Beaver
Issue 836 | 13.10.15
the
Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union
Comment:
HeForShe Talk Was Tiring, Insulting and Disappointing Purvaja Kavattur Social Policy and Economics Student
UN HeForShe Campaign Receives Critical Reception On Campus Ellen Wilkie Executive Editor
THIS WEEK UN WOMEN’S HeForShe campaign’s #getfree Tour arrived at the London School of Economics campus to widespread criticism. This criticism came as a result of an allegedly racist remark made by panellist Charles Stephens and the implication in the name ‘HeForShe’ that there are only two genders. HeForShe is a solidarity campaign rallying men to become advocates of gender equality and encouraging action against inequalities towards women. LSE played host to alumna Elizabeth Nyamayaro, Executive Director of UN Women and Founder of HeForShe. The panel also included Lena Schofield, Hilary Stauffer, Douglas Booth and Charles Stephens, Head of Global Gender Agenda and Head of Diversity and Inclusion Head Office Functions at Barclays Plc. The comment made by Charles Stephens that came under criticism
recounted an incident where ‘I was recently…(in) a small grocery grab and go...in the centre of London... There was a veiled woman working behind the counter and this guy came in and grabbed her breast. And I’m like, I said something not very polite in very loud terms out of a reaction. I’m blown away, like, I’m in the centre of London and this is happening. This isn’t a rural village in Africa or the rural United States’. Whilst making this statement Stephens gestured towards Elizabeth Nyamayaro, the only BME panellist. Lena Schofield, LSESU Women’s Officer and panellist at the event commented ‘Regarding the UN Women event, I would describe it as a really uncomfortable thing to be a part of. I had reservations about taking part, but had hoped it would be an opportunity to challenge the school on real issues. Unfortunately HeForShe and LSE were more interested in cross promotion for its own sake rather than engaging with the concerns of students. The high point of the
event was certainly contributions from students in the audience who challenged HeForShe on their poor record on recognising non-binary gender identities and raised serious concerns about safety on London transport. It was a shame to see the panelists fail to engage fully with these questions, or attempt to mansplain women’s experiences to us. Most concerning were the xenophobic comments made by a panelist, which the Chair failed to challenge. HeForShe has repeatedly shown itself to be more interested in press and centering the voices of men than intersectional feminist issues.’ Schofield’s full statement can be read on page 3. Mahatir Pasha, LSESU BME Officer said, regarding Stephens’ comment, that ‘I find it extremely shocking that someone who is Head of Diversity and Inclusion at a company as large as Barclays can so casually exert what come across as racist remarks. From what I have heard, not only does the statement suggest that sexism is in some way more understandable in rural parts
The City Sport
of Africa or the United States, but it also posits that it is more prevalent in these regions. Evidence actually suggests that islamophobia, especially that against women, is just as much of a problem in London than it is anywhere else. This can be seen through the Met Police recently releasing that hate crimes against Muslims in London have risen by 70% in the past year, with Tell MAMA, an organisation that monitors Islamophobic attacks, saying that 60% of Islamaphobia victims were women. To suggest that some hate crimes are more understandable in Africa and the US than in London is not only lacking in evidence, but may also reinforce lazy, often orientalist, stereotypes. These kinds of remarks lack foundation, cause offence and are wholly unacceptable. They should not be welcome at the LSE.’ The HeForShe Campaign was contacted for comment, but at time of print The Beaver had not received a statement. Read the full report on Page 3
An Interview with AU Welcome Party, James Meadway Reviewed!
