that the SU and Officers are not trying to pass comment on anything as its still being investigated and suggested that if students still wanted more details then they should head over to the Beaver Online.

Gross was then asked to comment on the Instagram post that had come to light in which she had called a friend wearing a headscarf the “local LSE terrorist”. Gross recalled that one of her friends could not pronounce her name right and stated they “like Jews better with numbers not names”. Gross claimed that he did not mean it or realise the impact his statement had

caused, which is similar to how she feels about the Instagram post, “I can’t even imagine how it must have felt for a community of students to see that picture on my instagram…

[I am] incredibly sorry … [I] should never have even thought of something like that”. However, Gross emphasised that the photo was posted over a year and a half ago and “in a year and a half we have all evolved and changed…I can’t stand by what I said a year and a half ago”.

Gross was then asked “How do [you think] Muslim people feel now coming to you following that picture?”. Fathia Begum, the original complainant about Gross’ Instagram post, suggested she felt it “dehumanised Muslim women in a culture where we’re already dehumanised and humiliated” adding that she felt it was “trying to devalue my opinion and my values as a Muslim woman on campus”. Gross reiterated that the photo was “taken several months before I was elected as Anti-Racism Officer” and that she had “grown quite a lot since I started university”. However, she continued that “that picture should never have been posted … all I can do is hope … at some point you can understand I am no longer that person … I felt a knife twisting in my gut when I remembered I took that picture”… I didn’t think all Muslims were terrorists before I got to university …[during university] I realised how horrible racism can be”.

A further member of the audience emphasised that in her speech Gross accepted that she “hasn’t been proactive in tackling Islamophobia” with the individual who posed the question claiming that “[I feel] disenfranchised from the SU, [as you’re] propagating negative stereotypes about Muslims, what are you going to do to ensure Muslim students feel more included?”

In response Gross gave the audience her personal email for students to come to her with queries. Gross suggested that she felt there will always be a problem as the anti-Racism Officer is always going to selfidentify as one thing. Gross claimed that “I don’t think my role is the voice of all anti-racism on campus, I am here to enable other students to use their voice”. The individual who posed the question added that many students are “frustrated because you haven’t provided them with platforms”.

Audience member Aysha alFekaiki then asked “why did [Gross] lie on Twitter?”, referring to Gross’ assertion that her open letter to The Beaver last week was based on an ‘SU investigation’ when in fact no such investigation had been con-

cluded. Al-Fekaiki said that “(by saying that your letter was) based on an official SU investigation, that then makes everyone believe you as you’re representing the SU as well”.

Gross clarified she meant that the SU investigation was being filed.

Al-Fekaiki then alleged that the tweets had been deleted, a claim that Gross refuted.

A question was then posed for BME Officer Samiha Begum, absent due to a timetabling clash, alleging that she had contradicted the anti-Semitism motion that LSESU passed in January on her personal Twitter account last summer. The allegations formed an official complaint lodged by the LSESU Jewish Society to the Students’ Union, (full details of which can be found on the page opposite).

Another individual voiced concerns surrounding the open letters. It was mentioned that in the open letter that she had written in response to Gross’ last week, she had claimed that “white privilege extending to white women undermines anti-racism struggles on campus”, the individual being concerned that as BME officer Samiha Begum was seemingly ignoring those who self-define as Semitic.

Following that final question, audience member Joseph Grabiner lightened the tone by congratulating the presentations of the other Part-time Officers as their presentations “were great”, yet the focus of the questions was firmly on Gross and Begum.

The Sabbatical officers then took to the stage to relay what they have been achieving over the past few months. Buckley-Irvine kicked off by saying a “massive thank you to the part time officers and everyone here for a respectful debate” claiming that they wanted to “resolve [the issue] in such a way that everyone feels safe on campus”.

Buckley-Irvine then went on to talk about her achievements, mainly the passing of the Rent Guarantor Scheme, saying “thank you to the School after six years”.

She has also been able to increase scholarship support to international students which is currently frozen at £750,000, and they are awaiting concrete figures. Buckley-Irvine emphasised that “things don’t happen over night at LSE”, but she is currently trying to agree fair fees international students. Another agreement in the pipeline is with regards to halls rent, which are currently rising. Buckley-Irvine has been able to secure fifty free spaces for students who are not able to afford the rising levels of rent; they are also rethinking the strategy for fair prices for accommodation.

Alistair Duncan, Activities and Development Officer, then stood up to talk claiming it has been a “rewarding but difficult week”. Duncan then exclaimed that the “fruits of my labour starting to show”, with regards to the board that has been put up in the Saw Swee Hock for societies to write up their events so the student body can be kept in the loop. Duncan also sat on the investment sub-committee attempting to get Divest on the agenda; it was agreed that LSE would look into an independent review with regards to divestment and the committee saw their first protest in nine years.

Next to speak was Seb Bruhn, Community and Welfare Officer.

He suggested that he has recieved a few comments from students with regards to counselling not responding fast enough to students, in response Bruhn has “lobbied to get a couple of extra councillors”. Attention was then focused on Green Week next week, with Bruhn claiming “we’ve made a big banner”.

Next, Bruhn spoke of integrating relationships with Halls committee

and the SU as there has been claims that they are “disconnected”. In relation to how anti-Semitism can manifest, Bruhn wanted to reassure students that there are things happening on campus adding, “we have a very international voice… its important we know the consequences of anti-semitism, but also important we don’t make sweeping statements”.

A slightly strapped for time Tom Maksymiw was the next Sabb to stand up, opening with comment on the upcoming results of the “LSESU Lit Fest competition” suggesting there was a “[very] high standard of entries” and that it was “[all]very exciting”. With regards to Exam Feedback Target Maksymiw suggested that “we’re getting somewhere” but expressed the difficulties of trying to communicate a single message around such a large number of departments, however, it was added that “we know what we want… [and] what can make it doable”. Maksymiw’s slightly rushed presentation was concluded with a reminder that it is Voter Registration day today, and that all students should find out whether they are eligible and if so should register to vote in the 2015 General Election.

Finally, Mahamid Ahmed, Postgraduate Officer, addressed the audience, with moments to go before the end of the UGM, claiming that they are still fighting for better student representation on panels, and commenting on problems that are being experienced within LSE400 with regards to gender representation. Sadly, that is all Ahmed had time for before time ran out.

The UGM had the “Biggest turn out we’ve had all year”, according to Uddin and perhaps this commitment to student politics will continue in the coming weeks.

Only time will tell.

9

News

Tuesday February 10, 2015

JSOC Launches Complaints over BME Officer Tweets Jon Allsop Executive Editor

THE LSE STUDENTS’

Union (LSESU) Jewish Society has launched a complaint to the Students’ Union regarding a tweet and a retweet by Samiha Begum, the LSESU Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Students Officer.

The tweets, which the Jewish Society has said were identified by independent society members and which have been seen by The Beaver, include a retweet of @Daraghma1998 ‘s post that “The #Nazi #Israeli occupation army has just slaughtered 1049 #Palestinians & wounded 6000 so far. They are not just figures!!! #GazaUnderAttack” and the statement “the problem is the disgusting Zionist child-killing theology” which Ms Begum herself authored.

The tweets were brought to the attention of today’s UGM by an audience member, who alleged that they contravene the recently passed LSESU anti-Semitism policy. The audience member stated in reference to the retweet that the policy claims that “anti-Semitism includes but is not limited to (9) ‘equating Jews or maliciously equating Jewish Foundations of the state of Israel with the Nazi regime. This includes, but is not limited to equating Zionism with Nazism and claiming that ‘history is repeating itself ’ with regards to the Nazi Holocaust and the State of Israel. This also includes using Jewish symbols and religious imagery alongside Nazi symbols and imagery. This does not necessarily include analogies between historical events.’”

In reference to Ms Begum’s tweet, the audience member claimed that “this is a clear reference to the blood libel that has led

to the oppression of Jews around the world.”

Another speaker at UGM, meanwhile, referenced an open letter to The Beaver written by Ms Begum claiming that “white privilege extending to white women undermines anti-racism struggles on campus”. The speaker argued that in asserting this in response to an open letter from Jewish LSESU Anti-Racism Officer Esther Gross, Ms Begum was ignoring the selfdefining Semitic students that she ought to be representing. The comments on ‘white privilege’ form a separate part of the complaint that the Jewish Society have presented to the SU. In their complaint to the SU, Jewish Society presidents Millie Foster and Lianne Mizrachi argue that “at the UGM you (LSESU General Secretary Nona BuckleyIrvine) explained that an investigation and mediation process has been launched with Esther Gross and Samiha (Begum). We would like these two complaints to be equally investigated and we call for Samiha, as BME officer, to apologise for the offence that she has caused to Jewish students both on her public Twitter account and in her open letter. Also to specify how she aims to reconcile with Jewish students on campus who, as part of her role, she must also represent and support.”

The tweet and retweet date from the 24th and 26th July 2014 respectively, several months before Ms Begum was elected BME Officer in October 2014. When asked for comment by The Beaver, Ms Begum responded: “I posted the retweets at a very difficult and emotional time when Palestinians were suffering from indiscriminate and exceptional suffering by Israeli forces. This was one of the many retweets I had

posted at this time. With hindsight I would say that regardless of the gravity of the actions of the Israeli state, posting a retweet that compared it to Nazi Germany is inappropriate and unhelpful in any context and I unreservedly apologise for retweeting that comparison.

I stand by my use of the term ‘white privilege’ and believe that this can extend to a person of any religion. For example, you can be Muslim and still be ‘white passing’ thus hold a white privilege. Some Jewish people in the west don’t have names that are easily recognisable as Eastern European or Hebrew and don’t wear a yarmulke or other religious symbols. You cannot tell they’re Jewish and thus they can also benefit from white privilege. White privilege is a term conditional and dependent on the individual’s appearance and identity. It’s a complex issue that deserves to be spoken about with more than just a few lines and I look forward to hearing more discussions about this at LSE.” (Editorial note: due to an editorial mistake, Ms Begum was not, when given an opportunity to comment on the allegations, given a chance to respond to the specific allegation that she had referenced ‘the blood libel’. The Beaver has contacted her again inviting her to respond to these allegations as well. The Beaver apologises for this oversight and has apologised to Ms Begum.)

The complaint has been made in the context of complaints leading on from last week’s event ‘Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine’, organised jointly by the LSESU Feminist and Palestine Societies. In the aftermath of complaints made about the ‘glorification of terrorism’ at the event, LSESU Anti-Racism Officer Esther Gross and BME Officer Ms Begum wrote open letters to The

Beaver. Last weekend, LSE student Fathia Begum revealed on Facebook that Ms Gross had posted an Instagram photo depicting a friend

wearing a headscarf as “the local LSE terrorist”. Fathia Begum and others on campus described the post as “Islamophobic”.

SU Takes No Action Against Feminist and Palestine Societies After ‘Gender and Resistance’ Complaints Continued from page 1 who resisted the Nazi forces

during the Holocaust was deeply offensive. We hope that the

SU and the school will continue to investigate this concern.”

The statement from the LSESU does note that the LSE is conducting an ongoing investigation into the event and that they will “publish the outcome in due course”.

It further insists that “We want a campus that can robustly discuss issues in a mature, safe environment. We recently passed policy confirming our commitment to taking action on anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. We work closely with LSE’s Faith Centre and all our faith societies to have a campus that is as welcoming as it

can be; only last week the UN Society worked with the Israeli and Palestinian Societies on a successful event which looked at Palestinian Statehood and the UN.” The LSESU Palestine Society told The Beaver: “‘LSESU Palestine Society welcomes the results of the official SU investigation as a fair and justified view of events. We thank the Sabbs (Sabbatical Officers) for all their support through this time, and we look forward to engaging in further discussion in the future.”

News

Tuesday February 10, 2015

10

C and W Officer Reflects on Global Village Week Sebastian Bruhn LSESU Community and Welfare Officer NOW THAT GLOBAL VILLAGE Week, with it’s delicious food, striking performances and informative talks has finished, it is perhaps important to take a moment to reflect on what these five days actually mean for our community and what it has taught us. Indeed, the week was one of the largest collaborations that our Students’ Union (SU) has seen in a long time, with involvement from numerous SU staff, executive officers and student societies. However, it was also a massive development from celebrations of and activities related to our global community in the past. There were short language courses on offer, traditional dances, debates on contemporary international politics, and a wide array of cuisines, just to name a few.

Global Village Week was an incredible opportunity to really bring to light how truly diverse and lively our student community is and how lucky and fortunate we are to be able to experience so many cultures in

one location. At times, LSESU has actually had more countries represented than the United Nations! One of the aims of the week was to bring together groups on campus that may otherwise not have experienced and appreciated one another in as direct and open a way and to help us all consider the greater things we can perhaps achieve when we come together. As happenings throughout the years have shown, we are at an institution where our activities and words spread, are felt, and reverberate through the rest society. This means that we have a serious responsibility to constantly aim to be better and more positive in our relationships and openness to other cultural and national groups. In other words, we have a certain duty to not export conflict and negative ideas, but to export all of the positive ideas and values that our School’s environment allows us to nurture and grow; unity, respect and peace.

Hopefully, Global Village Week was, similarly, also an opportunity for us all to consider how empowering it is to have an education and understanding that is international. We get

this in some ways in the classroom, to varying degrees, but Global Village Week enabled the type of growth that takes place in relation to one’s understanding and appreciation of the contemporary human state when one experiences a culture or way that is new to oneself. Meeting others from different backgrounds helps us understand their point of view better, but also enables us to refine our own views and beliefs, with a more holistic awareness of the rest of the world.

Educating ourselves with this global awareness and outlook will hopefully also enable us to have a more effective and positive influence in our world’s increasingly global atmosphere, if that is the path we choose in the future.

“So thank you all so much for your participation and help in making this valuable week come to life. I really hope that it was enjoyable, but also that it has spurred you to think about the community we have here, right now, and the incredible responsibilities and potential that we have together.” - Sebastian Bruhn, Communities and Welfare Officer

FGM Victim Sheds Light on Her Experience Suyin Haynes Deputy News Editor AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Society hosted their successful Gender Equality campaign week last week with a fruitful Houghton Street Stall and two panel events; Tuesday’s ‘Progress and Shortfall: Women’s Rights in the 21st Century’ and Thursday’s ‘How Do We End Female Genital Mutilation?

(FGM)’ workshop.

Thursday’s event was a great success with Louise Robertson, representing charity 28toomany which campaigns against the practice, Ebru Sahin, a Masters student, and Hoda Ali, an FGM survivor. The evening started with Robertson presenting a short film dispelling some of the common myths and assumptions about the practice, which is prevalent and most concentrated in 28 African countries, hence the name 28toomany.

Robertson emphasised FGM as a changing, rather than static practice, which is often justified by many reasons such as being a rite of passage or as a means of controlling female sexuality. Sahin then presented a multimedia photo documentary themed around the connection of education and photography as a means of raising awareness about FGM. However, the most powerful talk of the evening came from FGM survivor Hoda Ali, currently working as a sexual health nurse, and who has appeared on the Channel 4 FGM documentary The Cruel Cut. Ali shared her personal experience of being cut at the age of seven, noting that “FGM was part of my life, part of me, part of where I came from” growing up in Somalia. Speaking about her family, she noted that her mother had made the choice for her to be cut because of societal pressures, asserting that “all the

women before me in my family were victims”. The poignancy and hope for the future that Ali outlined in her experience, where she concluded that she is the last generation in her family to be affected by the practice, earned her a well-deserved standing ovation from members of the audience.

Event organiser Asha Chadeesingh said that “I just feel so pleased with the turnout, and grateful to the speakers for coming, because I truly believe that educating just one person on FGM is important in triggering an expansion of knowledge, and ultimately that’s what will help end the practice for good.” Overall the Gender Equality Campaign Week has been a great success for the Amnesty International Society; increasing its profile on campus by raising over two hundred pounds on Houghton Street and organising engaging and well attended events such as this one.

Comment Section Editorial: THIS WEEK OUR EXECUTIVE Editor, Jon Allsop, announced his retirement from The Beaver.

Whilst his Facebook has seen adulation from BNOCs far and wide, I would like to write this week’s editorial espousing THE TRUTH on Allsop (much akin to the many inside scoops that Jon has uncovered in his time as editor).

This week Jon changed my birthday on Facebook from its usual autumnal date to the 6th February. This led to much hilarity to everyone but me, who was forced to have a number of awkward conversations explaining to estranged family members and old friends why I am choosing to celebrate a second birthday (who do I think I am, the Queen?).

Jon followed through on his prank strongly, with Stevie Wonder’s ‘Happy Birthday’ echoing through the office all day and an incredibly sarcastic birthday shoutout on PuLSE Radio in the afternoon.

Jon is a twisted individual who puts on a facade of selfdeprecation. Despite this, he will be sorely missed (but largely because his likely successor is even more twisted than he is).

Comment

Ellen Wilkie

Tuesday February 10, 2015

12

Section Editor: Ellen Wilkie Deputy Editors: Ella Sun, Mali Williams comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk

End The Open Letters and Outrage The recent conflict on campus has been disheartening and petty

Natasha Valladares READING THE BEAVER over the last week has been overwhelming. I’ve been ill with the flu and haven’t been on campus much, but in my absence it seems like everything has been getting a bit heated.

I’ve read about the BME and Anti-Racism Officers and the comments they’ve made now and in the past. I’ve read about offensive speakers, and students who took matters into their own hands. I’ve been shocked at the way a university dedicated to social sciences has been handling their opinions and feelings about social issues.

“I condemn any instance of racism but this article is my condemnation of the way that these racist incidents have been handled.”

I feel like everybody who has studied LSE100 (which would be all of us, as it’s compulsory) ought to remember one of the key points that is drilled in; that an inter-

disciplinary perspective is essential in understanding complex issues.

While this arguably applies more neatly to the modules laid out in LSE100, it is a general idea that can be applied usefully in our lives and I believe that it applies here.

Put simply, we need to be considering any issue from all perspectives and, failing that, we need to demonstrate at least some form of consideration.

I condemn any instance of racism but this article is my condemnation of the way that these incidents have been handled. Escalating slur campaigns between two officers elected to represent the interests of the student community is not in the best interest of the LSE community. Walkouts and fire alarms in the middle of public lectures seem to me like sure ways to undermine your cause. Making a racist Instagram post and leaving it up after having been elected to a position that stands against racism is foolish and unironically throwing out terms like ‘white privilege’ in a conversation about racism is counter-productive.

Let me explain what I’m trying to say before I’m subject to hostile open letters or public demonstrations. We are all privileged students.

We all have the opportunity and means to be studying at one of the top universities in the world. More specifically our university stands on the forefront of the social sciences, and I, for one, came here with the aim of broadening my understanding and with hopes of improving society.

If we want to stand against racism we must not be hypocritical. This applies to both the BME and Anti-Racism Officers as well as to humanity in general. Posting racist Instagrams is racist. When you represent students who have

been affected by racism it would be useful to not be a perpetrator of it wherever possible (which is arguably, always). When you are trying to represent a concern about racism, using exclusionary terminology like ‘white privilege’ is just as hypocritical.

The incident regarding Esther Gross’ Instagram doesn’t need much elaboration, allow me to instead to explain my concern with the use of the term ‘white privilege’. White privilege refers to the benefits that those of white skin tone are passively benefitting from.

It is not fair that the colour of your skin can in and of itself be an advantaging or disadvantaging factor in education, employment and society generally. By weaponising the term, instead of using it to refer to a cultural phenomenon, you actually perpetuate a dialogue that focuses on skin colour, religion or race above all else. You encourage divisive attitudes and draw a clear line between ‘us’ and ‘them’. This is not a productive way to create an inclusive society that involves rightminded people of all exteriors to campaign for equality and settle for nothing less. It is understandably frustrating that many white people (or male, or able-bodied, or any other dominant societal group) are unaware of and therefore unconcerned by this discrimination that pervades every aspect of society, but that is no excuse for allowing oneself to settle for anything less than equality and inclusion from said society or, most importantly, from oneself.