Page 24 Page 32
THE HEFORSHE EVENT ON Wednesday has left me feeling tired, insulted, and disappointed. There were just too many comments made at the event which left me despairing over the future of gender equality, and consequently, the future of feminism. An event supposedly aimed at reaching a state where gender discrimination is a distant memory, in turn went on to reinforce the barriers that many people face in getting involved in the discussion of gender equality, as well as reinforced the very structures of kyriarchy that the event supposedly opposed. Now HeForShe, instead of addressing the history of discrimination in the struggle for gender equality, went on to make uneasy lesbophobic and xenophobic comments. Actor Douglas Booth referred to the hypothetical sporty girl who prefers hockey over ‘hanging out with her mates’. He expressed distress when he imagined people calling her a lesbian. Yet he failed to qualify this. Now I’m going to give Booth the benefit of the doubt and assume the distress he felt was over how people can so shockingly assume someone’s sexuality is determined by the sport they play. However the fact Booth didn’t qualify his disgust gave off the impression that he thought being called a lesbian is an insult. As a person in the media he surely must understand the impact and gravity of word choice, and even more so when he is given a powerful platform on which to speak. Continued on Page 9
Room 2.02, Saw Swee Hock Student Centre, LSE Students’ Union London WC2A 2AE Executive Editor Ellen Wilkie
editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Managing Editor Megan Crockett
Beaver
the
the
Beaver
Established in 1949 Issue No. 836- Tuesday 13 October 2015 -issuu.com/readbeaveronline Telephone: 0207 955 6705 Email: editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk Website: www.beaveronline.co.uk Twitter: @beaveronline
managing@thebeaveronline.co.uk
News Editor Suyin Haynes
news@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Comment Editors Mali Williams
comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk
PartB Editors Kemi Akinboyewa Vikki Hui
partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk
The City Editor Alex Gray
city@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Features Editor Taryana Odayar
features@thebeaveronline.co.uk
The Nab Editor
nab@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Sport Editor Vacant
sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Online Editor Gee Linford-Grayson
online@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Collective Chair Perdita Blinkhorn
collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk
The Collective:
A Doherty, A Fyfe, A Laird, A Leung, A Lulache, A Moro, A Qazilbash, A Santhanham, A Tanwa, A Thomson, B Phillips, C Holden, C Loughran, C Morgan, C Hu, D Hung, D Lai, D Sippel, D Tighe, E Arnold, E Wilkie, G Cafiero, G Harrison, G Kist, G Linford-Grayson, G Manners-Armstrong, G Saudelli, H Brentnall, H Prabu, H Toms, I Plunkett, J Cusack, J Evans, J Foster, J Grabiner, J Heeks, J Momodu, J Ruther, J Wurr, K Budd, K Owusu, K Parida, K Quinn, L Kang, L Kendall, L Erich, L Mai, L Montebello, L Schofield, L van der Linden, M Banerjee-Palmer, M Crockett, M Gallo, M Jaganmohan, M Johnson, M Neergheen, M Pasha, M Pennill, M Strauss, N Antoniou, N Bhaladhare, N Buckley-Irvine, N Stringer, O Hill, O Gleeson, P Amoroso, P Blinkhorn, P Gederi, R Browne, R J Charnock, R Huq, R Kouros, R Serunjogi, R Siddique, R Uddin, R Way, S Ali, S Crabbe-Field, S Haynes, S Kunovska, S Povey, S Sebatindira, T Mushtaq, T Odayar, T Poole, V Hui, Z Chan, Z Mahmod
To join the Collective you need to have written for 3 or more editions of The Beaver. Think you’ve done that but don’t see your name on the list? Email collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk to let us know!
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.
Ellen Wilkie on the necessity that The Beaver scrutinises the Students’ Union
From the Executive Editor THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL flaw in the LSE system. Every good constitution requires checks and balances on power to maintain order and justice and the current set up of the LSE fails to deliver this. At present, the School is held effectively to account by the Students’ Union. The Union, however, is lacking a check on its’ power. Given that the SU, like the School, relies on money taken from students fees but, unlike the School, has the responsibility to represent and work solely for the student body, it seems reasonable to expect that students should at best be consulted and at least be informed of what is happening in the third floor offices of the Saw Swee Hock Centre. In the absence of an alternate body at LSE, it is the responsibility of The Beaver and thus myself as Executive Editor to take on the role of scrutinising and reporting on activity within the SU. Last week in our pages we did just that, reporting that the SU was introducing pay for Part Time Officers and criticising their decision to do so without having consulted or even informed the student body. I would never claim that the sole purpose of this publication is to hold the Union to account but, in the absence of any alternatives, scrutiny falls firmly within our remit and I will not apologise for the paper having done that. No newspaper ever should. In her criticism of our reporting, the General Secretary claimed emphatically that the introduction of PTO pay does not break any ByeLaws. Our communication of this point in the last edition was admittedly vague but I will take this opportunity to set that straight. Article 6 of the Background to the ByeLaws requires that any amendment to the Bye-Laws be passed through UGM. To introduce PTO pay then Bye-Law 6 would require amendment to its clause on remuneration of Officer Trustees to include the Executive Committee Officers. Whilst this does not explicitly state that a UGM would be required, it does strongly point in that direction. By being so insistent that no byelaws have been broken, the General Secretary has narrowed the focus of the debate to nit-picking over which Bye-Laws state what. This is boring
and alienating to the majority of the student body. As we argued last week, the issue with the introduction of PTO pay goes far beyond whether the Bye-Laws were broken or not, and should be of concern to the student body. PTOs will uniformly be contracted for 4 hours a week at a rate of £9.15 per hour, the London Living Wage. As we reported last week, some former PTOs worked a minimum of 15 hours a week which could reach as many as 30 hours during peak periods. It is not clear whether 4 hours is meant as a measure of how long PTOs should spend doing their jobs or whether it is - as it appears to me - a completely arbitrary rate. Were PTOs to only work 4 hours per week then they would never achieve the fantastic things that some of them do each year. It is also worth questioning why those 4 hours of work done by PTOs are so much more valuable, that one get paid and the other not, than the work done by Democracy Committee, society presidents, AU Club captains and Beaver Editors, all of which easily exceed 4 hours per week. If we are to look at the work of last year’s PTOs there was a very clear disparity between the work of different officers. Is it fair to pay all of those officers the same amount for their efforts, when one may have worked 3 hours per week and another 30? I wholeheartedly support the introduction of accountability reports that will coincide with the introduction of PTO pay, but am not convinced that accountability reports alone will guarantee that PTOs will work an equal amount to reflect their equal pay. The pay level agreed for PTOs is far too low to eradicate the need for a part time job, as is supposedly the purpose of the pay introduction. The forty-ish pounds per week that PTOs will receive in no way reflects the stress, the hours or the responsibility taken on by a PTO and pays considerably less than other available student jobs. To take just one example, the recently advertised position as a cold caller for the Annual Fund will earn more than double what the PTOs will per week. It is clear that the pay rate being offered will not make any real
change in how accessible these positions are to students from a lower income background. This incident has highlighted how opaque our SU is and how distant its decisions are from the student body it supposedly represents. This change compromises the voluntary basis on which PTOs were elected. It also demonstrates how little the SU care about students opinions once they have been elected to their positions.This student body is engaged and it is interested and had we had the opportunity we would have collectively decided the route forward. It is common sense that PTOs should be paid but preventing the student body from discussing the terms of that payment is unacceptable. We proudly proclaim on a regular basis that we are a democratic Union, but how democratic are we if all of the real decisions are pushed through at an executive level and UGM is reserved for bland motions in support or condemnation of matters beyond our sphere of influence. This act of scrutiny was not, as has been alleged, The Beaver making a scandal where there wasn’t one. I firmly believe that we made this stand for the benefit of the student body by giving them information that had been withheld from them. Neither was this personal bitterness at The Beaver editor not being included in the policy for payment, as has been accused. I took this role on with no expectation of payment and nothing has changed since. There is no vendetta against the SU and we were not needlessly critical. This was The Beaver doing its job, as the only body in the position to scrutinise what the SU does. This was not a personal attack on any officer, but a general disapproval of a policy and the execution of that policy. As the new editor of the newspaper I am not carrying the old prejudices that the paper was said to have had. I will happily celebrate the achievements of the SU when they make them and work alongside them where I am able. I will not refrain, however, from using my position to scrutinise the SU, which I believe to be not only an important, but a necessary task that we are uniquely positioned to do.