Looking at the protest during the event with the Israeli Ambassador I am equally puzzled by the actions of the students involved.

Walking out mid-talk and blocking the entrance does not detract from the speaker as much as it does

from the credibility of your cause, whatever that cause is. No matter how much you disagree with what a person is saying, by interrupting and blocking entry you only make it more news-worthy. By these actions you also undermine your own right to be heard, however noble and worthy your words may be.

“No matter how much you disagree with what a person is saying, by interrupting and blocking entry to their platform only makes it more newsworthy. ” Ultimately I can respect that each of the parties involved in the tensions of this past week have reasons for their actions, but although I respect this I still disagree with the way each party has handled themselves. In making a stand for what you believe in it is crucial to conduct yourself in a way that you can be proud of, a way that you would respect in another and a way that you would like to be treated yourself. I am not an expert on racism or conflict and don’t pretend to be.

I raise these concerns because I am a member of the LSE community and I want and expect it to be a community I’m proud of. What’s heartening is that I genuinely believe that everyone I’ve written about shares that goal.

Photo: Flickr: Bernardo Ricci Armani

13

Comment

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Sweeping Judgements On Crimea Are Premature A response to Maria Komarova’s article ‘Crimea River: Ukraine Isn’t The Only Victim’ Lev Grybov THE LONDON SCHOOL OF Economics and Political Science is well known for its student diversity. Of post-USSR countries, there are Armenians, Byelorussians, Balts, Kazakhs, Ukrainians, and of course, Russians. LSE is also famous for being a place where one can always find lively and intellectually stimulating discussions, as, although ‘great minds think alike’, the devil is always in the detail. The current topic of Russian aggression towards Ukraine is not an exception to this. Therefore, it is absolutely natural that various opinions on the matter are expressed. Some of them are backed by available facts, while others are ‘guesses’ and ‘perceptions’.

The strong connection between ex-Soviet countries is perfectly represented by the collaboration of different LSE SU societies. The most recent of these is the collaboration of ‘nationalistic’ and ‘hateful’ (as the author of ‘Crimea River: Ukraine isn’t the only victim’ describes) LSE SU Ukrainian Society, and LSE SU Russian Business Society on the matter of Russian Business Week,

which begins at LSE on Feb. 14. Moreover, members of both diasporas spend a lot of their informal time together, having mutual hiking and skiing trips, as well as socials.

Their political views range from one extreme to the other: some are utopian-communists, whilst others are classical liberalists.

“Ukraine has an undoubtedly interesting history, which, although has strong connections to Russia, is arguably much older than the latter’s.”

The views on current affairs vary with similar magnitude as well. The question is: what is the right view? The right opinion is one that is supported by facts and can be clearly argued, as was stated

above. Believe it or not, the right views according to this definition exist on the both sides. Moreover, every such view is always well-respected, even though one does not necessarily have to agree with it.

As Niccolò Machiavelli stated in ‘The Prince’ (1532, Ch. 22): ‘There are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, and the third is useless’. After all, although many of these people are patriots, they are primarily well-rounded and educated people, who can accept the opinions of others whilst also having their own.

Moving on to the next point, as the author of ‘Crimea River: Ukraine isn’t the only victim’ probably tries to state, Ukrainians have a ‘narcissism of small differences’ (S. Freud, 1917): ‘…the two major ones being a different name for vodka and a bit of salty pig’s fat’. With widespread access to any sort of information (in the UK, at least), it should not be a secret that the Ukrainian

language is significantly different to Russian. It is not only the word ‘vodka’ which differs.

Needless to say, Ukraine has an undoubtedly interesting history, which, although has strong connections to Russia, is arguably much older than the latter’s. Therefore, it is highly advisable to obtain at least a basic knowledge on the matter before making any loud statements.

“The war is a complex political and cultural drama which has only just started.

Shocks require time in order to be cured, just as ‘Rome was not built in a day’.”

Finally, the statement about the Ukrainian government being ‘incompetent’ was not well explained, and the solution ‘to take things into their hands and stop the separatists,’

although sounds alluring, is probably over-simplified. One has to understand the complicating factors behind the problem, the more important of those being: the Ukrainian army was left extremely weak after Mr. Yanukovich’s rule; there are civilians on the occupied territories; and, surprisingly, there is still some hope left for the de-escalation of the conflict. The ongoing war is a complex political and cultural drama, which has only just started. Such shocks cannot be treated as something casual, and require time in order to be cured, just as ‘Rome was not built in a day’.

To conclude, as Ivan Pavlov, the famous Russian psychologist, said: “Perfect as the wing of a bird may be, it will never enable the bird to fly if unsupported by the air”. Although the debate on the overall matter can last infinitely and some arguments can appear to be axioms, they have to be backed by factual information, which is scarce in these times. The ‘good old’ Cold War blurs the lines, and the motivations of the ‘main actors’ remain unclear. Hence, it would be irrational to produce any global judgments…Yet.

Say What You Want About Freedom Of Speech Defending an absolute right to freedom of speech does not make me an apologist Aiden Hepworth I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE this opportunity to make a confession. It is a startling confession to make at Britain’s most socialist university. Here goes – I loathe Mehdi Hasan. I scorn, I despise, I detest, and I hate Mehdi Hasan. He is my kryptonite, I feel as though he is the most ill informed, unenlightened wretch ever to walk the earth. Therefore, as a believer in the absolute right to Freedom of Speech, it won’t take much of your brainpower to imagine the atmosphere in my flat when he declared, matter of factly on Question Time, “None of us believes in an untrammelled right to free speech.” – Excuse me?!

Fortunately for Mehdi, he has never met me. I am the person he loathes. I am the man in the pub, pint in hand, defending the right to deny the Holocaust. I am the man defending the right to be racist. I am the man who thinks that it is okay to draw pictures of historical figures. But let’s take a different approach. Free speech is always cast in negative terms. Free

speech is always illustrated as giving license to all of the pernicious forces in the world, and that is the wrong view to take.

We ought to view free speech as the cornerstone of every democratic society, the Atlas of rights, propping up an entire world of other rights. From this one freedom all of our other freedoms spring forth. Freedom of assembly, freedom to protest, strike, and yes, even the freedom to be offensive. Without the freedom to express your beliefs, all rights become meaningless and all attempts at progress are futile.

Free Speech was after all the midwife of the Enlightenment.

Restrictions on speech prevent us from becoming morally autonomous human beings, free to shape our own destinies.

Once we moralise through legislation, we seriously impact upon an individual’s life. Oppressive governments have gotten wise to this. Throughout the ages, the first act of many dictatorships has been to legislate against sedition, treason or ‘offending the culture of the nation’. These broad umbrella terms have been used to imprison dissent-

ers in the name of “the public good”. By restricting the information and ideas we are allowed to absorb, oppressive states throughout the ages have infantilised us, making us entirely dependent on their diabolical will. Freedom of Speech is the freedom to criticise bad ideas.

By preventing restrictions being

“We ought to view free speech as the cornerstone of every democratic society. From this one freedom all of our other freedoms spring forth.” placed on speech, we allow tyranny no foothold in our society.

Hasan’s recent stupid comments (of which there are no shortage) come in light of the Charlie Hebdo Massacre. Charlie Hebdo lampooned my reli-

gion relentlessly too, and their puerile publication first came to my attention when they were mocking my religious leader, the Pope. But no ideas should be placed upon a pedestal, least of all religion. Religion is an idea and ideas ought to be criticised.

When ideologies go unchallenged, the worst parts of them are allowed to fester. Worse still, once we impose a blanket ban on “hate speech”, we turn this “shield” into a sword to attack and persecute those whose ideas are incompatible with any supposedly divine belief system.

You hold critics to the standards of what they believe are false religions by forcing compliance.

One ought to be able to criticise Islam, Judaism and Christianity without fear of reprisal from the state or individuals. By protecting religion we have enabled a culture of victim blaming, which has enabled a cultural mindset not of “Je suis Charlie”, but “Charlie had it coming”. We have allowed a set of individuals to think that they are above all criticism, whose battle cry to deflect legitimate criticism of a religious-cultural identity is, “That’s

racist/[religion]-phobic!” This is the culture that Mehdi loves. A culture where every argument or headline he produces need only include his religious affiliation in order to silence opponents.

In fact no doubt, many will read this and think that by supporting the right to be racist or the right to deny the Holocaust that I am indirectly lending support to individuals who exercise those rights, or that “me and my ilk” are allowing Nazism to proliferate. This is simply incorrect.

You will find nobody who is a more ardent foe of the collectivist, Nazi evil than I. You will not find a more ardent supporter of Holocaust memorial projects than I. The way to defeat the evil racist minority, is to draw them out of the shadows and expose them as the vile cowards that they are.

Don’t allow them to sit in dark rooms scheming away, because that is where bad ideas proliferate – not in the public forum.

Mock them, parody them, and defeat them. Show everybody how ridiculous you think that they are.

Exercise your right to Freedom of Speech in a positive way.

Love freedom. Hate tyranny.

Comment

Tuesday February 10, 2015

14

Israeli Ambassador To The UK Talk: Responses In Opposition In Support A candid and honest analysis of the region

Deflecting questions and irrelevant answers

L A S T T U E S DAY, T H E I S R A E L I ambassador to the United Kingdom, Daniel Taub, came and talked about one of the most controversial topics in international politics: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His intention was to have a civilised discussion about the current situation in Israel and issues with negotiations. Besides a few outbursts from the audience, an embarrassing walk-out and a false fire alarm, he was able to achieve his objective.

Ambassador Taub did an excellent job showcasing some of the pertinent issues with negotiations. He outlined how both sides have been at fault for ineffective negotiations and how both sides have caused unrest. His Excellency did not spare Israel, citing some of Israel’s past transgressions and that at times it had an inability to move forward with meaningful talks. He showed how historic actions from both parties has led to mistrust and an unwillingness to negotiate for peace and how it is imperative to move forward from these narratives.

There have been criticisms of his speech, (such as the one outlined opposite), that asserted that His Excellency’s responses were evasive and irrelevant.

Bronwen Mehta cites a few examples of how Ambassador Taub blamed the Palestinians and outright talked about different topics, unrelated to the issue and/ or question. I will respond to some of the claims made by the author.

It is important to recognise that Ambassador Taub is an employee of the Israeli government and it is one of his duties to portray his country in a positive light. Last week, the United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Matthew Barzun, came to campus to do the exact same thing -- even though issues such as police brutality and racism are prevalent problems within the United States currently. It is unrealistic to think that an ambassador can simply go against his own policies and statements

WRITING AS A NON-AFFILIATED attendee of the Israeli Ambassador’s talk hosted by the LSE: Firstly, I thought it was shocking that Taub commented on the LSESU PalSoc and FemSoc joint event on Gender and Resistance in Occupied Palestine, something which he did not attend and his comment completely misrepresented. As this is an issue currently under investigation by both the school and the SU, it is highly inappropriate for an official figure to make a statement about it based on hearsay and inaccurate rumours, as opposed to waiting for the results of the investigation. Secondly, it was inappropriate for him to criticise FemSoc for focussing on Palestinian women, as opposed to Israeli women as Israel is apparently the pinnacle of gender equality in the region.

There are so many issues with this, I don’t even know where to begin.

The entire purpose of the event was to empower those who are often forgotten in our narratives of the conflict. And by generalising and grouping together all women in the region surrounding Israel, he grossly oversimplifies complex gender issues and, in my view, undermines their right to a platform.

Moving on from that, I found his talk worryingly out-of-touch with reality- it completely diminished Israeli responsibility for events throughout Israeli history including the events over the summer. The jokey demeanour by which Taub presented his views, I actually found somewhat offensive to both Israelis and Palestinians, as I thought it completely disregarded the severity of what he was talking about.

His discussion of negotiation theory was in some ways patronising as it did not once address one of the main problems: the power imbalance which dictates the process and outcome of

Jeremy Miraglia

and outwardly accuse its government of oppressive and aggressive actions. Taub simply supported his government, as any good ambassador would and did a fair job, taking into account that he conceded his government’s failure in producing meaningful peace talks.

The assertion that the Ambassador has disdain for international laws due to the fact he believes there is a bias in international organisations, such as the UN and ICC, is absurd. If you do look at the UN resolutions passed on Israel, you would see there is a disproportionate amount of criticisms and indictments. I feel singling out the only stable and effective democratic country in the Middle East while countries like Syria, where its civilians are subject to torture, chemical gas and extrajudicial killings, or Saudi Arabia, where people are still subject to beheading, a gender apartheid and other gross human rights violations, is atrocious. To further illustrate my point: in 2013, the United Nations adopted 25 critical resolutions against countries who were deemed to be committing horrible atrocities. 21 of the 25 resolutions were directed towards Israel. The four other countries that received these criticisms were: Syria, North Korea, Myanmar and Iran. In addition, the head of the UN investigatory committee into Israel’s supposed crimes against Gaza, William Schabas, was found to have accepted money from the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), leading some people to question whether or not Mr. Schabas can truly be unbiased. I do believe that these are excellent examples of inherent bias within the UN and I understand why Israel would be hesitant to recognise the legitimacy of these international organisations.

I was pleased to have the opportunity to see Ambassador Daniel Taub speak on the problems facing Israel and the region. He gave a very candid and honest analysis of the region and gave fair criticism to both sides, as neither side is completely innocent.

Bronwen Mehta

any negotiations that occur within the existing framework.

Furthermore, blaming the UN’s negative response to illegal Israeli occupation on an inherent bias, is a clear admission of his complete disdain for the International Laws that their resolutions seek to uphold. This for me demonstrated the aforementioned divorce from reality which was prevalent throughout his talk. Whilst the title of the event was ‘Israel and the Middle East: challenges ahead,’ it seemed to nearly entirely focus on a warped perception of the failures of past negotiation, discussing future options and regional challenges only very briefly.

The Q&A section of the event was equally aggravating- his inability to answer questions was shocking, as any question posed seemed to trigger the response of random anecdotes as to how Israel tried to not kill Gazan civilians last summer- even when this was not even nearly relevant to the question. His presentation of Hamas was wildly inaccurate, although I definitely accept that strong and thorough criticism of their inhumane acts of terrorism is due, ignoring and dismissing their role in providing social necessities is just a sign of ignorance.

Whilst I acknowledge that many of the topics covered are highly emotive and controversial - Taub himself declared his frustration when faced with circumstances where genuine discussion and debate are shut down, so his method of side-lining blame and massively generalising in order to avoid complexities was highly hypocritical.

As a student trying to learn more about the complex issues at hand in such a politicised and publicised conflict, I was hugely disappointed. The audible outrage towards some of the dismissive and disrespectful answers to questions (even once the most vocal opposition had left) were clear signs that I am not alone in this view.

15

Comment

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Why Is Anti-Semitism Not Racism?

Claiming that Jews enjoy ‘white privilege’ is an insulting denial of anti-Semitism Gabi Steuer AS AN O RT H O D O X Jewish student at the LSE, I was shocked to read LSESU BME Officer Samiha Begum’s statement concerning the LSESU Anti-Racism Officer Esther Gross which detailed her opinion that ‘there is a problem with white privilege extending to having a white woman hold the post to undermine anti-racism struggles on campus’. Not only does this statement fail to acknowledge the amount of work that Esther has done with all faiths and factions of our diverse community here at LSE, but it is personally upsetting to me that it discounts her own faith background in its entirety.

The fact is that unlike other minorities groups, you may not

know the Jews of your campus.

Some males may choose to don a ‘kippah’, a religious head covering, but most will not. Off campus, having witnessed jokes made about the holocaust, taunts of ‘pancake-head’ when walking with male friends wearing religious head coverings, or simply shouts and profanities yelled outside my synagogue, I am aware that anti-Semitism is still a problem prevalent in Europe today. Recent events

“Unlike other minority groups, you may not know the Jews of your campus”

in France have only helped the world to notice them, at least this week.

Jewish students may look, sound and behave just like every other average student in the UK. You may not be able to pick out a Jew from a group of ‘white British’ students, because often they will fall in to this category.

Does Samiha presume that because some Jews may be white, they will be immune to the sufferings of any other ethnic minority group? Unable to understand racial prejudice? With France having the highest rate of anti-semitism of anywhere in Europe, does it seem likely that our French Jewish anti-racism officer is lacking these insights?

The statement begs the question that should white skin prevent Jews being labelled as a

“Labelling Esther as ‘white’ is an attempt to delegitimise our hard working Anti-Racism officer” minority in general? Observing religion on campus as a female Jewish student can be hard at times, as it may have an impact on what I wear, what I eat and drink and how I socialise with others. Faith can even affect academic study in the wake of religious festivals. Judaism is widely considered to constitute an ethnic minority. Yet when it

comes to filling in countless job applications, I will fill in ‘white British’- should this mean that I forsake any rights to recognition as a minority?

People often fail to acknowledge Jews as being subject to racism, perhaps due to the case that many will indeed identify as ‘White British’. Yet the very fact that the presidents of Jewish society felt compelled to address the SU is largely telling of the concerns of Jewish students on campus. Labelling Esther as ‘white’ is an attempt to delegitimize our hard working antiracism officer. Jews are a small minority on campus, as they are in the UK. By ignoring Esther’s religious background, is Samiha not ignoring one of the very minorities she has been elected to represent?

‘White Privilege’: Not Just For Caucasians LSESU Anti-Racism Officer’s careless remarks neglect prejudice and Islamophobia on campus Kavita Kalaichelvan LETS BE HONEST; WE don’t live in an equal world. It is not equality when 12 journalists killed in a European society provoked the entire world to march in solidarity while the massacre of 2000 people in Nigeria only mustered a few second page headlines. Neither is it equality when women make up only 17% board directors of FTSE 100 companies and only 23% of Members of Parliament in the UK. Systematic biases which confer dominance to one group over another have become so deeply entrenched in our society such that for the most part, we don’t understand the privilege each of us have because we have been conditioned into oblivion about its existence.

That’s what privilege is; when one has never had to worry about something before such that they are oblivious to the fact that others do, often on a regular basis. These are things you are born into which present you with opportunities which others might not enjoy such as class, gender, skin colour or ability. Such biases can be attributed to systematic biases enshrined in our society which confer dominance to one group over another.

One of these is white privilege which can be defined as a transparent preference for whiteness which saturates our

society and creates significant differences in the ways a white and a coloured person experience this world. In today’s society, being white is seen as being ideal, just in the same way that Western ideas such as freedom of speech and democracy are upheld to be the norm. We see this reflected in the media, in

“The lack of visible and sincere apology for her statement suggests that Esther has not realised the cost of her carelessness, perhaps blinded by the privilege she enjoys in not being Muslim.” academia and even in available make up options.

In her piece “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”, Peggy McKintosh aptly identifies some of the daily effects that white privilege has in her own life such as ‘I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race

widely represented’ and ‘I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection’. These might seem like trivial conditions, but are unfortunately not as easily afforded to people who are of a different race. For most people of minority races, the way they have been perceived by society has been shaped by their race alone. To put it bluntly, a white person is not defined by their race in the same way a black person might be.

Understandably, the term ‘white privilege’ (which is probably more accurately described as ‘racial privilege’) is offensive to some but it is not intended to induce guilt or throw blame.

Nobody chose to be born within a certain race or with a skin colour, and it cannot be your fault if you enjoy these privileges.

Likewise, nobody is implying that if you are a white middle class male you have not had to work hard for what you have.