Can You Hack It? IN COLLABORATION with the rest of the LSESU Media Group, The Beaver is holding its first social of the year! Join us, in the company of Pulse Radio, LooSE TV (or whatever name Maxwell has tried to change it to this week) and the Clare Market Review in a pub crawl along Fleet Street, the traditional home of British news publishing. Meet in The Three Tuns at 7pm on Tuesday 20th October for a night to remember (or more likely, forget). Nona Buckley-Irvine @nonajasmine Solidarity with Bahar Mustafa, ridiculous decision been made and so many double standards in this George Harrison @CanaryGeorge @nonajasmine I’m glad you’ve changed your mind regarding the freedom to offend. :) I agree that it’s ridiculous and illiberal #CommonGround Liam Hill @liamjhill Pleased with this.
Ifrah Arshad @iffiex “Without the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms, today’s democracy becomes tomorrow’s tyranny” #LSEShami James Wurr @jameswurr So the EU has decided to fund the @MetroUK Rush Hour Crush... #reasonstoleave
Tweet us @beaveronline to see your 140 characters in print!
News | 3
HeForShe: Gender Equality Is A Shared Responsibility Jeslyn Soh and John Lee Undergraduate Students HEFORSHE IS A SOLIDARITY campaign rallying men to become advocates of gender equality. Launched by United Nations (UN) Women, it encourages action against inequalities towards women. The HeForShe #GetFree Tour is visiting campuses in different countries to raise awareness for gender equality and spark the conversation with young adults. It encourages students to explore their understanding of gender issues. It aims to inspire them to take a lead in advancing equality in their communities. LSE hosted alumna Elizabeth Nyamayaro, Executive Director of UN Women and Founder of HeForShe. The panel also included Lena Schofield, LSE Students’ Union’s Women’s Officer, Hilary Stauffer, Visiting fellow in the Centre for Women, Peace and Security at LSE, Douglas Booth, actor and UNHCR supporter, and Charles Stephens,
Head of Global Gender Agenda and Head of Diversity and Inclusion Head Office Functions at Barclays Plc. Professor Craig Calhoun opened by stressing the shared responsibility of creating an inclusive campus culture. According to Nyamayaro, a key concern prior to the launch of HeForShe was the uncertainty of whether men actually cared about gender equality. As it turns out, they do. “In the first week, more than 100,000 men had signed up to HeForShe and at least one man in every single country in the world,” said Nyamayaro. What makes HeForShe distinctive is the emphasis on inviting men to join the conversation, especially key decision makers. “You cannot create social change with half of the team sitting at the table.” Booth continued by relating to the topic of refugees. “While conflicts are a tragedy for everyone, they are particularly catastrophic for women and girls. (They) have fewer resources to protect themselves and are often targets for sexual violence.” He highlighted that
through empowering women, men benefit too. Gender equality breaks down traditional masculinity, consequentially liberating men from gender stereotypes. He envisions a world where children “can be free to be themselves, to live as they want”. The panel tackled the question - how do we create environments where everyone can flourish? Stauffer introduced unconscious bias, where preconceived notions are so ingrained that people do not realise that they are being prejudiced. Sharing her personal experience, Stauffer said, “I am the person that is asked to get the coffee, and it is because I am the only girl in the room.” She suggested small commitments to raise awareness of this bias; for example, the men having their turn to get coffee. Drawing the problem closer to home, Schofield expressed the urgency for LSE to prioritize student wellbeing. The university must cultivate an environment where students feel safe to voice out against harassment. On the topic of structural
change, the panellists agreed on the need for it. Presently, women are less likely to hold leadership positions. The change comes in the effort to create equal opportunities. Nyamayaro stated, “Who are the decision makers? The reality is that they are mostly the men.” This was the idea behind Impact 10x10x10. An initiative under HeForShe, it promotes the commitment of male global leaders towards gender equality. A member of the audience presented a discourse of what can be done at an individual level. Stauffer remarked, “People hide behind limited resources.” She maintains that “you are going to have to fight the power on it” and that “we have to push back because it’s true but we can’t let it rest.” Professor Calhoun added, “One of the issues in prioritizing is to get people to decide which is forefront now and follow through on that.” Moving forward, the #GetFree tour continues to other universities. HeForShe is further exploring ways to make their campaign more inclusive.
Section Editor: Suyin Haynes Deputy Editors: Vacant
Full Statement From LSESU Women’s Officer, Lena Schofield Lena Schofield LSESU Women’s Officer
This exemplifies the problems with the HeForShe movement, that it allows men to turn the conversation back to themselves, and reinforces a patriarchal power dynamic, where they can demand that women expend more and more energy justifying the reality of our experiences instead of educating themselves. If hearing two people candidly discuss our fear of violence on public transport isn’t real enough for you, then how much do you distrust our accounts of our own experiences? Most concerning the xenophobic comments made by Stephens, which the Chair failed to challenge. He recounted a story of seeing a woman groped in central London, and expressed his shock that it was happening here and not in a “rural village in Africa or the United States”. Stephens had made similar comments to the other panelists before the start of the event, expressing his surprise that Barclays divisions in Africa were doing well on gen-
der equality, and had women in top jobs. It is deeply distressing to think that Charles is Head of Global Gender Agenda and Head of Diversity and Inclusion Head Office Functions at Barclays. Elizabeth Nyamayaro of UN Women and He For She failed to address adequately the concerns of an audience member that HeForShe reinforces the gender binary, either during or after the event. This event was deeply problematic, and it is laughable that HeForShe describes itself as challenging the status quo when it does so much to reinforce it. HeForShe has repeatedly shown itself to be more interested in press and centering the voices of men than intersectional feminist issues. I’m hugely thankful to all of the awesome LSE women who stood up after the event and challenged the speakers on their problematic comments. You made an incredibly draining and unpleasant event more bearable.
News
THE UN WOMEN EVENT was a really uncomfortable thing to be a part of. I had reservations about taking part, but had hoped it would be an opportunity to challenge the school on real issues. Unfortunately HeForShe and LSE were more interested in cross promotion for its own sake rather than engaging with the concerns of students. Craig Calhoun excused slow progress on inclusivity at LSE by pitting liberation groups against one another, describing them as ‘competing goods.’ This is disingenuous and ignores the experiences of people who do not see their multiple identities as ‘competing goods’ but rather as interconnected and in need of being addressed as a whole. The high point of the event was certainly contributions from students in the audience who challenged HeForShe on their poor record on recognising non-binary gender iden-
tities and raised serious concerns about safety on London transport. It was a shame to see the panelists fail to engage fully with these questions, or attempt to mansplain women’s experiences to us. Charles Stephens repeatedly spoke from an entitled and privileged place over the experiences of women on the panel. When Hillary Stauffer spoke of her personal experiences of sexism in the workplace, being asked to take notes and get coffee, Stephens questioned whether this really happened all of the time. Hillary responded “85% percent of the time” to which Charles condescended “so not all the time”. As well as this when I empathised with an audience member about our shared experiences of harassment on public transport, Charles took this as an opportunity to demand that we make our fear more accessible to him “we can talk about being scared, but if I can’t even comprehend it...how do we make it real for the guys”.