Rather, recognizing privilege makes you aware that some people have to work much harder just to experience the things you take for granted, if they can even experience them at all. More importantly, acknowledging privilege is the first step towards understanding the true extent of racism.

The question here is whether the ignorance of her own privilege has underpinned the actions of the LSESU Anti-Rac-

ism officer. (At this point, it is necessary to clarify the following: saying that she enjoys white privilege does not discount the experiences and oppression she might have suffered as a Jewish woman. Each of us can be privileged in some ways, and not in others and the concept of intersectionality recognises this nuance.) As an elected representative whose duty is to act against racism on campus, it is Esther’s responsibility to try and understand the biases that minority groups at LSE face regardless of whether she might or might not face them herself.

Hence, it was negligent of her to take a speaker’s comments made in reference to resistance of women against soldiers in a region of armed conflict, and skew the narrative to imply that the event was glorifying hate against Israelis and terrorism. More so, in carelessly accusing LSESU Palestine Society of inciting violence, she reinforces the very biases which Muslim students have to face every single day in society. The lack of visible and sincere apology for her statement suggests that neither Esther, nor her supporters have realised the cost of her carelessness, perhaps blinded by the privilege they enjoy in not being Muslim.

In today’s world, that privilege cannot be understated.

Non-Muslims are not made to apologise for all the people of their religion each time a terror-

ist attack happens. Non-Muslims do not face the brunt of the mass media against them.

Non-Muslims are not subject to double standards where antiSemitism is banned but publication of Islamophobic cartoons of the Prophet are considered to be free speech. The prejudices which face Muslims are real, and has a brutal impact on the way they interact with society.

By feeding into these prejudices with false accusations, Esther has demonstrated the sore lack of realising her privilege and being empathetic towards the very people her position seeks to protect.

As such, the anger of those calling for Esther’s resignation is reasonable. The only way for her to regain any semblance of trust within the minorities she represents now is to issue a heartfelt apology to the Muslim community that she has inadvertently vilified. They have had their narrative skewed yet again, this time on their own campus. At the same time, for the community, this anger should not be blinding. As minorities, when people try to understand our position and sympathise, we need to give them the benefit of doubt. Antagonism cannot be the solution for ignorance – only patience and cultivated understanding can.

Maintaining the status quo as us vs them will not win us the fight for equality. It will only prolong the battle.

Comment

Tuesday February 10, 2015

16

The Life-Threatening Disease Of Stupidity

The ‘Anti-Vax’ movement’s distrust of doctors is unfounded and is killing children Calum Muirhead HAVING GROWN UP AROUND medics for my entire childhood (most likely exposing me to every disease known to the Great British public), the idea of mistrusting medical professionals simply by virtue of their line of work is a concept I find baffling. After all, would you doubt the advice of a fireman when concerning the proper way to tackle a blazing apartment block just because it’s his job to put out said blazes? It is this crux (albeit itself propped up by a fair amount of pseudoscience) upon which the modern anti-vaccination movement rests.

Within the last decade, increasing numbers of parents are consciously opting to refrain from providing their children with vaccinations against diseases that can often be lethal if not treated. This phenomenon has come to a head in recent days, with an outbreak of measles at the Disneyland theme park in California infecting more than 100 people across the United States. This is particularly troubling concerning the fact that measles was declared eradicated by the Centre for Disease Control in 2000. In a mere span of 15 years, the movement to prevent vaccination has effectively resurrected a disease thought destroyed in the US by modern medicine.

To make matters worse, US politicians (including potential presidential contenders) have opted to play the ‘parent choice’ angle when questioned on the issue of anti-vaccination movements.

Unfortunately, the situation has

no longer become a matter of parental choice but rather one of public health protection.

“Wilful ignorance is no longer an excuse to potentially threaten the lives of not only your children but the children of others.”

The mistrust of the medical and pharmaceutical professions that has galvanised the anti-vaccine movement is obviously dangerous to the general population.

However, I cannot think of an ideal that would insult a collection of individuals more than to mistrust them in their very own field. To claim that national medical bodies, supported by decades of scientific research, possess a perverse agenda to inoculate innocent children with hazardous chemicals that may additionally cause physical and mental defections is like something out of a conspiracy novel (I blame Dan Brown personally).

Ironically, many in the antivaccine movement espouse the virtue of parental research before committing children to vaccination courses, while at the same time stating that the information

from drug companies and established medical bodies should not be trusted. Their argument?

‘Well, doctors are only human, they don’t know everything, they can make mistakes too’. While this is true in a minority of cases (most notably in the case of the flawed link of the MMR vaccine to autism that began this whole debacle of idiocy), if parents are told not to trust those who society has selected to acquire expertise in this very field, where shall they turn instead?

Recall the fireman example; ‘well firemen are only human, they don’t know everything, they can make mistakes too’. Would that justify leaving people to burn to death just because the expert ‘may’ make a mistake at ‘some’ point during the execution of their job description? Would you rather entrust the safety of your children to someone with a water pistol and a damp cloth?

Unfortunately for the selfproclaimed ‘Anti-Vaxxers’, their philosophy of mistrust and denial of scientific research has most likely sown the seeds of their own destruction. As tension grows between with parents who refuse to vaccinate their children and those seeking to protect their offspring from preventable diseases, the chorus to effectively quarantine un-vaccinated children from their peers grows louder with every preventable outbreak. Many US clinics are already considering refusing afflicted children to attend for fear of infecting their entire clientele.

More radical voices have even

proposed the classification of non-vaccination of children as an offence which should result in the removal of the children from the parents. While I sympathise with the bonds that tie parents to their children, wilful ignorance is no longer an excuse to potentially threaten the lives of not only your children but the children of others. Your poor parenting does not warrant the death or disabling of others.

“Unfortunately, the antivaccination issue has no longer become a matter of parental choice but rather one of public health protection.”

If this poisonous movement continues to worm its way into the minds of parents with little intervention by political power, the only end result is the eventual loss of many children to preventable diseases that we have spent centuries attempting to eradicate.

As much as this scenario chills the blood, perhaps the death of one’s children is the only sufficient remedy to the ignorance of the anti-vaccination movement. The disease of stupidity has no cure, therefore it must be contained, by any means possible if necessary.

Photo: Flickr: John Twohig

A Formal Invitation From Democracy Committee

A public discourse on the lack of publicity and attendance of LSE’s weekly UGM

Conor Rohan LSESU Democracy Committee Dear Liam Hill, Mark Malik and Christopher Hulm, I would like to take this opportunity to formally invite you to the Union General Meeting on Thursday 12th of Febru-

ary. I am sorry I haven’t written sooner, but I have been quite preoccupied “hanging my head in shame” with the rest of the Democracy Committee at the lack of publicity for previous UGwMs. Also invited are: Joe Anderson, the vegetables Christopher ate for dinner last night, Jay Stoll, Craig Calhoun, my pet turtle ‘Napoleon’, that guy who cooks the burgers in Wright’s Bar and LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE LSE STUDENT (seriously, anybody and their dog can come to these meetings*). It will be taking place in the Old Theatre from 1-2pm and, as part of Green Week, we will be discussing motions to divest from fossil fuels and

on the proposed ‘streamlining’ of the ethics code.

If you’d like to know more about what’s happening and when, please like the LSESU Democracy page on Facebook!

If, however, you’re not great fans of social media - which I’m assuming you’re not since you seem like you’ve missed every single event page we’ve created, Martha will arrange for hand-written customised invitations to be delivered to each of you by courier to your classes every week.

RSVP Yours sincerely, Conor Rohan and the rest of your Democracy Committee *Except you Jason Wong, you’re not invited.

Mark Malik LSESU Disabled Students’ Officer Dear Democracy Committee, Thank you for your kind invitation to tomorrow’s UGM. I can confirm that I will be attending. Indeed, as Disabled Students’ Officer, I will be taking questions. I look forward to the Director being there and to meet your pet turtle, Napoleon. I only wish that you had named him Nelson. I cannot speak for Christopher Hulm’s vegetables – which may or not have existed on the night in question – nor for any previous UGM chairs.

I note with regret that P-Day has not received an invitation. This is a travesty and Democracy Committee

should hang their heads in shame.

I am glad that there is now a page for the DC. It is a one-stop shop for all my hacky needs and will be invaluable in the weeks ahead.

If, nonetheless, Martha would like to deliver hand-crafted invitations, I have a class Fridays 12pm in TW2.2.04. I may need a reminder on Tuesdays at 4pm in 32L.G.20.

Thank you again for taking the time to personally invite me. I am truly honoured.

Yours Sincerely, Mark Malik LSESU Disabled-Students’ Officer; Vice-President, LSESU Conservative Society; Collective member of The Beaver; Self-appointed Heir to Meaden; BSc Mathematics and Economics

17

Comment

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Tax Cuts: A Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing

The timing of David Cameron’s tax cuts raises questions about the aims of his fiscal policy Ryan O’Rourke IS IS UNDENIABLE THAT TAX cuts are popular. From the middle ages, when princes would tax the peasantry to fund wars, taxes have been associated with increasing the size and role of the state at the expense of the general public.

This has only been reinforced by modern economic theory; fiscal conservatives often refer to this as government interference at its best.

Therefore, David Cameron’s announcement of tax cuts last week could be welcomed as a sensible policy. The prime minister’s tax cuts both increase real household income, a measure of how well off we are, and limit the states role in the economy. Both should increase demand and consumption. This is undeniably true.

However the timing of the cuts, both before an election and when the buzzword in British politics is austerity, is strange. The choice of tax cuts also raises the fundamental question over whether Mr Cameron is motivated by rational policy making, or ideological zeal.

The tax cuts have been embedded into the narrative that the British public, after 5 years of austerity, deserve some relief. This

is misleading. Ricardian Equivalence, named after the 19th century economist David Ricardo who first discussed the theory, tells us that such tax cuts do not present a fiscal panacea. The basic premise is tax breaks today either have to be paid for by increased taxation tomorrow, or future cuts in gov-

“The choice of tax cuts raises the fundamental question over whether Mr Cameron is motivated by rational policy making, or ideological zeal” ernment spending. It is within this narrative the cuts should be placed.

There are two possible objections to this. The first has to do with interest rates. Currently the rate governments can borrow is at a historic low. Therefore, by cutting taxes today and raising them when

such rates are higher allows the government to bring forward consumption which is cheaper in real terms. This leads into the second; cutting taxes can lead to an increase in current demand. By bringing forward consumption, tax cuts in theory should both rejuvenate the economy and decrease government interference on a micro level.

Whist both may objections may have a point, they fail to address the fundamental effect of the tax cuts; they represent an increase in long term government expenditure. Even if government can borrow at a low rate of interest, that borrowing has to be paid back in the future. Along with the persisting budget deficit and the coalitions deficit cutting plans, which the Conservatives (Mr Cameron’s party) have said they will continue, this raises several questions.

The first is why taxes are being cut instead of the deficit being reduced, or decreasing the cuts in public services. Given the target groups, those on low income and those who earn around £40,000 a year, it would seem the decision to cut taxes is more politically motivated rather then backed by economic rational. Slowing the rate of cuts could also be seen as

“The public should be given the direct choice of whether services such as the NHS remain are partially privatised.” admitting to the fact that austerity and fiscal consolidation had failed, whilst increasing government expenditure would contradict what the coalition has aimed to achieve.

But the more important question is why Mr Cameron has chosen to loosen fiscal policy at all.

Given more cuts will be needed regardless of the economic recovery, it would seem there is a strong ideological motivation behind the policy. This is more pertinent since the loosening has come as cuts in taxation rather than rises in public expenditure. By increasing the pressure for future cuts in public spending, the tax cuts may have revealed Mr Cameron’s true motivational factor; to ensure the size of the state continues to shrink.

There are justifications for doing this. However, when public services such as the police and the criminal justice system are running on a shoe string, it seems ill timed. It also raises further questions about the future of services such as the NHS. Given welfare spending is set to continue rising, it would seem Mr Cameron is trying to force the issue of decreasing state activity in such programs. This is both undemocratic and unfair. The public should be given the direct choice over whether services such as the NHS remain as they are, or are either restricted or partially privatised. Forcing such future decisions through the prism of a tax cut is misleading.

It also raises a question over the future direction of Conservative policy. So far, the coalition’s cuts in public expenditure have been justified by the pressing need to control public expenditure. Given this need has somewhat subsided recently, it seems Mr Cameron’s vision is to force further cuts as to achieve the goal of a smaller state. There is nothing inherently wrong with a smaller state. However, it would be far better if Mr Cameron, rather then mislead the public, stated this as his aim. It may even win him back some support back from the centre right.

A Realist Account of LSE International Relations Disappointed IR students voice their concerns about department’s performance Anonymous Students AFTER AN EVENTFUL SECOND year full of abruptly cancelled lectures, essays returned just hours before exam and, on one memorable occasion, half a documentary masquerading as a lecture in a surreal back-to-school twist, the BSc IR students of the class of 2015 thought they’d seen it all. What follows is the brief but lamentable tale of just how wrong they were.

Indeed, these problems seem minor when put up against the mess that was the third year of our degrees.

Before this academic year had even begun, dissatisfaction had snowballed into anger and worry.

With only three full units of the original six available and the introduction of three new half units to replace them, students who had long considered their options for their final year and studied towards them found themselves, in varying cases, taking a wide basket of subjects in which they have no particular interest, or in a position where they were expected to complete six exams come the Summer Term. Even so, many of the courses were capped, limiting the options for all students. Naturally for many, this was a source of considerable disappointment.

Even that, however, was the tip of the iceberg. The real problem revolves around particular course - let’s call it IR3xx. Saved from near cancellation by the IRD’s hiring of a fellow at short notice, the new hire quickly proved problematic as he attempted to change the course’s assessment after it had begun by introducing a vague ‘research assignment’ on the basis of a questionable plebiscite and without departmental sanctioning.

He brought to the classroom and lecture hall an abrasive personality, such as his sudden ‘PSA’ concerning students’ body odour at the beginning of a morning lecture. A marked divergence exists between his class structure and that of the course’s Graduate Teaching Assistant, causing fury in those disadvantaged students - where the GTA provides handouts, case studies and a solid grounding in concepts and theory, the professor sees fit to ramble on with no particular focus whatsoever. “Is class still relevant?” one seminar group was asked. Given that particular class’s supposed focus on the broad theoretical traditions of historical materialism and dependency theory, many that morning were likely asking themselves the same question.

The ‘research assignment’, a

3500 word essay that is to count for 40 per cent of our grade, has caused the most trouble. The only formal stipulated requirements are a short paragraph on moodle, and when the lecturer was asked to expand on this on various occasions, he could only repeat the same words – ‘empirical’, ‘contestable’ and ‘problematic’, in a wide variety of similarly opaque configurations – and refusing to give a concrete example of an appropriate research question. Students are thus required to conjure up their own title for their essay without a coherent understand of what exactly it is that is expected of them.

The problem is evident in the sheer number of students whose proposals were continually rejected by the professor, but it is compounded by those assignments which were approved by the GTA, only to then be rejected by the professor. Not only was the professor incapable of communicating his requirements to his students - his GTA appears to have been left baffled too!

The BSc IR students have naturally taken all the standard paths in their demand for changes in the teaching of the course - first through their SSLC representatives during Week 6 of Michaelmas Term, then through the SU in Week 0 of Lent

Ter. When both methods failed due to a variety of bureaucratic reasons, a petition with the signatures of comfortably over half of the students enrolled in the course was put together only to be practically ignored by the IRD with regards to the assignment of IR3xx (an extension for the essay was granted independently of the petition, but without clarifying the actual problem of unclear requirements).

Then, due to unforeseen circumstances unrelated to the course, teaching was interrupted in Week 2 of Lent Term. The course was paused for two weeks, during which time the IRD’s communication of information was as poor as ever, leaving students confused as to whether they had lectures and classes or not, and if yes, then on what topic. As it stands right now, students enrolled on the course are still not clear clear about the assessment of the course - both in the exam and the essay - or about the future of the course in general even though 1/9 of their degree grade is at stake.

All this makes the a student of the IR Class of ’15 wonder whether their £25,500+ was really worth it.

We feel extremely disappointed that our department has neglected our concerns regarding IR3xx, voiced

in nearly weekly emails by numerous individuals and in a petition signed by over half of the students taking the course. When purchasing an education, it is fair for us, as students and consumers, to expect certain rights to education. Rights to decent quality teaching, clear instructions, fairly transparent marking, equal treatment for all students. Not just one, but all of these aspects have been missing from IR3xx and yet, the IRD has failed to address this in a sufficient way.

Studying IR at LSE is a privilege. However, when my juniors from my high school ask me about university choices, I wonder if I am doing the right thing in encouraging them to apply to BSc IR at LSE. While this institution can provide so much, my opinion on the BSc IR course has after the experiences of the past three years turned quite sour.

Editorial note: Due to the timing of submission relative to print deadlines we have not had opportunity yet to ask the IR Department for comment on these allegations. By the time you read this we will have approached them for comment, which will be added to this article online and published in print next week if/when received. If anyone has a response please email the executive or comment editor.

Global Village

Photo

Photo

Tuesday February 10, 2015

18

The Beaver 09.10.2012

COVER CREDITS: FLICKR - DAVE

Tuesday February 10, 2015

20

PARTB

LOVE AND PHYSICAL ATTRACTION:

LET'S TALK ABOUT SEX, BABY

A CONFLATION

PHYSICAL attraction is both a subjective and nebulous concept to which there are many contributory elements, including one's smile, smell and mannerisms, yet despite what some assert to the contrary it is often appearance that is its deciding factor. Although there may be exceptions to this general rule, it tends to be the case that when evaluating another's potential as a partner, their level of physical attractiveness will feature heavily in one's considerations, as emphasised by the example of Tinder, the photo-based dating app, where a user can flick through the photos of possible matches, liking or rejecting them based on their appearances. This focus only seems to be subsidised by the popular notion of 'love at first sight' that we so frequently encounter, thus emphasising in itself our tendency to conflate physical attraction with romantic love.

It could be said that our society

influences this tendency in two respects. Firstly, despite the proverb that 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder', wherever it may glance, the beholder's eye is constantly exposed to the images of the purported beauty ideals for both genders, and hence it is inevitable that each individual's subjective view on what constitutes physical attractiveness is subconsciously subjected to the rippling tide of consumerism.

Secondly, building on from this, we are frequently exposed to this conflation in the entertainment industry, where physical attraction is frequently equated with love, as depicted in most Disney storylines. Therefore many of us adopt a 'type' in our pursuit of love, in accordance with our standards of physical attractiveness, a source of judgement only encouraged by society to be nipped and tucked by us all.

This conflation is further evident in literature, for example in the

works of the Ancient Roman poet Ovid, whose Pygmalion appears to confuse love 'amor' with appearanceorientated lust 'cupiditas' (Book X, The Metamorphoses). Here a sculptor, having carved a statute of a woman to embody his physical ideal, falls in love with his creation, a 'love' that heavily connotes physical attraction: '[he] marvels and burns with passion for this bodily image' 'miratur et haurit pectore...simulati corporis ignes'.

Ovid's famous depiction of Narcissus (Book III, The Metamorphoses) is another example of this where the character falls in love with himself upon viewing his reflection in a fountain.

Upon observing 'his youthful cheeks and ivory neck and the beauty of his face...' 'inpubesque genas et eburnea colla decusque oris...' his love is apparent, but once again with lustful connotations: 'I am burning with love for myself. I move and bear the flames' 'uror amore mei: flammas moveoque feroque'. It is thus evident that Ovid in his description of romance fails to adhere to the fact that 'love is one thing, lust another', 'alius est amor, alius cupido' (Lucius Afranius).