4|
Tuesday October 13, 2015
Disabled Students’ Network Is Launched James Clark Staff Writer
THE LONDON SCHOOL OF Economics’ Student Union’s Disabled Student’s Officer Isobel Clare, launched the Disabled Students’ Network last week. Taking a summer of planning, the network follows on from previous Disabled Students’ Officer Mark Malik’s Disabled Students’ Assemblies. However, the Disabled Students’ Network also has created further activities in which students can participate. Students will be able to use the Network for campaigning, facilitating discussions and highlighting issues for self-defining disabled students within LSE and at other institutions. The Network adds to the growing list for libera-
tion groups such as the Women’s Network and the BME Network. “The Network has created a safe space for all students who selfidentify as disabled, ranging from Neurodiversity, Mental Health, Physical and Long-term Illness on Facebook and also in meetings. It also further allows for the inclusivity and support of all students, even those who do not self-define as disabled” Disabled Student’s Officer Isobel Clare explained. “I’m excited to have broadened the remit of what the Assemblies were, to start getting more people involved and talking about disability in a positive light and to a greater extent on campus. It also allows people to plan and run their own projects under the umbrella of the Network such as the Neuron Project. Representation of all disabilities will be
felt on campus a lot more through the means of the Network.” The Neuron Project currently runs as a resource both on Facebook and as an “online library” blog, providing helpful and nontriggering resources to users about Mental Health and reducing the stigma around it. With other events planned in co-ordination with the Network to maximise the effect of the project on campus, the project is one part of a greater effort this year to bring disability to the forefront on campus. The Network and Isobel have already started a plethora of events to great success such as the Neurodiversity Meet and Greet, the Mental Health Awareness day on campus, and the Famous Faces exhibition of public figures with dyslexia. The Network is also following in the footsteps of the Women’s Network by involving societies, such as the newly founded Head Space society by Asia Lawrence, which focuses on awareness of mental health, along with fundraising for relevant charities and promoting wellbeing and happiness on campus. Students can get involved in the Network through joining the group on Facebook and joining the mailing list in the Activities and Resource Centre on the first floor of the Saw Swee Hock Student Centre to keep up to date on plans and events for the Network.
New Exhibition Traces Migration Bhadra Sreejith Undergraduate Student
THE OLD B U I L D I N G, London School of Economics (LSE), is currently hosting a touring multimedia exhibition entitled Germans in Britain, created by the Migration Museum Project. The exhibition aims to shed light on the centuries-old relationship between Germany and Britain, and the history of migration from Germany to Britain. It also exposes the similarities between both countries, and the interchange of ideas and goods that stretches to the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in the 5th century. The exhibition, which snakes around the Atrium Gallery, is made up of seventeen panels, each of which deals with a separate part of the German-British relationship. Each panel has several examples of the topic it deals with; for example, the introductory panel points out that both Germany and Britain represent themselves as “semi-classical female figures”. The percentage of the British population that is German-born is currently the highest in Britain’s history, at 0.43 percent. However, there is diversity in the Germans in Britain today, with the German community including ethnic Somalis, ethnic Vietnamese and former East and West Germans.
The history of German migration shows that many poor Germans arrived in early 19thcentury London, who hoped to work in the thriving city. Many of them settled in the poor East End, where a settled Germany community existed. However, the major wave of migration was between 1933 and 1945, when around 59,000 German Jews were given asylum in Britain. There were 10,000 Jewish children who travelled alone on “kinder-transport” rescue missions, leaving their parents and their family behind. Germans have been an important part of British education as well, with five of Britain’s NobelPrize winning scientists having been born in Germany. According to the exhibit, “the German fondness for systematic observation has fuelled many fields of scholarship in Britain”. Karl Marx lived in London and made his observations of capitalism from there. The exhibition aims to show how British sport, science, art, businesses and banks have all been shaped by their German connections. The Migration Museum Project traces the history of migration and movement to the UK by different communities and plans to create the UK’s first dedicated Migration Museum. The exhibition will be hosted in the Old Building till the 8th of November, so don’t miss it.
LSESU Releases Statement on Sexual Harassment Rahat Siddique Staff Writer THE LONDON SCHOOL of Economics Students’ Union (LSESU) has recently written its statement about sexual harassment at LSE. Earlier in the year, the SU passed a motion to ‘adopt a zero tolerance to sexual harassment policy’, they are now urging the School to do the same. While the School has a formal policy against bullying and harassment which mentions sexual harassment, there is no appropriate channel for those that have been victims of sexual harassment or abuse, a new distinct policy would address this issue while acknowledging the sensitivity of such cases. The National Union of Students estimated that one in four students are subjected to inappropriate touching or groping whilst at university, while a 2010 survey by the NUS found that 68% of women have experienced sexual harassment while on campus across the UK. The SU have submitted a paper to the Ethics Committee to encourage the School to take a more proactive approach to address this issue within the LSE community.
On a national level, only 51% of institutions have a formal policy against sexual harassment, leaving LSE as part of an uninspiring average. Across the pond, universities in the US have been coming under fire for the high levels of sexual harassment on campus leading to a political discourse pertaining to policy. LSE, like many universities, has a problem of misogyny and sexual harassment on campus, which was epitomized by the crude Freshers’ leaflets distributed by the Men’s Rugby Club last year. The current harassment policy at LSE disregards the sensitivity of sexual harassment cases and how it differs from other forms of bullying. Implementing a zero tolerance policy would give victims the confidence to disclose their experiences of sexual harassment without the fear of being made vulnerable by inappropriate procedures. As it stands, the current methods of dealing with harassment usually encourages victims to speak to the perpetrator. The Good Lad campaign led by the Men’s Rugby Working Group aimed to address issues of misogyny and sexism on campus, with a particular focus on lad culture associated to sports clubs.
Tom Carmichael, Outreach Officer of the Men’s Rugby Club said “The appalling statistics on sexual harassment at university speaks for itself, and it’s great that the SU are pushing for a tough and clear framework on how to address it. Last year the Men’s Rugby Working Group held a ‘Good Lad Workshop’ for our members and we already have plans to hold one this year, both for ourselves and other clubs in the AU. The message of the workshop is clear: if we are to seriously tackle negative ‘lad culture’ we (and in particular men’s sports teams) need to also go far beyond the minimum standards in how we expect ourselves to act and treat others.” The School is yet to respond to this proposal, which aims to create a more supportive and time sensitive complaints procedure. As the LSE still falls short in comparison to the work being done at other institutions, implementing a new and more accessible sexual harassment policy would enable further progress. The LSESU Women’s Officer, Lena Schofield, will be doing more work on addressing sexual harassment throughout the year, and it is hoped that the School will follow suit.
Students Consulted On Divestment Elena Bignami and Anna Koolstra LSE Divest LSE’S INVESTMENT POLICY is going through profound change this year. A Socially Responsible Investment Review (SRIR) group was set up over the summer to undertake an ethical review of all the investments of the School, with a specific focus on fossil fuels. The school is now engaging in constructive discussions with student campaigners to bring divestment to the next level. Demands made by the LSE Divest campaign group include freezing of any new investments into the top 200 fossil fuel companies and divestment of the entirety of their funds from these companies within five years, as well as a yearly review procedure. On Monday, October 5th 2015, a Town Hall meeting for staff and students was called to discuss divestment from fossil fuels, tobacco and armaments. At the meeting, the School expressed its interest in divestment from indiscriminate arms, tobacco and fossil fuels. Commitments to fossil fuel divestment, however, remain controversial. The panel clarified that LSE’s endowment is currently passively managed and, to date, demand is not high
enough to create fossil free passive funds in the UK. The School has expressed its interest to divest from tar sands and coal but has repeated that excluding the top 200 fossil fuel companies is legally and financially controversial. The beliefs of LSE Divest are that advocating tar sands and coal divestment on the grounds that it is more feasible right now does not exclude divesting from the top 200 companies in the short term. Panellists frequently mentioned the small size of the LSE’s
endowment fund which allows for limited possibilities. However, responding to discontent from the LSE Divest movement about this point, Craig Calhoun promised that: ‘the LSE is actively interested in securing the cooperation of other institutions in a common policy that would enable us to make more effective investments to reduce carbon’. The School have stated that a statement on divestment will be made by the end of November. Craig Calhoun commented that LSE recognises the importance
of the UNFCCC climate talks and wants to actively lead the way to divestment: ‘I am hoping the statement that we make will go beyond symbolically to say we are going to think about this, and presenting that as in and of itself a divestment policy, to something that will go further than that’. Representatives from LSE Divest commented that ‘overall, LSE got the message. Students demand divestment, the issue is important, and a leading institution like the LSE needs to act as a pioneer. It’s just a matter of time.’