There are some who attempt to justify this conflation with the idea of it being a natural instinct, intrinsic to one's being, a symptom of man's evolution that in itself seems very unevolved.

It is a fact of life, or so we are led to believe, that certain physical traits are more desirable in terms of procreation, such as youth, but nevertheless it appears rather paradoxical that as a species we regard ourselves as so advanced and yet we exhibit tendencies, perhaps subconsciously, that have remained fundamentally unchanged, even primitive. Perhaps we are not so different from other species after all?

Take the male peacock for example, whose elaborate feathers are displayed during his courtship of a peafowl. It could be said that we are no different in our impression of love, concentrating our efforts on the very dominant concept of physical attractiveness, a conflation that is further encouraged by our society, thus appealing to the prehistoric man in us all.

AS you probably know, Valentine’s Day is coming up this weekend. Whether you look at it as an opportunity to show that ‘special someone’ extra affection and romance, or as a gag-inducing ploy created by Clintons’ card company (I’m not bitter, promise), the Institute of Sexology at the Wellcome Collection on Euston Road is well worth a visit for anyone interested in….well, sex.

Unsurprisingly, the exhibition was full of curious visitors on a Sunday afternoon; plan your visit as you’ll need a ticket with an allocated timeslot to get in – we recommend a hazelnut and marshmallow hot chocolate in the museum café as you wait. Although it may be busy, it’s well worth the wait; with the mantra of ‘Undress Your Mind’ adorning the walls, the Institute of Sexology is an exploration into the science of sex throughout the ages, examining it in the arenas of the laboratory, the classroom and the home among many others. The diversity of material on display ranges from the first UK National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles, to clips such as Woody Allen’s 1973 Sleeper, where a slightly hysterical Diane Keaton gets locked in a strange contraption known as the ‘orgasmatron’ – haven’t we all?

In all seriousness, a particular highlight is Sharon Hayes’ documentary ‘Ricerche: three’. Projected onto a large screen in the exhibition’s central room, the short film explores sexuality in a conversational and informal interview style from the perspective of students at an all women’s college in western Massachusetts. Voicing their opinions on the underlying political conditions informing people’s attitudes to sex and their self definitions, one participant notes the hypersexualisation of society and classes her abstinence as a political act, presenting the audience with alternative conceptualisations of sex as an act and sexuality as identification. Amongst the handwritten letters to key contraceptive advocate Marie Stopes, and the notes of sexologists Sigmund Freud and Alfred Kinsey, do be sure to check out Zanele Muholi’s Faces and Phases – a photographic exploration of black lesbians, bisexuals and transwomen in South Africa and beyond.

Overall the Institute of Sexology is a fascinating insight into the weird and wonderful world of sex; where else in London would you be able to find the first uses of the words fetishism, sadism and masochism, or a satirical video criticising 1980s discriminatory Conservative policy against homosexuality? We wouldn’t recommend it as a first date (might be slightly awkward), but this is definitely worth a visit for exploring one of city’s more unusual exhibitions. Unfortunately, no photographs are allowed inside the exhibition, but then again, we wouldn’t want to spoil the surprises for you.

The Institute of Sexology is free admission and on until 20 September 2015 at the Wellcome Collection, Euston Road.

SUYIN HAYNES

The emphasis we attribute to physical attraction in our pursuit of a partner, although potentially unavoidable due to social and natural influences, embodies a narrow-minded, indirect objectification of another. Here the concept of romantic love we are so often exposed to and encouraged to seek, in actual fact a conflation with physical attraction, is not blind, but rather incredibly superficial.

EDEN HOWARD

PARTB EDITORIAL TEAM PARTB

FASHION

FILM

Jade Jackman Vikki Hui

Sanya-Jeet Thandi

Jade Jackman Maryam Akram

partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk

fashion@thebeaveronline.co.uk

film@thebeaveronline.co.uk

FOOD

LITERATURE

MUSIC

TECHNOLOGY

THEATRE

VISUAL ARTS

Caroline Schurman-Grenier

Gareth Rosser

Rohan Soni

Jon Rhys Foster

food@thebeaveronline.co.uk

literature@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Conor Doherty, Will Locke & Dominic Tighe

techonology@thebeaveronline.co.uk

theatre@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Jade Jackman Maryam Akram

music@thebeaveronline.co.uk

visualarts@thebeaveronline.co.uk

21

Tuesday February 10, 2015

TECHNOLOGY

WOMEN IN I.T.

A CAREER IN I.T.?

CAROLINE Barnsdall-Thompson, Principle Enterprise Architect for a FTSE 100 company, shares her opinions on why women should consider a career in the Technolog y Industry.

I started working in technology over 30 years ago, after studying Computer Science at City University. My first day at City was spent waiting for the other girls to turn up to the Computer Science lecture hall. They never did – it was only ever me and 20 men!

I spent the first few years of my career in the stereotypical technology role: coding. However, due to the wide range of opportunities that the industry has to offer, I am no longer spending hours on text editors writing lines and lines of code. Something that hasn’t changed however, is the domination of the technology industry by male employees. I’m regularly in meetings and conferences around the world still waiting for another woman to turn up! Here are my three main reasons why women should consider technology: 1) It’s not (just) about coding!

When someone mentions they work in IT, you probably have a vision of the IT Crowd… a few nerds in a dark, long forgotten room in the basement hacking away. The truth is there is more to the technology industry than coding!

What technology is really about is designing solutions that make businesses more cost effective, personal lives easier and innovations that change the world… Can you imagine any business that can exist and profit in today’s world without technology in some form or another? Or your life without your smartphone and laptop?

But for this industry to work, it needs more than coders. It needs analysts to understand the business opportunities, designers to design systems that deliver those opportunities, portfolio managers to manage spend (large companies spend on average $11,580 per employee per annum on tech), venture capitalists to foster early-stage innovation, sales representatives to pitch these

products and services to clients, just to name a few…

2) Women are really good at IT! The key skills needed for all of these roles include communication, people and project management, an aptitude for consultancy and a certain amount of logic… and guess what, women are really good at all of these! Women in tech do well, but there are just not enough of us taking advantage of this!

Women make up 49% of the UK labour force, but they account for just 17% of IT professionals (and falling).

Even Google only manages 30% of women in its workforce: it’s time to change those statistics.

3) Women are the lead adopters of Tech (So we ought to design it!)

Women in western countries use the internet 17% more than their male counterparts. They use their mobile phones more, use location-based services more, are the fastest-growing and largest number of users of Skype, and use most social media sites more often, particularly Pinterest. They also form the majority of owners of tech devices.

And tech devices are going to be big, I mean really big. By 2020, 50 billion devices are predicted to be connected to the internet. This will continue to compound the growth of the industry: with more and more ‘intelligent’ devices coming the opportunities are endless!

You don’t have to be ‘technical’ to discover the opportunities for the technology industry - let’s see more business opportunities using tech designed by women!

To discover more about the technology opportunities at the LSE, join the LSESU Technology Society, who have a number of upcoming events for careers in technology and learning key skills.

Digital Studies and Women in Europe

If women held digital jobs as frequently as men do, Europe’s GDP could be raised by around 9 billion euros a year.

THIS year saw the 199th anniversary of the birth of Ada Lovelace, a name seemingly anonymous to many, a woman who is one of the greatest mathematicians and computer programmers this world has ever seen.

Lovelace is considered the world’s first computer programmer after creating the first algorithm for use on a machine. Fast-forward to 2014 where is an unfortunate shortage of women in digital studies and careers; this needs to change, as ICT is the key to future European growth and women need to play a greater role in the industry in order for this to be achieved. Women account for 17% of Computer Science graduates, fewer than 30% of employees in the ICT sector, and a mere 9% of European app developers. The two problems that the European Commission intends to act on are that many girls do not choose ICT-related studies at school, and even fewer choose careers in ICT. Subsequently, a study entitled Women Active in the ICT Sector was commissioned to analyze these problems in more detail.

With the ICT sector growing at a rate of 120,000 new jobs every year, the Study hasfound that by 2020 Europe could face a shortage of 900,000 ICT professionals, severely hampering the economy and limiting the scope for growth. Most strikingly, however, is the finding that if women held digital jobs as frequently as men do, Europe’s GDP could be raised by around 9 billion euros a year, that equates to 1.3 times the GDP of Malta! Furthermore, analysis has found that underrepresentation of women is extremely evident in particular job positions within the sectors such as technical and decisionmaking posts. Four recommendations were agreed upon based on the study’s findings: build a renewed image of the sector; empower women in the sector;

increase the number of women entrepreneurs in the sector; improve working conditions in the sector. European initiatives such as the ‘Grand Coalition for Jobs’ and the ‘Ada Lovelace Conference’ are acting to effect these changes as a matter of urgency.

Grand Coalition for Jobs

This initiative is described by the European Commission as “a multistakeholder partnership that endeavors to facilitate collaboration among business and education providers, as well as public and private actors, to take action and attract young people into ICT and to retrain unemployed people.” The initiative’s aim is to see a substantial increase in supply of trained ICT practitioners by 2015 in order to safeguard growth in the sector. International forums like the World Economic Forum in Davos in February 2014 have been used by Former European Commission President Barroso and Former Vice President Neelie Kroes to engage more stakeholders into the initiative. Here, CEOS from across the globe were invited to endorse the Davos Declaration on the Grand Coalition for Digital Jobs. Recently, parallel national coalitions have been launched across Europe: in Bulgaria, Greece, Malta, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Poland.

These countries all face a different set of challenges due to their diversity of educational systems and labor market conditions and, thus, more localized coalitions facilitate the discovery of country-specific solutions for the shortage of ICT specialists. An example of a national coalition is ‘Women and Girls Go Digital in Greece’ where the Minis-

try of Interior found that women have a higher return on investment than their male counterparts (50% higher).

On the back of this finding, a detailed National Action Plan was presented in April 2014 laying out the target of enhancing the digital and entrepreneurial skills of women in Greek society.

Ada Lovelace Conference

Held at the Stevens Institute of Technology, the Ada Lovelace Conference aims at expanding the influence of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. This year’s Conference saw Valerie Aurora, recognized as one of ‘Femme–O–nomics Top 50 Women to Watch in Technology’ and cited in 2012 as one of the 6 most influential ICT thinkers by SC Magazine, as the keynote speaker.

Valerie Aurora discussed a wide variety of papers on Lovelace’s work, issues affecting women in computer science, and the broader societal implications of her story. Furthermore, there was a focus on Lovelace’s life outside of her academia, attendees learnt that she rode horses, had secret affairs, went to late-night salons, suffered through various health problems, played the harp, and was a keen gambler on horses.

This reflects the aim of the wider Ada Initiative, and whilst much focus is given to her ICT and Mathematical achievements, it is important for young girls and women interested in a career in the industry to have an exciting and successful role model to inspire them.

COSTA THRASYVOULOU

CAROLINE BARNSDALL-THOMPSON

"That Brain of mine is something more than merely mortal; as time will show." – Ada Lovelace

Tuesday February 10, 2015

MUSIC/FOOD

REVIEW:

TETSUO & YOUTH BY LUPE FIASCO LUPE Fiasco has had a very interesting decade or so in hip-hop. He started with two albums (Food & Liquor and The Cool) that were well-received, appealing and conscious hip-hop projects. But following those albums he’s gone quite wayward after a great outbreak into the genre. We all thought Lupe was stuck. No longer was he a “cool” topical emcee that provided food-for-thought music, but instead he’d become the commercial sell-out that endorsed ultra-mainstream-targeted singing hooks mixed with supertechno beats that completely drowned out anything important he said. Now in early 2015, Lupe is back on form with Tetsuo & Youth – he’s finally in a more creative and coherent territory.

In other words, Lupe’s back.

After struggling with his label (Atlantic Records) over the last 6 years or so when wanting to release material in his artistic control (e.g. the commercial attempt disaster L.A.S.E.R.S album), Tetsuo & Youth displays a more refreshingly creative approach. It’s split by interludes that signal shifts in the general mood and sound of the album – starting with ‘Summer’ and generally get more grittier and darker until ending with ‘Spring’, which considering the release date of this album, is presumably up to us to figure out.

Lupe approaches this album dif-

ferently by bringing his brand of lyrical conscious and topical rap without the production and hooks that blurred the lyrical depth in his recent attempts.

The opening track, ‘Mural’, is a killer 8-minute rap epic that that needs no hook or flashy production but instead just simple looped piano and drums.

The result is probably the best Lupe has ever rapped in his entire career.

Topically the song deals with a flock of massive societal issues that could take up this entire review. Needless to say, it’s one of the most addictively replayed songs possible, so much so that it’s almost a detriment to the other 15 tracks.

Ultimately, it’s Lupe’s combination of highly conceptual story telling and mood-reflective beats that back these tracks up. This is best displayed on the intellectually stimulating song ‘The Prisoner’ which examines the prison-industrial complex in the US from two different perspectives and so is split into two 4-minute songs. The perspectives delve into the actual prisoner and how their life is affected as well as the prisoner guard who works there on a day-to-day basis – with the production changing accordingly creating a contrastingly venomous second half. The album also dives into some extremely heart-felt themes – ‘Madonna’ is a warm ode to mothers protecting their children from the

dangers of the street and ‘Adoration of the Magi’ pushes a peaceful message to the youth’s attitudes: ‘why you ready to die, you just a baby’.

Lupe gets a lot more gritty songs in the ‘Winter’ section of the album – ‘Chopper’ is a long trap-influenced banger posse cut that mocks the ease one can acquire weaponry, and ‘Deliver’ focuses on dangerous neighborhoods within America are looked upon – that ‘the pizza man don’t come here no more’. Whilst the hook on ‘Deliver’ does sound slightly cheesy, the cryptic messages Lupe leaves make up for this – such as the way Lupe says ‘pizza man’ very similar to ‘peace of man’.

Testuo & Youth struggles with an already lyrically stuffed 79 minute run time. In addition to this, the songs that get large extended lengths (despite being frankly awesome tracks), make it difficult for the project to be as cohesive and sharp as an album with this much substance has. However, this isn’t to say that that the rest is just filler, most of it is the most stimulating material mainstream hip-hop has heard this decade. It’s more that both this structure and length make some tracks feel very underwhelming in comparison – especially the soppy ‘No Scratches’, so perhaps Lupe should’ve released this as six ten-minute tracks to create a more balanced project.

However, overall, this album is a very good project – there’s weight behind his lyrics without sounding too ‘preachy and its both a musically and lyrically interesting album that can appeal to all sorts of fans. What’s even better is that Lupe delivers a variety of messages and plenty to decipher through an album that is still in ‘mainstream’ territory. Given the state of hip-hop, albums that have real depth and substance like Tetsuo & Youth are needed, instead of more of the same meaningless braggadocios ‘club-bangers’. But even taking out the current state of hip-hop as a factor, Lupe has finally put out an album worthy of following his first two efforts.

22

Bach Violin Concertos

by Candlelight

WHAT could be a better way to spend a Friday evening, than in the beautiful church of St-Martin-in-the-Fields with some of London’s finest instrumentalists? A group of us from the LSE Music Society were lucky enough to witness this fantastic concert, consisting of Bach’s violin concertos, Pachelbel’s Canon and other music

by Vivaldi, Handel, and Purcell performed by ‘London Musical Arts.’ We were taken on a journey back in time to the grand courts of the Enlightenment era; through my mind’s eye I could see bewigged aristocrats and ladies of court with billowing dresses, dancing ceremoniously up and down at some regal function. This effect was enhanced by the spectacular Georgian surroundings, particularly the grand ornamental ceiling, lit only by candlelight.

The music itself was beautifully performed. In Bach’s Violin Concerto in E Major one could see both the passion and intensity in the face of Violinist Joshua Fisher, especially at the expressive endings of phrases. The final piece, Bach’s Concerto for Two Violins in D Minor, was particularly enjoyable, when Fisher was joined by Deborah White. It was interesting to witness such high levels of musicianship, which was communicated through eye contact throughout the concert, but particularly here, in the

sections of antiphonal exchange. All the more so as we were seated so close to the action. Another of the highlights of the evening was the ‘Meet the Music’ event during the interval. Here, conductor John Landor invited Fisher to play sections of the music at a slower tempo so that the audience could appreciate the intricacy of the melody and the difficult double bowing manoeuvres, which are easy to miss when in the context of the music.

The music itself was lullingly beautiful, with classics such as Bach’s Air on the G String, Vivaldi’s Concerto for Two Violins in A Minor, and Purcell’s Rondeau from Abdelazer. I really empathise with Schopenhauer’s ideas about the power of ‘absolute music,’ as during this concert, I felt completely relaxed and free from worry.

I was able to recognize his idea that music is capable of powerfully embodying aspects of human nature that are inexpressible in language, and can temporarily elevate the human mind to a higher plane where one is released from the slavery of passions.

Overall it was a tremendous concert of some of the most exquisite pieces from the Baroque period. Members of our group particularly enjoyed the chords with augmented 3rds (somehow different from perfect 4ths?!), however, the ‘cherry on the cake’ according to Music Society President Daniel Kim was the wine served down in the crypt during the interval! We would like to thank to Barry Chui of the Music Society for organising what was a great evening and looking forward to more excursions to come!

DOMINIC TIGHE

Essential Listening: Mural, The Prisoner pt1 and 2, Body of Work, Chopper, Madonna, Adoration of the Magi Rating: 8.2/10

DHRUV BHANOTHA

A ROYAL FEAST AT ROYAL CHINA

IF you like Dim Sum (and if you don’t, I don’t get you at all) then you NEED to go to Royal China! It is by far one of the best places in town. Dim Sum is one of the best things that ever happened to Chinese food. Why? Because it allows us Western brunch enthusiasts to step away from our comfort of eggs and bacon after a long night out and discover an alternative, yet just as delicious, way of having a semi breakfast/lunch/meal of the day. Whether it’s the dumplings, the noodles, the duck or even the weird buns of sweet dough, you’ll be begging for more, I guarantee.

Here is how it goes: you impatiently wait for your number to be called

while you watch the dozens of dim sum plates go by you. Once you are seated, you are surrounded by the chitchat of the tables around you. You have no idea what they’re saying, but you’re excited to be there. You open the menu, pick your favorite items while struggling not to order the entire menu, and begin your own chitchat amidst the sea of Dim Sum enthusiasts. Suddenly, your waiter comes back, and he’s carrying 5 plates in one hand and 4 in the other. You don’t know how he does it, but you’re impressed. When you taste the food, it’s exactly what you imagined…only better. The flavors, the variety and the atmosphere make for a lovely Sunday meal.

Not only is the food bursting with flavors and aromas; it also tastes as good as it smells! Never have I ever been so excited to see mountains of plates served in front of me. If you don’t like meat or fish, the menu is big enough so that you won’t starve.

Whatever your taste is, they have something to satisfy you! The dumplings are phenomenal. There wasn’t one in particular that was better than the other. Basically, I recommend you try them all. I also recommend you go with a friend who has a rather deep pocket so you can enjoy the experience more thoroughly. It’s a little pricier then other venues, it’s well worth the price! The best part about it is that half the people in line are Asian. The other

half are overly excited food enthusiasts (like myself, I’m not going to lie). With 3 locations around London, you have no excuse not to go! If quality and a good time is your thing, head over to Royal China…now.

CAROLINE SCHURMAN-GRENIER

Find them at these locations: Royal China 13 Queensway London 40-42 Baker St London 805 Fulham Rd

23

Tuesday February 10, 2015

THEATRE/FILM

REVIEW: SELMA

"Owing as much to Oyelewo’s performance as to DuVernay’s assured directorial touch, Selma is a marvelous achievement, an example of storytelling at its most moving and powerAN early scene in Selma acts as powerful signal of intent. As we watch on as a violent intrusion ends the idle chitchat of children, it’s clear that this movie will not gloss over the more shocking chapters of history. Instead, it proves an immersive, surprisingly graphic look at the Selma Voting Rights Movement of 1965, which saw a committed throng of non-violent black protestors trying to stand firm in the face of racial adversity. Director Ava DeVernay may only have two indie dramas under her belt, but here she handles an important subject with the concentration of a hardened pro, producing a film that is equal parts forceful, maddening, and inspiring.

Written by first-time screenwriter Paul Webb, this confidently weaves a balanced portrait of Martin Luther King (here played by David Oyelewo) alongside a broader film about the struggle against institutional racism.

The film centers on the concerted push for black voting rights, which assumed a growing sense of urgency as

white on black crimes mounted up in the virulently hostile south. Unfortunately, it’s clear that this issue still isn’t high on the list of political priorities, with President Lyndon B Johnson (Tom Wilkinson) turning a blind eye to King’s entreaties for social change.

In lieu of cooperation with the powers that be, King decides to take an alternative route, joining civil rights activists in a non-violent march from Selma to Montgomery.

core. Without becoming overbearing, this hard-hitting material carries great emotional weight, and it’s matched by the strength of the performances. Oprah Winfrey shows steely resilience in a brief but memorable cameo, Stephan

The opposition they face on the way is considerable, and there’s a palpable sense of threat as police officers advance on the protesters with batons and firearms. Staged deftly by DuVernay, these collisions feel appropriately momentous and cinematic, managing to use the now hackneyed slow motion walk as a source of tension and magnitude. However, the most refreshing thing here is the sheer force of the violence – Selma pulls no punches, and many of its scenes – particularly the catalytic murder of a young black man in a café - will shake you to the

James impresses as a devout student activist, and Keith Stanfield leaves an indelible mark as a defiant young protestor.

Perhaps predictably, the very best performance comes from Oyelewo.

Finally given a role that his promising supporting parts have merited, he delivers a considered, commanding portrayal of King, showing a fine grasp of the southern drawl. More importantly, he gives us a sense of King’s patient, mild-mannered demeanor, especially as he strains to uphold the principle of non-violence amongst some doubtful followers. Miraculously given that the film doesn’t have access to King’s original speeches, Oyelewo also conveys King’s strengths as an orator, thoroughly convincing as a man whose words can whip an audience into a passionate furor.

its portrayal of the opposition is simplistic and seriously lacking in nuance.

Here, there’s very little to distinguish Wilkinsons’ exasperated President Johnson from the prejudiced Governor of Alabama (Tim Roth), with both being treated as flimsy caricatures.

DeVernay admirably addresses King’s infidelities and his ideological skirmish with Malcolm X, but though these scenes are well played and strongly performed, they also feel insubstantial and somewhat disconnected from the main plot, sacrificing some of the film’s momentum.

Nevertheless, these are only minor hitches in an otherwise compelling, affective cinematic journey, showcasing Oyelewo’s talents, and heralding those of director DuVernay. The two can feel hard done by to not have drawn more Oscar attention.

Much like King himself, Selma is not without its flaws. While it ably displays the divergence of interests that made up the civil rights movement,

RYAN CRANE

INTERVIEW: ZINNIE HARRIS

EARLIER this week, Beaver Theatre Editor Jon Foster caught up with playwright Zinnie Harris about her new play ‘How to Hold Your Breath’ which is running at running at the Royal Court Theatre until the 21st March. Tickets available

Zinnie Harris's credits at the Royal Court include Nightingale and Chase. Her play The Wheel for the National Theatre of Scotland, directed by Vicky Featherstone, won a Fringe First Award, jointly won an Amnesty International Freedom of Expression Theatre Award and was shortlisted for the Susan Smith Blackburn Prize. Her 2000 play Further than the Furthest Thing won the Pegg y Ramsay Foundation Award, a Fringe First, and the John Whiting Award. On television, she wrote extensively for Spooks and is currently writing Tommy and Tuppence based on the Agatha Christie series for David Walliams on BBC1.

Your new play 'How to Hold Your Breath' is about to open at the Royal Court Theatre, can you tell us a little bit about it?

Its a play that is hard to define in a few sentences, on the one hand you could say that story starts with a woman called Dana who sleeps with a man who says he is a demon. That's the easy way to put it. It also is a play that looks at how thin civilisation is, and what happens to human nature when catastrophe and trauma strike a community or country.

ty and capitalism. Is important to you that your writing had a strong political edge?

I think all new plays should have a political edge to some degree - theatre is a way of holding a mirror up to the world and reflecting back both good and bad. I don't particularly strive to write political plays, I just write about what I see and the dangers of where we are headed.

the director and the cast?

I've been in rehearsals throughout not because I didn't trust them to get there without me, simply because I wanted to be as much support as possible and Vicky and I know each other well enough for me to be present without getting in the way. I love the rehearsal room, watching the discoveries and playfulness that actors of this calibre bring. I feel very lucky.

'How to Hold Your Breath' sees you reuniting with Vicky Featherstone, who directed your play 'The Wheel' to critical acclaim.

What's it like to be working with her again?

Vicky is a wonderful collaborator. She understands me and my work completely, and is demanding of me and yet supportive. I don't feel I could have written this play for anyone else. Plus she is an exquisite, imaginative and detailed director so the production is fabulous, every beat is realised and her collaboration with Chloe Lamford (designer) and Ann Yee (movement director) mean that despite the play taking us to dark places, the production is sculptural and has moments of true beauty.

Michael Shaeffer ( Jarron), Maxine Peake (Dana)

You've also been working on the upcoming Agatha Christie adaption 'Partners in Crime' for the BBC, can you tell us a little about that, and how the experience differs to something like 'How to Hold Your Breath'?

That is a different kind of project in a way, and a different kind of writing experience. For one thing, it’s an adaptation, so the task is to bring the skills you have to someone else's story and bring it to the TV screen in the strongest way possible. I was also collaborating with David Walliams a lot in the early part of the writing process, and he was a joy to work with - another generous and supportive soul. We had a lot of laughs at the start, then it becomes a real team effort as the filming gets closer so you don't necessarily own it in the same way as a new play. I feel very proud of it though - I just watched

the first edit of the first episode and can't wait for it to be on TV now – I think (hope) the audience will love seeing David Walliams and Jessica Raine as a married-couple pair of spies!

Finally, in the wake of this years Oscar nominations and the recent comments by Chris Bryant, there’s been a lot of debate about how inclusive the arts really are.

What advice would you give to aspiring writers and directors?

To keep going, to work as hard as you can and be as brilliant as you are able.

Don't ever let a half-baked draft or shoddy writing go. Be precise, be theatrical and dream.

JON RHYS FOSTER

You've also got the fabulous Maxine Peake, playing the role of Dana, what's it like to be working with an actress of her calibre?

Europe seems to be a strong theme and setting in the piece, and in the past your writing has focused on feminism, communi-

As a writer, do you like to be quite 'hands on' in the rehearsal process, or once written do you prefer to hand the script over to

Zinnie Harris by Johan Persson

Michael Shaeffer ( Jarron), Maxine Peake (Dana)

Max brings so much to the role, she is mesmeric to watch on stage - she has the role completely in her stride and is brilliantly surprising and bold. I now can't imagine anyone else playing the lead. She is also a lovely person, so has this radiance in the rehearsal room which has been contagious. I've never worked with such a lovely company.

The Beaver 09.10.2012

COVER CREDITS: FLICKR - SHARYN MORROW

INCLUSIVITY REPORT RECOMMENDS

ROOT AND BRANCH REFORM AT LSE Now With 30% Less Ollie Hill

jonallsop92 Now that I’m no longer married to the job of being the Executive Editor of The Beaver, I’m dedicating my time to what really matters: finding my soulmate.

Height

Five and a half inches on a good day

Hair

Brown (but I get dappled blonde highlights in the French sunlight!

(I was in France last year btw))

Eyes

Brown

Body type

Unathletic

Relationship status

Deeply committed to my right hand

Relationship sought

A nice girl please (out of the friend zone, you understand)

Has children?

Nope

Wants children?

Wants someone to nod sympathetically at sixth form political opinions

People who viewed your profile...

I AM:

I AM INTERESTED IN:

CFO of a large Interesting people semi-honest institu- to maintain bizarre tion, youth networkmeandering coner, rowing machine versations about SU stress tester, politics with whilst sticker-in of noses I’m bored in the gym I AM:

I AM INTERESTED IN:

A bargain-bucket Stella Creasy

Polly Toynbee, ostentatious displays of feminism and getting re-elected

I AM:

I AM INTERESTED IN:

Only a member of this site because I was once on the front of the Guardian, dontcha know.

My Owen Joneslookalike boyfriend, FREE SPEECH, not Owen Jones, ‘minarchy’ (wtf?, ed.)

I AM:

I AM INTERESTED IN:

Far deeper than you

The theory of (cultural?) relativity, who shot Tupac Shakur? (it’s a bit fishy), non-empirical argumentation

Tuesday February 10, 2015

26

Tough Guys and Gals (JUST) Survive A couple of weeks ago you may have been amused, or annoyed, by the apparently overenthusiastic fortune cookie sellers on Houghton Street who employed tactic such as video screening, skipping and downright sycophantic flattery to get your money. I hope you gave into their powers of persuasion, as I was one of those cookie-crazed distributors. The reason that I and my 3 team mates spent up to 6 hours a day in the cold last week can be explained by words that were increasingly striking terror into the hearts of a few LSE students; Tough Guy. On Sunday 1st February 8 teams took on a 12km obstacle course to raise money for a wonderful charity IntoUniversity who help mentor disadvantaged young people.

Situated in Wolverhampton, the track sends participants through a hellish journey that includes mud, icy pools, fire, electricity, barbed wire, darkness and much, much pain.

To provide some perspective, since its opening in 1987, two people have died as a result of running the race, injuries have included broken necks and in 2009 six hundred participants contracted hypothermia. LSE participants were asked to sign a death waver on the way to the event, which essentially declared, “if I should die on Tough Guy Route 2015, that it is my own bloody fault for coming.” Reassuring.

This year’s RAG organisers called for a strong participant base from AU sports clubs to make the event more competitive, resulting in 5 of the 8 teams being sports based.

You can thus understand my increasing concern as my team

by Perdita Blinkhorn

were participating on behalf of the Feminist Society (and between you and me, none of us have a gym membership). While I spoke to members of other teams who had prepared with practice runs and abstaining from alcohol at least 2 days before Tough Guy so they could make their best time, the FemSoc Tough Gals were trying to focus on just finishing and coming up with contingency plans for if one or more of us contracted hypothermia. We felt that the occasional press up would be quite sufficient and devised our own “training sessions” i.e. we watched Cool Runnings, ate brownies and appreciated Liam Hill’s excellent taste in wine.

We focused primarily on ways to not die by preparing the vast quantity of well thought-out layers we would be wearing. Like many participants we opted for the standard wet suit base with various warmth conserving layers both over and under; but that’s when we decided to get creative. We slathered much of ourselves in Vaseline to improve water-proofing , whipped out the gaffa-tape

and (while my team mates decided to skip this handy technique) I took extra care of my feet by insulating them in condoms. The combined power of Vaseline and condoms knows no bounds.

However, I learnt the hard way that this last idea was probably one of the worst I’ve ever had, as whiel the condoms were effective at keeping my tootsies dry, they were even more competant when it came to cutting off the crculation to my feet.

This turned out to be rather important around a quarter of the way in as the cold mean people’s feet really needed all the blood they could get.

The RAG President Katie Budd gave her own tips to participants, advising swimming caps and thermals to help them through a journey which can last between 2-4 hours.

She summarised the thoughts of many previous participants that I’ve had the pleasure to talk to well, as she explained “Remember that it’s as much a mental challenge as a physical one!” adding, “Thank you so much for all your hard work fundraising - there’s lots of money going to an excellent cause.”

When my team and I eventually set off on the exceptionally muddy course in a haze of smoke, helpfully provided by the organisers to create an atmosphere, we were feeling rather disparaged and not particularly confident. However, after the first hour it became clear that we were doing better than we expected with the mud, running, hills (oh god, those hills) and the pools of freezing water and that we might not die after all. We did discover a new hatred for nets though, as crawling under at least 50 of them can be a real drain on the moral. More than once, our height proved disadvantageous and one of more tall blokes behind had to push us over obstacles and mudhills as out backsides dangled precariously in the air.

The mental challenge was seemingly won. The physical challenge though took a nasty turn for the worse. Approximately 3 hours 15 minutes in I had contracted moderate hypothermia and knew if I didn’t leave the course while I had the chance I probably wouldn’t even be able to walk off in another quarter of an hour.

Dazed, confused and colder

than I had ever been in my life I was guided back to the coach where one particularly lovely member of the RAG team argued with the driver about letting my mud covered-self on bus and near his upholstered seats. He eventually caved in given that I was literally freezing and close to fainting. While I spend the next two to three hours shivering, cognitively dysfunctional and attempting to talk through uncontrollable chattering, my team and others bravely persevered.

Men’s football smashed Tough Guy, finishing in an astonishing time, were first to complete the full course from LSE; they were also one of the few to suffer all the obstacles as some watery parts had to be closed due to their temperature dropping to -10 C. The fantastic women’s hockey weren’t far behind and a strong performance came from the Sabbatical team. My beloved FemSoc team mates all finished- not the fastest but we were all happy that we had survived. I was incredibly proud of all of the participants who had gone through hell and back for charity, their shiny Tough Guy medals (perhaps not much consolation at the time) serving as a life-long reminder of the stupidity they undertook.

The Tough Guys of LSE, or at least those who’ve returned from the Midlands, may take comfort in the idea that all their emotional, mental and physical trauma from the experience has helped raise thousands of pounds for a deserving charity, even if the resounding conclusion of the day on the way back was a chorus of “never again.”

Next Sunday we’re heading to the Imperial War Museum - keep and eye on facebook for more details

LSESU CYCLING CLUB

This Sunday the LSE Cycling Club’s Casual Ride, braced against the wind, headed east to Brick Lane, aiming for the Cereal Killer Cafe.

Encountering an enormous queue they picked up some Brick Lane bagels and returned to Brick Lane Coffee, a destination from last term.

27

Tuesday February 10, 2015

SOCIETY SPACE Women in Business How to Rock an Interview - Skills That Get You Hired Time: 18:00 - 20:30 Venue: STC.S75

LSESU Elects, a media group joint venture to cover the LSESU elections this term, is NOW recruiting! We are looking for: - People to conduct EXIT POLLS! - Roving election night reporters - Technical and production staff - Talking heads and presenters No experience necessary. E-mail J.Allsop@lse.ac.uk, M.Pearson2@lse.ac.uk or G.Rosser@lse.ac.uk to find out more and sign up!

On Thursday 12th February LSESU RAG will be running a donor recruitment event for Delete Blood Cancer UK. We will be on the 1st floor of Saw Swee Hock from 11am-5pm, just come up and have a chat! A representative from Delete Blood Cancer will be present throughout the day to answer any questions you may have.

The LSESU Men’s Rugby Working Group will be running a charity waxing/head shaving on Friday 13th February. The event will take place throughout the day on Houghton Street, with varying members of the group to pick from.

We’re proud to say we’ll be supporting three charities: Prostate Cancer UK Wooden Spoon FORWARD UK

London to Budapest.

Five days.

No money.

Intrigued? Come and find out how you can get involved and raise money for the fantastic charity War Child!

Info Session: Tuesday, 6pm. East Building E.304

NEPALI AAWAZ is a 3-day conference being hosted by the LSESU Nepalese Society from 10th – 12th of February 2015.

The society will be welcoming a range of guest speakers from different professional backgrounds who will be talking about political, economic and social issues facing Nepal? Want to learn more about foreign direct investment in the developing world? Debate the issues facing the education industry in Nepal?

Or understand the ins and outs of the seemingly impossible task Nepal has of writing a new constitution? Then NEPALI AAWAZ is just right for you.

Photo

Tuesday February 10, 2015

28

Men’s Rugby Working Group Campaign, by San Puri

Clockwise from top left (this page): LSE Director Craig Calhoun, Róisín Bennett-Odlum, Luis Miranda, Isabel Stephenson, Daniela Soldner-Rembold and Pete Clark and Samuel Moran-Smyth

The word ‘lad’ historically, has meant ‘boy or man’. In recent times however, being called a ‘lad’ has been typically associated with negative, egotistical culture. This culture tends to bring misogyny, sexism and homophobia with it. The aim of the Good Lad campaign is to tackle negative lad culture, and try and associate positive attributes to the word ‘lad’; effectively re-branding it. The word lad won’t disappear overnight, but what’s associated with it can over time with campaigns such as this.

The whole idea with a white board photo campaign is simple but effective.

We wanted views of the LSE community, and what they think a lad is. We then took a photo, and uploaded it to Facebook. A familiar face holding a white board with a strong message really works when it comes to getting the message across, and raising awareness.

The photos are not the end of the line.

We want to take the points that kept reoccurring in the photos and enshrine them in a constitution if and when the club is to come back. Regardless of this, once we collate our findings, we will challenge other clubs and societies to do the same!

29

Photo

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Clockwise from top left (this page): Geoff Keeling, Alanna Hoffman, LSESU Feminist Society Vice-President Lena Schofield, Athletics Union President Taylor Rampton, the LSESU Islamic Society’s Obai Afify, Joseph Grabiner and Bryn Laxton-Coglon

The City Section Editorial:

“PERFECT FOR EACH OTHER, they lived a block apart, but would never meet. They lived in different worlds. His was OK Cupid and hers was Tinder.”

Flashfiction by Sean Hill only slightly modified by me in honour of Valentine’s Day coming up this week and the fact that more and more of us owe our success (or lack thereof) to multi-million dolar online platforms.

The first ‘electronic’ dating service was brought to life on an IBM computer the size of a filling cabinet by a Harvard mathematjosh ician in 1965. We’ve moved a long way since then, and algorithms now seem to play as big a part in modern courtship as wine, chocolate and Zoo bar (?). Funny how as soon as new technology is invented, it seems to be applied to help cope with human emotion.

And on the topic of emotional, check out Camilla Naschert’s article on something we at The Beaver all feel very emotional about, the survival of printed media, and my interview with Jenny Blakesly on another emotional topic, careers. Camilla’s article comes with particular good news: printed media will survive (at least for now), so keep those articles comming to The Beav’s!

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Section Editor: Mika Morissette city@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Features: Spotlight on the SNP and Plaid Cymru Pages 34-35

30

Sport: Alternative Super Bowl Review Page 38

No More ‘Blues’ for China’s Gay Men

Valentine’s Day is coming up and with more people than ever finding their dates online this year, the ‘business’ of love has never been more profitable.

Perdita Blinkhorn City Corespondent DATING APPS SEEM TO BE all the rage in today’s smart-phone centred world with everything from Tinder to Gindr, each claiming to hold the key to happiness be that through a chance at a long-term relationship or a one night stand.

One new app that is taking China by storm is called “Blued” but the difference is that this app is playing matchmaker between gay men and has become the biggest gay dating app in the world.

Homosexuality is legal today in China but is still widely considered taboo and undesirable. Many users are taking advantage of the

software that utilises GPS location technology to find other gay people near them with whom they can form friendships in an attempt to escape the isolating reality of being queer in the world’s most populous country. Of course, men are also using Blued to find love which might be one of the reasons it is so popular with an estimated 15 million yearly users; that’s two and a half times as many as Grindr.

The app’s creator, Ma Baoli, recently secured an investment worth £18.9 million which increased its total valuation to £189 million.

However, the software could be doing just as much if not more for the gay-positive movement as it is for the economy with activists noting how the app has contributed to the

positive self-image of homosexual men in China. This is understandable, as homosexuality was illegal in China until 1997 and classed by the government as a mental illness until 2001. The co-founder of the company who made the most recent investment in Blued, David Choa, emphasised the benefits of the private app, “‘People [in China] are more in the closet and less open about it [homosexuality], but the beautiful thing about the smartphone is that it’s a private device”.

Activists in China are also seeing the app as a great way for “spreading knowledge about the community,” in the words of Shanghai Pride celebrations organiser, Raymond Phang. Arguably one of the most exciting fea-

ture, for LGBT+ commentator at least, is the fact that the app possesses a feature which allows users to receive information about safe sex and AIDS. The app has been so successful both financially and culturally it has announced plans to use investments for expansion, expressing the desire to open the app to users in more countries, as well as offering a premium pay service. Tinder, the hugely successful dating app in the UK and US, has recently announced similar future plans- does this mean Blued is now the one for the big established companies to watch? Either way, it seems love is in the app for the gay men of China and may Blued have every success in a still hostile environment.

Photo: Flickr, Daniel Lee

The City

Mika Morissette

Not as Gloomy as Expected: Global Press Trends in 2014 Camilla Naschert City Corespondent THE PRINT MEDIA INDUSTRY has certainly been on a rocky path in recent years. But for those dreading the death of the morning paper, the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA), which represents more than 18,000 publications, including 76 national newspapers, worldwide, has good news: Its World Press Trends report indicates that despite recurring prophecies about newspapers’ expiry, the industry’s reach has continued to grow in 2014. New metrics methodologies used in the annual report revealed that newspaper content reaches more people than ever, offering new business opportunities and increased impact.

The report documents a steady increase in distribution of digital circulations as well, interpreting this as an appreciation of high quality journalism online around

the globe.

Advertising revenues however continued to fall last year. With an estimated $85 bn of income generated through ads in newspapers globally, 2014 marked the fifth consecutive year of decline, comparing returns with $98bn in 2009.

The losses clearly originate from the rise of online journalism: According to the WPT report, the US newspaper industry loses an estimated $7 in print ad revenue for every $1 earned in digital advertising revenue.

“Unless we crack the revenue issue, and provide sufficient funds so that newspapers can fulfill their societal role, democracy will inevitably be weakened,” said Larry Kilman, WAN-IFRA’s Secretary General. Kilman described the newspapers’ role as a facilitator of debate in a democratic society without which the health of a civilisation is at risk.

Coming from a representative of an interest group these words are not surprising, and their im-

plications for society and other industries are very real. However the rise of free content online that weakened the print media plays a crucial role in informing people globally, and encouraging development and political change in countries without free press or a population able to buy a paper every day.

Looking into the regional divides in newspaper circulation and market value, 36% of newspapers’ market value is in Asia, 34% in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, 21% per cent in North America and 9% in Latin America, all according to the WAN. The survey comprised data from over 70 countries, representing more than 90% of the global industry’s value.

Here it is important to note that industry value is measured in financial terms only, and that the newspaper circulation per capita says little about the quality and impact of the journalism produced. Daily newspaper consumption per 1000 people is highest in

China, followed by Luxembourg, Saudi Arabia and Egypt – whether these countries place newspapers dedicated to an unbiased and free societal debate on the top of their agendas is certainly debatable.

The report provides encouraging insights into the distribution of digital circulations as well, interpreting this as an appreciation of high quality journalism online around the globe. “There is growing understanding by the public that you get what you pay for, and an increasing willingness to pay for newspaper content on digital platforms,” said Kilman. “With all the free offerings out there, people are still willing to pay for news that is professionally written and edited, that is independent, entertaining and engaging.”

Whether this will be enough for the full transition of highquality journalism from paper to the screen without dramatic losses will be a fascinating and challenging question for the industry in the coming decades.

31

The City

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Why is the LSE So Stressed About Careers?!

A few weeks ago The Beaver published a few articles on employability which caused quite a reaction.

So why are LSE students so emotional about careers? I sat down with Jenny Blakesley, the Director of the LSE Career Service, to talk about the pressures of an incredibly employable student body.

Mika Morissette City Editor IS IT JUST ME, OR DOES THE LSE student body get very anxious about careers?

Definitely. I used to work at Kings, where I had to pay people to hand out flyers to the Careers Fair. At the LSE, I need to pay people to guard the fire exists in case things get too crowded!

What do you think creates this atmosphere in the LSE then?

I think one of the reasons is that at other universities student aspirations are more evenly spread across the labour market (sciences, engineering, business, arts, etc.), whereas at LSE the number of students applying to similar jobs with similar deadlines creates peaks of anxiety at certain times of the year.

LSE also has a larger number of international students, who often feel pressure to get a return on the huge personal and financial investment they made coming here, and post-graduate students who may have worked before and have a clearer picture on what they want to do.

There seems to be a constant fixation with LSE’s position in the league tables and it gives one the impression that not having a ‘prestigious enough’ Alma Matter is a major source of anxiety. Do you think this is the most important source of anxiety?

There are so many reasons students get anxious, but one is that they tend to forget that the LSE is an elite institution where students have high expectations of themselves. Students tend to benchmark themselves against other highachieving students and feel bad for not making the same career choices as everyone else.

As I mentioned, the fact that many LSE students come from overseas also means that there are a great many students here who face family and financial pressure to ‘get a return on their investment’.

There is a real debate going on at the moment on whether the new fees regime has changed students’ relationship towards their institutions, but this is nowhere near what international students already face.

On the topic of family-pressure, parents from an older generation often don’t understand that people don’t find a career straight out of uni and stick to it until they retire anymore. They put a lot of pressure to find a long-term career immediately, but these days the

labour market is much more fluid and most people will have several ‘careers’ between graduation and retirement..

Rankings of employers and schools provide students and prospective students with useful information, but they also often contain shallow or even misleading information.

How should students best use these rankings, and which rankings/resources would you recommend?

I wish students would use some of the critical analysis skills they learn at the LSE when they pick up rankings. Of course, I’m not naive enough to think people will ignore rankings entirely, but they should take note of what the parameters are and in what ways they are/ aren’t relevant to their own decision making..

In terms of providing students with information about recruiters we try to run a good balance of ‘transactional’ events (where we simply put recruiters and students together) and ‘educational’ events like panels or skills workshops where students can learn from professional in a given field both about available opportunities and the skill sets required to be successful.

Most importantly, they can come talk to Career Consultant, who, unlike friends, family or potential employers, have no vested interest in what you do next apart from that you do something that makes you happy and fulfilled. This is what really counts because you’ll never convince a recruiter at a bank that you are right for the job if you don’t genuinely want to do it and you are only applying because everyone around you is.

Just looking at rankings and league tables, how could these be improved?

Don’t get me started! For one, they could change how they look at salaries: at the moment, rank-

Photo: LSE Careers

ings use government statistics on graduates where alumni are polled only six months after graduating.

The question on income is also voluntary, meaning that the people who tend to answer are either those who are cross at not earning enough and those who are happy at earning a lot, creating a huge spread when the statistic only

“I used to work at Kings, where I had to pay people to hand out flyers to the Careers Fair. At the LSE, I need to pay people to guard the fire exists in case things get too crowded!” shows the average. They also convert all salaries into pounds, and these figures do not take into account purchasing power parity for graduates who return overseas.

Fundamentally though, you can look at all the data you like and it will still only be trends which do not take into account the individual.

So the Career Service has as their role taking in to account the individual, but how do you find a balance between too much and too little?

It’s indeed difficult to find a balance, just as it’s a tough choice for us at the Careers Service to find the right balance between organising as many events as possible to help students choose a career and being mindful of not overloading students with career concerns.

The LSE Career Service actually runs workshops alongside the Counselling Service to tackle

career anxiety, something I really can’t see being done anywhere but in the LSE! On the other hand, we are also constantly trying to adapt our services to changing needs. Students often complain that too much is loaded in Michaelmas, so we are developing a “Super Saturday” for the end of Induction week next Michealmas to help students get their bearings quickly. (Again, only at the LSE would students come in on a Saturday to do this!)

This year we introduced latenight opening on Thursdays which has proved very popular.

Is there any way of adding additional services like the ones you mentioned without making the terms seem even more frenzied than they are?

You would think “Super Saturday” might be too much too fast but the first things post-graduate students often write in asking during the summer is “why can’t I log in to Career Hub yet?” Overseas students face the added challenge of stepping off the plane into a new life in a new city and suddenly having job deadlines within weeks so we will also try and cater to them with special pre-departure alumni events.

Some programs specifically ask to have appointment times set aside for their students, but I believe in ensuring equity: just because you are in a department which feels strongly about employability doesn’t mean you should have any less chance to use the LSE Careers . The same goes for students with disabilities or PhD students with teaching commitments: we try to offer special booking arrangements for them so that no one is disadvantaged. Though bookings might be frenzied we try at least to offer equal opportunities.

Wow, so many bases to touch! Added to that time and

space limitations must also be a concern, right?

It really goes both ways. On one hand, our biggest venue on campus is the Senior Dining Room which can only be booked after 5pm. People often complain that Career Fairs are too hot and crowded, but there is nowhere close and big enough we could hire affordably. This is one reason why Nottingham, which has a huge exhibition centre, did well on High Flyers which takes into account events held on campus.

On the other hand, because we are so central, we can offer amazing panels with influential people who can just nip out of the office, something they couldn’t do in Nottingham or Warwick.

I also need to be selective with the employers I invite: while other unis with a wider array of taught subjects might invite more ‘Top 100’ like McDonalds or Aldi, we would choose to prioritise employers like the Adam Smith Institute which are more relevant to our students.

What do students say about this selection?

Actually, if I can say there is one thing I am proudest of since joining, it would be the variety of career events we hold at the LSE. Students complain that Michaelmas term is dominated by the City and then they ‘switch off’ by Lent.

This is partly out of necessity to meet City deadlines and because these companies have huge recruiting budgets, but look beyond this and you’ll see that all kinds of interesting employers go out of their way to visit the LSE. LSE International Organisation Day in November was attended by 1,300 students! Featuring a range of UN agencies and multilateral organisations it is the only event of its kind in the UK. . Our programme of fairs and conferences covers a broad range of labour market sectors and for those organisation who don’t recruit in huge numbers e.g. NGOs, charities, Think Tanks etc. we run lots of smaller events like panels and forums to put students in touch with professionals in those sectors.

It’s up to students to stay informed and select the right opportunities for them.

So my advice would be ‘don’t switch off in Michaelmas’. We are always open here at the Careers Service to people getting in touch with comments and requests. As you’ve probably gathered we are always trying to find new ways to better address student needs!

Features

Tuesday February 10, 2015

32

Section editorial:

Section Editors: Liam Hill and George Harrison

THIS WEEK’S FEATURES section boasts plenty of general election analysis, much of which referring to the distinct possibility of a coalition government; this includes the horrifying possibility of a Labour government propped up by the SNP: a party which stands for the abolition of Trident.

Thankfully, Labour recently ruled out abolishing our nuclear deterrent as part of any coalition deal, although the fact remains that parties such as the Greens and the SNP stand for nuclear disarmament.

For a start, the naivety of such a proposition is crippling; there is no guarantee that, if Britain were to disarm, any other states would follow suit, leaving us vulnerable and exposed in a nuclear world. Secondly, despite its considerable cost, Trident is a fantastic defence mechanism; in fact, nuclear weapons have been the biggest driving force for world peace in history.

The threat of mutually assured destruction has proven to be effective in the face of escalating global security concerns; war between nuclear states is unthinkable and, thanks to Trident, Britain remains a major military player.

If anything, Trident deserves more funding rather than less.

“People are Pissed off with Politics” An Interview with Baroness Royall

Features

George Harrison

features@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Deputy Section Editors: Zita Chan, George Greenwood, and Taryana Odayar tweet @beaveronline

George Greenwood Deputy Features Editor WANDERING IN TO THE House of Lords entrance, I wasn’t sure what to expect from the Shadow Leader of the Lords, Baroness Jan Royall. She is a politician of great experience, serving as special advisor to Neil Kinnock, before being ennobled in 2004, and serving as Leader of the House Lords until 2010. She has served as Shadow Labour Leader of the Lords since the 2010 election, and at the same time, she manages to hold down the Vice Presidency of the Party of European Socialists. So when we sat down in her rather well appointed office in the Houses of Parliament, beautifully upholstered in dark House of Lords red, I had much to ask her. I was rather pleasantly surprised by her informal approach to the interview, epitomised by her exclamation of “fuck a duck” in response to our discussion of some of my nastier experiences in Devon children’s social care. So as I moved into the interview, feeling slightly more relaxed, I asked for her views on the rise of UKIP. “I understand why people are thinking about voting UKIP. They are totally pissed off with politics.

They think they have been forgotten, and they are having a really hard time. Their lives are very difficult, so somebody is saying, ok, I’ve got a really great answer, were going to get out of the EU, get rid of all these foreigners, go back to the 1950’s, and it’s going to be great.

So I don’t blame people for being attracted by that, and I’m not saying that people who want to vote UKIP are idiots, most of them are very good people, but they just feel let down, and we’ve got to show them that we can make a difference.”

We then moved on to the issue of class within politics, with one of the key drivers of the rise of UKIP, and the EDL movement, being the lack of working class representation in politics.

“We’re doing a lot at the moment, if you look at the current parliament, we’ve done a great job in getting women into parliament, the Labour party have, other parties haven’t, and I think it’s fantastic, but when people say that we don’t have this group of former coal miners, they’re right. We do have some former teachers. And yes we’ve got Alan Johnson, but he’s a bit special.

And he shouldn’t be special, he is

special because he is a great man, but we need people from broader backgrounds and ethnic minorities.

We need parliament to reflect the country in which we live. So what we’re trying to do to ensure that people have got the confidence to come forward for selection. People like, our candidate in Great Yarmouth, who will have a really tough time standing against UKIP, she’s brill, she’s normal, single parent, two kids, she is fantastic. I come for Gloucestershire, in Gloucester we have Sophy Gardner Butler, former wing commander, she used to fly in Afghanistan, Iraq, ok she’s middle class but she’s special. I think the next parliament will begin to look and sound a bit different.”

On the upcoming General election, I asked her for her views on the likely coalition agreement that Labour may face in the aftermath.

“Of course we are not going to have a coalition; we are going to win a majority! Let’s get that straight! But in the event that we do, I think that, if I think about the Bills that this Government coalition government brought forward in the first flush of the rose garden, they were absolutely crap, to be honest with you. They were badly thought out, badly drawn up, and I think that any coalition in future really has to think about what it’s going to do, what it wants to achieve, and to really carefully think about the legislation and the impact it’s going to have on people. If we look at three or four things, the public bodies bill, for example, the one in which they were going to get rid of all the Quangos, including the Youth Jus-

tice Board, of which Tom McNally, defended and now he is the chair of, selling off the forests, you know all these things. And if we look at what they did on the NHS, it is wicked.

So I think that at the beginning of any coalition, there has to be a strategic plan, and they really have to keep the wellbeing of our country in mind, and that’s not what this coalition did. They were thinking about their own future rather than the future of the country. I think we need to take longer on working out coalition agreements. It’s what happens in other European countries, so I think to some extent we can learn from them. That’s not to say, that I think what we should do what Belgium does, and go without government for 6 or 8 months, but I do think, perhaps a bit more time and a bit more reflection is needed.”

On the balance of public and private healthcare, “Obviously it was my government that introduced things like the independent treatment centres, which we did for a very good reason, and they worked amazingly well, in that people with cataracts, instead of waiting 18 months for a cataract operation, could get one very quickly. But what they did was to provide a service that at that time the NHS couldn’t provide. So that when Andy Burnham says that the NHS should be the provider of choice, I think that is absolutely right, and if in whatever circumstances the NHS is not able to provide the requisite service, then it’s OK to look to private providers.

But what you cannot have is to get a two tier system. The people of

this country deserve quality care, from whomsoever it comes, and I think it is the NHS itself that can provide this level of care.”

And finally, discussing the state of social care, “I think on social care, Labours policy of having a seamless and integrated health and social care system is absolutely critical. I know that the government talks about it all the time, but what the government doesn’t talk about is a unified budget. And ultimately, that is what’s going to bring about the real change, and I think that’s an area in which the relationship between public and private is extremely important.”

To finish, I asked her what her one message to the students of the LSE would be.

“The first thing I would say to students at the LSE is that a consequence of this government’s policies, you are no longer registered to vote. Please register to vote, unless you register to vote, you will not be able to exercise the choice of whether or not to vote in the May 2015 election. And then I would say, please please please use your vote, because it is up to you to shape your future. Unless you try to influence policies, through your vote, you’re going to find you lose out, and I care about that not just because it is your future and your aspirations, it’s my future too. So I’m not being entirely altruistic here, but I think it is the young people of this country who are going to rebuild our country. So I want you to go and take responsibility and go to vote.”

Features Pocket Haringey: An Austerity Case Study The Philosopher: 33

Tuesday February 10, 2015

Manú Stastny First Year Undergraduate

HARINGEY IS A NORTH London borough that has built up a poor reputation for social care, most notoriously for the death of Baby P and for social unrest such as the 2011 Tottenham riots.

The most recent crisis to add to Haringey’s claim to fame, is its decision to make severe cuts to services for the elderly and the disabled. Haringey is taking 40% of its total cuts solely from the services of the elderly and the disabled: societies’ most vulnerable citizens.

The cuts will affect day centres, as well as the last remaining residential homes, which provide essential care for the elderly and disabled - two groups of people who have little to no contact with the wider community. The day services allow them time to interact with others and also give their hard working carers a small but essential break. The levels of immense anxiety which carers for adults with disabilities experience, due to societal isolation, worries for the future and lack of support, will be made even worse by these cuts.

The day centres which are

planned to be shut cater primarily to the needs of adults with severe disabilities, predominantly Autism. Globally, the proportion of people on the Autistic spectrum is growing. According to the National Autistic Society, 695,000 people in the UK are on the Autistic spectrum. This is obviously a group of people who are going to need increased care in the future, so many believe that closing these day centres is totally misguided.

To replace these services the council is proposing ‘re-ablement’ and ‘enablement’ strategies for the elderly and disabled through ‘social inclusion’ - a strategy that relies on members of the public to take care of those in need, solely out of good will. As Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick, a parent member of SASH (Save our Autism Services Haringey) explains: “There have been no studies on ‘re-ablement’ in the sphere of autism and learning disabilities.’ The term is commonly used to refer to people who have suffered an injury, however is totally inappropriate for people with learning needs, as ‘people with autism and learning disabilities have not lost skills that can be readily ‘re-learned’. It is obvious that ‘re-ablement’ will not care for those in need; thus breaching the

Care Act (2014).”

Haringey Council has drawn the ire of the parents, carers and social workers at these day centres for not notifying them of these cuts. The affected users only discovered the news by chance when a parent read the small print of Haringey’s website prompting claims of deception and betrayal by the Council towards its most vulnerable citizens. A number of the enraged senior citizens and carers for the disabled pointed out that no other London borough has decided to make cuts to services of the disabled. Islington, which borders Haringey, has decided to raise its poll tax, instead of cutting the services for the most vulnerable.

In other areas of the country such as Cambridge, Buckinghamshire and Surrey, social care budgets are increasing in line with the ageing population and the rise in conditions such as Autism.

Haringey’s Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone has condemned the cuts proposed by the Labour run Haringey council.

In the ‘consultation’ meeting at Haringey’s Civic Centre, Labour Councillor Gideon Bull told his council members how disgusted he was that Labour “was doing the Tory’s dirty work for them. ” In

order to fight these cuts, a group of parents and friends of adults on the Autistic spectrum have formed SASH (Save our Autism services in Haringey).

Last week BBC London Radio host Eddie Nestor discussed Haringey’s cuts on his radio program.

He interviewed Mary Langan, the founder of SASH, who explained why cutting services to people with severe learning difficulties is a false economy. If care is not maintained for the patients, then further and more expensive care will be needed to reverse the damage incurred from the lack of care. Other parents also phoned in, amongst them, Pam Duprey who told the story of her daughter Sharon. Sharon suffers of Microcephaly and has been abused at several residential homes. Ms Duprey fears that her daughter’s condition will deteriorate due to lack of care and as a result, she will be put into a mental institution. Ms Duprey went on to say how if this happens “the two of us would leave this earth together, this is how strongly I feel about it.”

The profound fear held by parents and carers for people with disabilities is nearly incomprehensible – or so it seems for those at Haringey Council, making the cuts to these essential services.

Revolutionising the Private School System Rohan Ahlawat First Year Undergraduate JUST IMAGINE IF every private school in the country closed tomorrow, and every child had to rely on state schools. The state system would be bought into chaos; even today there are stories of teachers policing classes rather than teaching classes, so imagine the strain on resources, on teachers and on the future of our country.

The solution would be to ensure that more resources are pooled into state education, tighten the curriculum, make certain that basic education in maths and English is provided, and allow for classes to be managed easier by teachers. The method of implementation would be to spend no extra money on state schools. Instead, provide tax breaks for middle income families who send their children to private schools.

I was fortunate enough to make it into a grammar school; my parents couldn’t afford it, but I had a bursary from the school. That bursary was almost the exact same as a tax break. In order for someone in my position to go to a private school, holidays are reduced, the quality of your food shop goes down and, instead of buying high quality clothing brands, it becomes

a matter of looking at those clothing brands and desiring it, knowing that, one day in the future, the hardship of the present will pay for itself.

The most important thing is that I was not an oddity, there were many like me in the same situation. It was a £13,000/year school, a good school, but one which I could not afford to go to without a bursary or a scholarship. Thus, there is a clear argument here to be made that instead of undermining private schools, we should see many of them as a means of social and class integration; we should not, as many on the Labour benches seem to do, fight a class war against them.

There are opportunities to be made from private schools; tax breaks for sending children to private schools if your income is be-

Source: Flikr, Jack Hynes

low a certain figure makes sense.

Not only would it free up resources in the state sector, thus allowing for the most deprived and mischievous children to receive more attention and educational support, but it also allows for many intelligent children lost in the state school system to thrive under the private sector.

This links into another point, and that point revolves around grammar schools. I went to a grammar school, and, in my experience, they are fantastic. Entrance exams, which are free to take for any child, are a means by which private schools can find certain children, from whatever back ground, who are capable and intelligent with a bright future, yet who may go completely unrecognised under the extreme strain and challenges faced in state

schools. With regards to the curriculum, it is significantly better at developing the skills people need for the future. I say this because grades seemingly go up every year; this year is the first year in which they have not for some time, and that quite frankly is fantastic news.

Since 1997, the curriculum has got easier; examiners make it easier for pupils today and that is undeniable. Even most teachers, in my experience, always seemed to say that “you’ve got it so much easier today” than they did.

As such, the tax break for private schools makes sense; it is not a tax break provided on a set income by the government, which means it can be spent on anything. Instead, you only receive it if it is to be spent on the education of your child. This could link into a further idea, whereby rich individuals around the country who are feeling charitable and hate the idea of working and giving all of their tax contribution directly to the state, they should too be able to sponsor many children from poorer backgrounds into private schools. As a result, the state sector would see an increase in the ability of their children, due to less strain on resources, smaller classes so teachers can teach, and more of a chance for teachers and staff to sport children who are maybe facing trouble in or outside of school.

What’s in a Name?

Alexander Howells Pocket Philosopher I T S E E M S N AT U R A L , and perhaps very sensible, to believe that the meaning of a name is simply that which it names. In other words, that the meaning of a name is solely what it ‘refers’ to. For example, the meaning of the name ‘David Cameron’ is simply who it refers to, the current Prime Minister of Great Britain, David Cameron. If you agree with this definition then, congratulations, you can count yourself as a member of the ‘Direct Reference Theory’ school of thought.

This view has advantages, perhaps the most significant of which is the ease with which we can use it to determine the truth of statements.

If the meaning of a name is solely its referent then we have simply to examine this referent to discern the truth of the statement. For example, ‘David Cameron is a man’, easy.

We ask whether our referent (David Cameron) possesses this property (being a man). He does, therefore the statement is true. ‘David Cameron is a good Prime Minister’. Not so easy, but you get the point.

Unfortunately, as with all things, this view comes with its drawbacks.

It appears incapable of dealing with several situations in an intuitively pleasing way. I’ll outline two of these.

Firstly, it finds itself up against the ‘problem of non-reference’ when faced with ‘empty names’.

Empty names are names which don’t refer to anything and they are abounding in our natural language. The most obvious examples are fictional or mythical characters, for example Sherlock Holmes and Pegasus. These names don’t refer to any existent entity and thus are a challenge when we ask questions such as ‘Pegasus is a winged horse.’

There is no referent to examine so how do we determine the truth of this statement?

Second, is the ‘problem of substitutivity’. A sentence such as ‘David Cameron = The Prime Minister of Great Britain’ seems to tell us something significant, whilst the trivial sentence ‘David Cameron = David Cameron’ does not. Intuitively we want these two statements (‘a=a’ and ‘a=b’) to tell us different things. However, the Direct Reference Theorist only observes that the two names refer to the same, one entity. Thus, whilst they can freely change between ‘a=a’ and ‘a=b’ they cannot explain where the additional meaning of ‘a=b’ comes from.

Features

Tuesday February 10, 2015

34

General Election: SNP Spotlight

Envisioning An SNP Incursion into Westminster Chris Burt First Year Postgraduate PICTU RE THE SCENE: Former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond making a speech in the Houses of Parliament in his new role as deputy Prime Minister, his Scottish National Party (SNP) part of a ruling coalition, mocking the English MPs, perhaps including Nigel Farage, who decry him and the SNP’s hypocrisy of getting involved in British politics, whilst squabbling on how to address the glaring lopsided nature of the UK’s democratic system.

A nightmare scenario for many politicians in Westminster, and a mouth-watering prospect for the media, has become a situation that has miraculously seemed increasingly possible in the run up to the May general election. Former SNP leader, Salmond, is running for parliament in Westminster in the Gordon constituency in Aberdeenshire, and recent polling has suggested that Salmond, and many more of his SNP colleagues are set to be sitting on the green benches in Westminster following the May election.

Last month, Nicola Sturgeon, the recently elected leader of the SNP and current First Minister of Scotland in the Scottish Parliament at Holyrood, entered the UK general election campaign by stating how SNP MPs will vote on English policies in Westminster if necessary after the election, a move away from the party’s general practice of not participating in the Houses of Parliament on non-Scottish matters, where they have six MPs. Sturgeon cited the possibility of voting against potential moves towards privatisation of the National Health Service (NHS) in England, which would have knock-on consequences to Scotland, even though health is a devolved power to Holyrood, and a policy matter under her guise.

Scottish MPs make up 9% of the Westminster total with 59 seats, and currently the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats hold the most, with 41 and 11 seats respectively, with the Conservatives having

Source: Flikr, Scottish Government

only one seat. The SNP just have six seats, however, in the Scottish parliament, which utilises a semi-proportional voting system, the party have held an unprecedented absolute majority since the 2011 Scottish election, providing the mandate which prompted the failed referendum on Scottish Independence held in September last year.

The SNP-led Yes campaign may have lost the referendum by 45% to 55% in a high turnout of 85%, however, large swathes of the Scottish electorate were galvanized into political action, and the SNP’s membership has increased enormously, becoming the third largest party in the UK with around 93,000 members (Labour, for comparison, has around 200,000 members UKwide).

An important effect of the increase in membership and broadening of political participation amongst the Scottish electorate is that the SNP have the possibility of greatly increasing their number of seats in Westminster: 45% of the vote is not enough to win a referendum, but would certainly win the first-past-the-post election in May. A recent YouGov poll (Feb 3rd) showed SNP support amongst the Scottish electorate at 48%, with Labour behind on 27%, the Conservatives on

15% and the Liberal Democrats on just 4%, a result that would vastly increase the number of SNP MPs, at the expense of Labour and the Lib Dems.

The possible, and seemingly likely, broadening of the SNP’s power base in Westminster has driven Nicola Sturgeon to enter more widely the general election campaign. Following on from the inclusion of the SNP into the upcoming TV leader’s debates, Sturgeon has outlined what might happen if the SNP did hold some balance of power post-May, surely as a means of appeasing potential voters who may see a vote for the party as wasted, due to their regional specificity, and previous policy of not participating in all Westminster matters.

Despite the SNP’s popularity, voters in Scotland have historically voted differently depending on which political body they were electing representatives to, with the SNP being the largest party in Scotland following the 2007 Scottish Election, but only gaining six seats three years later in the 2010 general election, with voters largely preferring Labour as a national party instead.

The large anti-Westminster sentiment felt and voiced by many across Scotland throughout the referendum campaign, however, may change the dynamic this time at the polls in May, and the SNP could tri-

umph. Furthermore, it now appears the SNP are prepared to play a large role in Westminster politics, with prospects of privatisation of the NHS, and disputes over the future of Trident, the UK’s costly nuclear deterrent based in Scotland, set to be large cross national issues, without mentioning the potential referendum and fallout on European Union membership; all issues providing the Scottish electorate with something to vote for.

The party set most to lose from SNP’s ascendancy are Labour, who are becoming increasingly splintered from all sides throughout the UK. Whilst the United Kingdom Independence Party, and the Green Party, are eating into the main political parties support base south of the border, Labour are also contending with the SNP’s rise north of it.

Having had little national political opposition in many Labour heartlands throughout Scotland, particularly in Glasgow and across central former industrial areas, Labour is now playing catch up in securing voters in these constituencies.

Voters here had previously been assumed to elect whichever labour candidate was up for election, and consequently have been largely neglected in terms of campaigning, until the referendum sparked a large effort when it appeared that

Scotland could vote yes.

The Labour party is split on multiple fronts. Turmoil between the national Labour Party, and the Scottish Labour Party, prompted the recent Scottish leader Johann Lamont to resign, citing a lack of autonomy from Ed Miliband in Westminster, and that she and Scottish Labour were treated as a ‘branch office’, also criticizing Labour MPs for being ‘dinosaurs’.

The new Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy has a huge job of revitalising support in Scotland for Labour, although he is hampered by the unpopularity of Labour leader Ed Miliband, and the perceived Westminster elite nature of the Labour party more generally.

It is not difficult to cast our minds back to the referendum campaign and the fact that the much-maligned former Prime Minister Gordon Brown became the most popular member of the Westminster elite in Scotland, to reveal the current crises in Labour appeal north of the border.

Perhaps most fundamentally, there is the catch-22 issue for Labour of the issue of English devolution and the inescapable West Lothian question, whereby a political model exists in the UK whereby Scottish MPs can vote on purely English matters, whereas English MPs cannot vote on Scottish ones.

With hardly anything to lose in Scotland, the Conservatives have outlined strong devolution plans, in contrast to Labour who have been confronted by the dual needs of maintaining the political influence of their Scottish MPs, whilst also appealing to both the Scottish and other UK electorates who desire reform of a system that, for Scottish and Welsh citizens, gives too much power to Westminster, and to English citizens gives too much power to nonEnglish politicians.

There seems no easy solution to these multivariate issues, although it appears clear that the UK is set for a general election like no other, with repercussions ranging widely on to the political system of the country. Alex Salmond, like many others, will be licking his lips in anticipation.

35

Features

Tuesday February 10, 2015

GE 2015: General Election: Plaid Cymru Spotlight GE 2015: Who’s With Polling Who? Examining Plaid’s SNP Parallels Analysis Rohan Ahlawat First Year Undergraduate I’M NOT QUALIFIED enough to make political predictions and, to be honest, even political editors and those we deem suitable and experienced enough to predict the next general election would find it difficult to make a dead certain prediction.

That I am sure of. One thing many do say, however, is that there will be no overall winner and, thus, we’re in for another coalition government.

If we consider the many turbulent and possible outcomes that we are left with, come postelection time, it is the right of the British voters to know if coalitions between parties were to occur, on what issues they would unite on, and what issues would they seemingly oppose. This way, in marginal seats around the country, the decision for voters may become easier; in constituencies around the country whereby the party an individual would vote for is so far behind the two parties that normally fight for the seat, knowing what sort of coalition deals a Con/Lib, Lab/ Lib, Con/UKIP, Lab/SNP coalition would enact, would go a long way to helping voters across the UK. There is also a precedent for such a procedure, and all one has to do is look at the process in Denmark. The Danes are used to coalition government, for better or for worse. This is mainly down to their Proportional Representative electoral system, but importantly, they make coalition governments easier to pick for the voters. The deals are done before the election, (pre-election coalitions) which means if you vote Conservative, you know you’re likely to get a Liberal/ UKIP agenda come the next parliament, whilst voting Labour allows for one to assess the impacts of the Libs and SNP upon a Labour led coalition government. It doesn’t just help the core voter however, it allows for conservatives in Scotland, to vote Lib Dem, whilst Labour in the South East would find it easier to vote Lib Dem also.

Though this may be easier, it will, for the conceivable future, not happen. Every time a leader of a political party is asked about a potential coalition, the answer is, we’re going to get a majority government. I suppose politicians will be politicians, and outright lies will follow, but of course, they can’t say anything less.

Gareth Rosser Third Year Undergraduate O F A L L T H E PA RT I E S vying for your attention, the one you may be least familiar with is Plaid Cymru, the Party of Wales. Despite success at a devolved level, including a coalition government with Welsh Labour, their ability to translate this success to a Westminster level has proven limited so far. However in the era of the “End of 2 Party Politics” Plaid will be hoping that their time has finally arrived.

So how will the general election go for Plaid Cymru?

On one level, predictions for the general elections are staggeringly easy. Plaid’s vote share has been decreasing since 2001’s General Election, where a 14.3% vote share in Wales earned the party 4 MPs. South Wales remains stubbornly red, and the larger constituencies where agriculture plays a dominant role remain blue. It might appear that Plaid have little to be excited about.

However Plaid are cautiously optimistic about their prospects come May 7th.

With the exception of Cardiff North - where the Conservatives hold a majority of 194 votes - comparatively little polling is done in Wales. This makes predictions about factors such as the rise of Ukip all the more difficult for Plaid. In the European elections Ukip were within 0.6 percentage points of being the largest party in Wales.

Ukip’s long ter m capacity to appeal to Labour voters in Wales remains unknown, but they may open the door to Plaid Cymru in previously entrenched Labour constituencies.

Plaid Cymru also have faith that the Scottish National Party has turned the spotlight on the nature of devolution in the UK as a whole.

M a n y Plaid activi s t s travelled t o Scotland

to help campaign for Scottish Independence, conscious of the comparisons inevitably drawn with Wales. Although polling demonstrated a lack of appetite for independence in Wales, the concessions offered to Scotland in the dying days of the campaign have reenergised Plaid. Presenting a united front with the SNP and demanding equal devolution for both countries has given Plaid a new argument for voter. The potential for a ‘nationalist’ coalition between Plaid and the SNP may also add credibility to a party that has failed to send more than 4 MPs to Westminster in its history.

Finally there is the issue of the televised debates. Although they will never admit it, Plaid may owe a debt of gratitude to David Cameron.

His insistence that the Greens be represented in the televised debate has seen the door opened to a for mat which would see Plaid represented in 2 of the 3 debates. The publicity and credibility this

offers Plaid would have been unthinkable even 6 months ago, and how Leanne Wood perfor ms will undoubtedly effect Plaid’s election chances.

Wood will particularly relish this chance, and will look to reinforce her work in portraying Plaid Cymru as a party with comprehensive policies.

As a first language English speaker herself, Wood may use the debates to prove once and for all that Plaid Cymru isn’t just about the Welsh language.

Although they finished ahead of both Liberal Democrats and the Greens at the most recent European elections in Wales, Plaid’s key challenge in breaking past their current 3 seats at Westminster may be their ability to appeal to protest voters. The protest votes gained by the Liberal Democrats in 2010 are arguably all up for grabs, and how these voters vote between the Greens, Ukip and Plaid in Wales will be an interesting subplot to the election. The worry for Plaid is that voters may struggle to see them as a protest vote: their coalition assembly government with Labour between 2007-2011 saw them subsequently punished at a regional level, and managing the distinction between the party at a devolved level and a UK level remains a challenge. Plaid will see this election (and next year’s assembly election) as the perfect opportunity to emulate the SNP - doing so may however prove trickier.

Leanne Wood, Source: Flikr

George Harrison Features Editor A P O L L I S WO RT H A thousand words, and recent polling by Lord Ashcroft suggests that bedraggled Nick Clegg is set to lose his Sheffield Hallam seat, with Labour 3 points ahead of Clegg. Whilst Labour may yet face jubilation at collecting the scalp of the Liberal Democrat leader, they face a substantial erosion of their support north of the border in Scotland. SNP gains are becoming the norm in former Labour strongholds, prompting considerable talk of a coalition being in the making between the two parties.

Indeed, no party is on course to achieve a substantial majority and talk of coalition is rife; the Conservatives have nationally eradicated the Labour lead, with the average of polls on the 5th February showing Labour and the Conservatives tied on 33%. This would not be enough for either party to achieve a majority, and, as such, many eurosceptic Tories will be monitoring UKIP’s 15% vote share with interest. The bad news for UKIP is that this considerable share of the vote is unlikely to translate itself to more than 8 seats in Parliament; however, with the margins at the top so fine, any number of seats could prove to be decisive.

Polling analysis by Ipsos Mori has found that since 1992, Labour’s average vote share has declined from this point in the General Election cycle, suggesting that the Conservatives may well overtake Labour in the coming weeks.

With just under half of the purple vote share comes a close tie at the bottom that sees the Liberal Democrats and the Green party tied on 7% each.

The two parties have fluctuated over the past months, but have converged for now.

For analysis of potential coalition partners and election results, read Gareth, Chris and Rohan’s pieces on this general election double spread.

Features Jordan Steps up Airstrike Offensive George Harrison Features Editor THE HEAD OF THE Jordanian air force, General Mansour al-Jbour has vowed to “wipe the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant off the face of the earth”, as the country steps up its retaliatory efforts against the terrorist organisation.

Following the release of an ISIS video which shows the burning of Jordanian pilot, Moaz al-Kassasbeh, to death whilst trapped in a cage, the resolve of the Jordanian military seems to have been strengthened; as many as 56 airstrikes are estimated to have been conducted by Jordan in the 3 days following the video’s publication.

Jordanian military officials claim to have decimated weapon depots, hideouts and logistics centres used by ISIS, although fears are now mounting that retaliatory terrorist attacks within Jordan may transpire as a result.

In accordance with the increased number of aerial assaults by the coalition of nations fighting against ISIS, an Iraqi led ground operation is preparing to strike against ISIS strongholds, in an attempt to flush the group from the region. Whilst many ISIS combatants are not equal in military prowess to soldiers from more developed states, they still pose a considerable risk in the Middle East and overseas; if the military coalition were to considerably step up their air offensives, in accordance with the Jordanian efforts, then there is the chance that many ISIS fighters can be neutralised, without incurring the risk of any ground involvement.

The notion of putting “boots on the ground” is unlikely to receive support from the populations of many Western states, who are weary of engagements overseas. Airstrikes, however, are less objectionable to the public, and may yield significant results if their ferocity and magnitude is increased.

Following Jordan’s lead may yet prove to contribute to the destruction of ISIS, although war weariness may prove to be the greatest obstacle faced by Western militaries, especially in the face of military budget cuts in countries such as the UK.

Tuesday February 10, 2015

36

ISIS Threat Spreads East Zita Chan Deputy Features Editor ISIS HAS TERRORIZED THE world. Its increasingly radical and high-profile terrorist activities have aroused global tension, in particular the Western countries. However, the ISIS problem escalated drastically when the antagonism against it spread to Asia. This is marked by the release of a video showing Japanese hostages Goto and Yukawa, while an ultimatum was issued: it was demanded that the Japanese government must pay a $200 million ransom. The Japanese government did not pay and this was followed by a second video released on 24th January showing Goto holding a picture of Yukawa’s body, and asking for the release of a prisoner held in Jordan instead of a ransom. On 31st January 2015, ISIS released a video that purportedly showed Goto being beheaded. It was later revealed that this happened due to a failure of an exchange on 29th October, which resulted in Goto’s decapitation on 30th January.

The event invoked outrage in Japan and the rest of Asia.

Even before the release of the footage of Goto’s execution, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe comdemned ISIS and said that his country would remained resolute against terrorism. Abe stated that “These sorts of terrorist acts of violence are outrageous and unforgivable… I feel deep resentment and resolutely condemn these acts”. Ensuing the decapitation, Japan declared that it would never forgive such terrorist acts. Japan’s antago-

nism against ISIS is more than apparent. The greater question posed is whether the rest of the Asian continent, in particular China, would and should stand against ISIS. China’s conventional policy of ‘non-inteference’ in international politics may suggest indifference. China has long adopted the ‘peaceful rise’ mentality.

She has always emphasized her longstanding policy of indifference when it involved the internal affairs of other states. This has been her means to maintain a silent but sound presence in international diplomacy. Especially in the recent times of crisis, China has taken upon such an approach in order to keep her head above the muddied waters.

In November 2014, American President Barack Obama branded China as ‘free-riders’ in international politics for 30 years, when China openly rejected aiding American efforts against ISIS. However, political and economic reality suggests otherwise.

In fact, earlier on 14th December, Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari said that China had extended an offer to help Baghdad fight the Takfiri ISIS militants by carrying out its own airstrikes against the terrorists.

The first factor is China’s demand for petroleum. China has always been the greatest importer when it comes to oil. With its huge population, coupled with its mounting economy that depends much on secondary industries, oil is a crucial resource that China cannot bear to lose, despite having invested efforts in diversifying supplies of oil from within the Asian continent.

China’s reliance on the middleeastern regions, including Saudi-Ariabia, Iran and Iraq cannot be discounted. Therefore, unrest and violence in these regions would only hamper the supply of oil. Thus, the interests of China, despite seemingly peripheral, are rather central when it comes to the terrorist activities of ISIS. China is the one that will benefit the most from peace and stability in the region. In addition to this, the USA also shares a similar dependance on the middle-eastern regions for oil. With China’s refusal to aid the USA in fighting ISIS in November, tension would only escalate between the two states, which may result in a fallout. This would result in a severe economic crisis for both countries if oil supplies are affected. Therefore, China’s demand for oil may be able to explain the reason underpinning her sudden change in attitude.

Another economic concern would be trade. Another appendage bolstering Chinese economy would be manufacturing and exports. ISIS has shown signs of becoming increasingly radical by declaring enmity against an increasing number of countries.

With ISIS gradually becoming the public enemy, China’s indifference in the matter may lead to isolation and even tension with other key trade partners, in particular USA. China cannot afford to hamper her trade.

If her indifference to the ISIS persisted, she would have regretted her hands-off attitude when key trading partners either dread China in fear of isolation or show aggression towards China by imposing policies such as trade embargoes to condemn

China’s undesirable neutrality.

Political reality also calls for China siding with the international community in fighting against ISIS. With the execution of the Japanese hostage, international countries increasingly feared the ISIS. China has always been looked down upon as a ‘free-rider’ in international politics. Its position within international diplomacy is maintained largely due to its economic importance within the international community. What China lacks is genuine respect, which also gives rise to political influence. If China took an active role in tackling the daunting threat of ISIS, this would garner respect from other countries that are under the threat of its terrorism. Apart from that, many nations would likely be willing to welcome a new key player to international diplomacy.

The USA has long established a pseudo-hegemony in international politics with its foreign policy. Nations have been longing for a power that is strong enough that has the capacity to counter-act USA dominance.

ISIS is an excellent admission ticket for China to enter into the playing field of diplomacy, especially by holding back traditionally important key-players, like USA, who may be threatened by China’s rise.

In conclusion, ISIS may be an ample opportunity for China to make use of to garner political relevance internationally.

Despite its traditional policy of indifference and isolation, now may be the time where China discard this conventional attitude and assert its presence in international diplomacy.

Source: Flikr, US Department of Defence

37

Features

Tuesday February 10, 2015

The Changing Politics of Aspiration Dermot Neligan First year undergraduate “THE LABOUR PARTY HAS a bad relationship with aspiration”. Progressive taxing “stunts ambition”, benefits “incentivise fecklessness” and the NHS is only “haemorrhaging our taxes”.

Labour stands indicted of punishing success, rewarding failure and committing the cardinal sin of incompetence by the Exchequer. Feeding the feckless from the pay packet of the hardworking. The clichés flow forth.

To those who dare to check the tide? The not-a-little-patronising charge of being “wellintentioned, but misguided”. It can be a lonely road trying to preach Miliband’s mantra, cyberspace suicide to be caught tweeting “#forthemany”.

So why do Labour get such short shrift, whilst a Conservative Party, whose front bench are practically a caricature of privilege, is not challenged for its narrative, painting itself the way toward “securing a better future”? A real term fall in wages under the coalition government coupled with levels of economic inequality not seen in decades betray what seems to be Conservative Party failing an important part of its core vote. The path to socio-economic advancement has rarely been so precarious.

On the back of five years

Source: Flikr, net_efekt

of a less than entirely reputable record on the economy and on living standards, why then the Tory campaign promise: “together, we’ll secure a better future for you, your family and everyone in Britain”?

It is certainly attractive sound bite, but isn’t the implication of universal prosperity (“everyone”), regardless of whether people work for it, tantamount to Labour’s propping up the unemployed, supposedly so contentious?

Perhaps we’ll never find out what they really mean. The catalogue of Con-Dem calamities give hope that come what May, the Conservatives will be out on their ear. Political point scoring on tuition fees, the NHS and public sector cuts are, quite rightly, well versed and may get some swing votes.

But perhaps the Achilles’ heel of the Conservative Party this General Election campaign will be the popular realisation that it no longer represents the interest groups whose vote it takes for granted.

Take small businesses and entrepreneurialism, yesterday’s political priority. The Conservatives rely primarily for donations on the corporate world, and it is reported that they are hoping to pull in a £26 million election campaign pot from the unofficial lobby group that is the Square Mile elite. Failing to close a £100 million a year hedge fund tax loophole whilst leaving small

business high and dry? It’s just not cricket.

The “death of the high street” is a myth, but the prohibitively high business rates which small business face are a fantasy. The Party once headed by the greengrocer’s daughter may boast of record numbers of tech start-ups, but the proportion of small businesses actually employing people is at a record low.

An example of government failure on the issue may be the gimmick of enlisting Mary Portas to lead a crusading “independent review into the state of our high streets and town centres”. Her ensuing project, with just £1.9 million of Whitehall backing, was unsurprisingly dismal failure: cue Daily Mail proclaiming “Mary, Queen of (fewer) Shops”.

Entrepreneurial spirit then sapped, what of populist home ownership? A cornerstone of Thatcherite policy, it has remained unresolved, as the protest on 31st January showed.

Chronic housing shortages and an absurdly inflated house price bubble, in London and the South-East most prominently, threaten to leave a generation of young adults dependent on their parents for a roof over their heads.

Whatever happened to helping hardworking families secure a better start for their children?

The swelling number of 95% mortgages awarded as stopgap in an overheating market

threatens to explode.

Less abstract for the typical student is the issue of education. Definitive to where we are and how we got here, education is elemental to “social mobility”. Let’s not forget the 1997 Labour pledge of “education, education, education” that arrested over a decade of Tory underinvestment in our schools. The contribution of the five years of our current Tory-led coalition? The pushing through of legislation allowing unqualified teachers into the classroom and an expensive social experiment of free schools and academies, which have allowed inevitably privileged and affluent local interest groups of, primarily, pushy and middle-class parents to open up schools on the cheap. Michael Gove may have won the headlines, but it was thirteen years of Labour government that made a legacy.

It is time for some revisionism to the debate on aspiration. Parties and people change. The Conservative Party’s claimed monopoly over the professed “aspirational classes” is wafer thin. Social mobility rose under the last Labour government, and what the Tories are doing for social mobility remains less than clear, backed primarily as they are by powerful corporate interests. Perhaps the small man or woman with big dreams will remember this at the ballot box.

Source: Flikr, Number 10

corner Charlotte Hussey RAG External Relations Officer O N T H U R S DAY 1 2 T H February LSESURAG will be running a donor recruitment event with Delete Blood Cancer UK. The idea of the event is to get as many students as possible to join the UK Stem Cell Registry and therefore become potential stem cell donors. Stem cell donors play a vital role in helping people survive blood cancers such as leukaemia, lymphoma or myeloma, so by registering on Thursday, students are signing up to potentially save a life!

Delete Blood Cancer UK aims to provide a suitable donor for every person in need of a blood stem cell donation. Every 20 minutes someone in the UK is diagnosed with a form of blood cancer and finding a matching blood stem cell donor could help save their life.

Blood cancer is an umbrella term for cancers which affect the blood, bone marrow and lymphatic system, and most of these cancers start in the bone marrow where blood is produced. Most blood cancers start when the normal blood cell development is interrupted causing abnormal cell production. These abnormal or cancerous cells prevent the blood from carrying out many of its vital functions. In order to treat a patient, the abnormal cells need to be destroyed, and then replaced by healthy cells, which is where the right blood stem cell donor becomes important. The proteins of the donor cells must be a close match with the proteins of the recipient’s cells to prevent the recipient’s body rejecting the donor’s cells. If a match is found, stem cells will be collected either through peripheral blood stem cell collection or by bone marrow collection and then delivered straight to the person in need.

Finding a close match is very difficult and currently less than half of the people in the UK searching for a lifesaving donor match don’t find one. This is why we need more people to be on the register! More people on the register means there is more chance of finding a match for hundreds of people in need of a blood stem cell donation. So please come along to the 1st Floor of Saw Swee Hock between 11am and 5pm on 12th February to support Delete Blood Cancer UK and become a potential blood stem cell donor!

Sport

Tuesday February 10, 2015

38

Alternative Super Bowl Review

Robin Park Sport Editor

Sweaty? Not so much.

Squashed? A little less. But scandalous as ever? We think so. Two events down and two to go, our Animals revelled in the calmer waters before creat-

some good throws, Russell Wilson was apparently doing very well, and there were many points on the board by half-time. The score 14-14. Then the most interesting bit of the Super Bowl commenced. Katy Perry strutted onto the pitch on top of a giant Zoid, and started singing Roar, which I highly enjoyed. Then there was a bit of Lenny Kravitz and Missy Elliot, which was probably longer than Katy’s performance, much like how there are more ads than gametime in the average football

match. Finally Katy climbed on top of a shooting star and flew about with fireworks. Even Taylor Swift would have been impressed.

In the second half, the Seahawks pulled off some good moves. 24-14 in the third quarter.

But the Patriots are a tough outfit.

They’ve been through some tough matches in the past. It wasn’t that long ago when they lost 21 – 17 to the New York Giants after leading their opponents in the third quarter. And experience showed as once again Tom Brady pulled

his team by the scruff of the neck and comprehensively crushed the Seahawks. The final score 28 – 24, the Patriots’ fourth Super Bowl title in the Brady-Bill Belichick era. They’re of course still being investigated for some dodgy ball tampering, which is “just not cricket” as my friend cleverly pointed out.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed my foray into American sport. A highly educational experience, which has made me into a true Patriots fan.

Photo credit: flikr, hello world media

Originally, this review was going to be written by my Polish-American flatmate, but unfortunately he has disappeared and I cannot reach him. The last time this happened, he ended up being found inside the Barbican, covered in snow and without clothes.

Thankfully, in my professional capacity as this paper’s sport editor, I actually watched the Super Bowl, despite my complete lack of knowledge in the game and ridiculous timezone clash.

A lot of my American friends were pretty excited for this. Some of the comments I heard this week were “yeah I’m totally frothing hard for this”, “it’s going to be insane bro”, and “will literally be the best shit if the Seahawks win”.

Their enthusiasm rubbed off on me, and though I wasn’t frothing hard, I was pretty excited to watch Tom Brady and the Patriots in all their golden all-American glory.

But firstly, who are the Patriots? They’re a team based in New England, made up of enormous angry men, who smash other enormous angry men, and keep on smashing until the TV networks run out of advertisements. American football is a very simple game. It needs to be. A typical play would be the following: a player will receive instructions from a coach, and will be told which opponent he needs to smash. Players will then charge forward, and in the process be bruised, battered and possibly maimed, before hopefully catching the egg and crossing over the line for a touchdown. The process is capped off by a kicking ceremony, in which a specialist kicker will punt the ball between the posts, before retiring back to the bench.

This is surprising for the average New Zealander or Welshmen, because it’s usually the case that the kicker is the brains of the outfit.

The five-eighth is the clever one making plays, directing players and doing all the razzle dazzle. In American football this role is taken on by the quarterback, who is clearly the most intelligent player on the pitch.

After being given this description by my more knowledgeable flatmate, I watched the game with great interest. Tom Brady made

ing a Storm of their own. (Less a Strom, more a river? Such is not for us to say).

And from the rest of you…

One Liv’ely lady spent a night on the Arc. One ‘treacherous’ ‘2nd’ teamer found his Gross to be pleasing. And two third year old timers Mill’ed their way home. Izn’t that lovely?

A founding dancer didn’t let a stubbed Toe finish her, she’s a Jack of all trades. Our resident Sil-baby fell head over heels. At

least she didn’t get Cald. And a 4th team lady Wok’ed the Walk until she couldn’t Tay’ke anymore.

One WRFC captain found herself a Pr-etey non-rugby Geordie with the help of a Great Britton while another Robbed an FC. And an FC laid the Seeds of hate with a few Salty words and a fist or two - where’s that team spirit lads?

From family feuds to star crossed lovers, tune in next week

for our Valentine’s edition which will see this report pay homage to all the Zoo Bar romances.

From those with the multiple ‘it’s just a one night stand’ to the down right loved-up - we’ll see you all in Zoo. Despite being omnipotent and benevolent, the Bev Report lacks omniscience. Send in the escapades you witnessed to sports@ thebeaveronline.co.uk

39

Sport

Tuesday February 10, 2015

LSE Students Compete In Volleyball England Student Cup Finals Robin Park Sport Editor IN THE NATIONAL FINALS the University of London (ULU) team competed in the Volleyball England Student Cup Finals.

From the LSE women’s team, Steffie Brader and Martina Zanella competed in the Finals, coming 9th out of 16.

From the men’s team, Bruno Baisch, Panikos Patsalides,

Moritz Schwarts, Austin Le, and Sven Sabas competed and also came inside the top 10, placing 7th overall.

Whilst they were representing ULU, it is a noteworthy achievement for LSE to have so many students compete at the highest level in an event that was streamed live online throughout the weekend. It is also a great achievement for the players individually and further evidence of LSE AU’s continuing success on the pitch.

Classified Results

Photo credit: Richard Smith

Women’s Hockey

Men’s Football

Netball

Women’s Tennis

LSE 2s 8 - 0 Brunel 2s

LSE 1s 0 - 4 Royal Vets 1s

LSE 1s 26 - 36 Barts and Royal 2s

LSE 1s 4 - 2 UCL 1s

LSE 1s 2 - 2 St Barts and Royal 1s

LSE 2s 26 - 37 Imperial Medics 2s

LSE 2s 0 - 0 LSE 1s (Walkover awarded to LSE 2s)

LSE 3s 41 - 32 Barts and Royal 3s

LSE 2s w/o Westminster 1s (Walkover awarded to LSE 2s)

Men’s Hockey LSE 1s - 0 Barts and Royal 1s Men’s Volleyball LSE 1s 3 - 0 Westminster 1s Women’s Badminton LSE 1s 2 - 6 King’s College (GKT) 1s

LSE 3s 2 - 1 St George’s 2s LSE 4s 0 - 4 Royal Vets Mixed Golf LSE 1s 2.5 - 3.5 Surrey 1s

LSE 4s 30 - 22 LSE 5s

Mixed Ultimate

LSE 6s 7 - 33 King’s 5s

LSE 1s 9 - 10 UAL 1s

Men’s Tennis

LSE 2s 13 - 1 UAL 1s

LSE 1s 2 - 10 Imperial College 1s

Women’s Table Tennis

LSE 2s 4 - 8 UCL 1s

LSE 1s 3 - 2 King’s 1s

BEAVER FANTASY FOOTBALL UPDATE Firstly, it would seem no one knows what the joining code for this league is anymore. Thank you Rohan Mehta for pointing this out. Obviously, I take editorial responsibility for this, even though it’s probably Gareth Rosser’s fault.

In January, not a lot changed as Dynamo Chicken Kiev continues to dominate. In the editorial battle, Red’s XI is close to the European spots, closely followed by Sam Barnett’s Sandalecht. Newly reelected Ski President Harry Philpot drops to 8th place, and Allsop rounds up the top 10 with 1178 points. Apologies again for the missing code and general shadmin. Good luck everyone.

Sport

SUBMIT A MATCH REPORT AND GET YOUR TEAM’S ACHIEVEMENTS IN PRINT

the

Beaver

Editor: Robin Park Email: sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk

LSE AU Running Competes In BUCS Cross-Country

Nigel Poh LSE AU Running Captain LAST SATURDAY MARKED the LSE Running team’s return to the pinnacle of all British Cross-Country competitions after a long hiatus - the BUCS Cross-Country Championships. Despite a well-intentioned effort to shift the location of the race to the South of

England this year, weather conditions remained unfavourable, and the race course looked like a venue befitting of Tough Mudder.

This year’s competition saw over 1600 runners from all across the UK gather at Stanmer Park in Sussex. While the school did not field a team for the Men’s 12km A-Race, star runner, George Bettsworth, was handpicked by the University of London to run under the UOL team, which finished a

respectable 32nd out of 51 teams.

Meanwhile, in the Men’s 8km B-Race, amidst tough competition from powerhouses like St Mary’s and Birmingham, the LSE I team managed to finish 63rd out of 95 teams, with Ben Marshall leading the pack, followed by F lorian Griesmeyer, Lauri Ojala, Carlo Portmann, Nigel Poh, Kevin Teo, Lee Seok Hyun & Hari Chitnavis.

The ladies also did well in the Women’s 6.4km Race, with

Triathlon Captain, Jaime Sim, clocking an applaudable 32:20 timing in her inaugural crosscountry race. Gemma Gordon and Zoe Carter also dashed past the finish line closely after one another and delivered strong and consistent performances for the women’s team.

Although everyone was battered by the muddy terrain and cold weather, the BUCS Cross-Country Championship was a great opportunity to

expose the team to the crème de la crème of English crosscountry.

While the team has often questioned its decision to run in deplorable conditions, the satisfaction from crossing the finish line and hearing a ‘beep’ sound makes the process worthwhile. With more races coming up this month, the team will continue to put their best foot forward - and run.