LSESU Votes to Support Free Education Demo Megan Crockett Managing Editor THE FIRST UNION GENERAL Meeting (UGM) of Term took place on Thursday 8th September; the first to take place in the Denning Learning Café of the Saw Swee Hock. Turnout hit around thirty students, all of whom attended to elect a new Vice UGM Chair and hear the four Sabbatical Officers (Sabbs) report on their year so far, before hearing for and against the motion, “Should LSESU support the November 4th student demonstrations, free education and living grants for all?” The first item on the agenda was the election of a UGM ViceChair in which Hari Prabu stood unopposed and was elected. The meeting then moved on to hear from the Sabbs. Katie Budd, Activities and Development Officer was not able to attend UGM so Nona Buckley-Irvine, General Secretary of LSESU, read an account which Budd had prepared.Budd noted the success of this year’s Freshers’ Fair, new online society training and the positive Give it a Go sessions marking the start of the year, amongst other activities. BuckleyIrvine’s report included her liaisons with the school regarding divestment and with ISOC on the problems they are having with Prevent. In addition Buckley-Irvine stressed
that she was trying to make teaching a priority following the “shocking” NSS Scores. Part-time Officer (PTO) pay was then discussed as Buckley-Irvine claimed that contrary to the front page article featured in Week 2’s Beaver, “no bye-laws were broken” as “no bye law exists” with regards to PTO pay. The General Secretary continued to suggest that the whole situation highlighted the need for better communication between the SU and the student body, as it seems that there may be an issue of transparency. BuckleyIrvine added that she thinks it is “crucial you [the student body] feel like you have all the information you need”. A question was then put to the General Secretary with regards to what changes there will be to PTO accountability now they are being paid. Buckley-Irvine said that PTOs will be subject to accountability reports at the end of every Term as well as filling in a timesheet; highlighting the fact that these “wages” are more remunerations than a salary. Furthermore, the SU Exec are expected to attend UGMs, which will be enforced more from now on. However, it was added that this might not always be possible since some PTOs have lectures and classes timetabled for the hour of UGM and therefore will not be able to attend.
Another attendee asked if PTO pay would affect GTA pay in any way. Buckley-Irvine responded stating that they are currently campaigning so that GTAs will be paid for more preparation time, as they are currently only paid for two hours preparation time per course they teach. This concluded Buckley-Irvine’s report and questions. Next it was the turn of Community and Welfare Officer, Aysha Fekaiki, to talk about her progress, outlining the launch of the Wellbeing Project and the securing of free yoga sessions every Monday alongside her main achievements: Black History Month and Alternative Freshers’ Week. The final Sabb to take to the stage was Jon Rhys-Foster, Education Officer, who began by telling the audience that is has been a “busy couple of months”. Rhys-Foster said that he is working on study space and hopes to get a clear design of what it will actually look like soon, and is continuing the “Reimagining Your Education” series started by Maksimyiw last year, with an event entitled “What is an LSE Education?” taking place that evening. That concluded the Sabb reports. The motion “should LSESU support the November 4th student demonstration, free education and living grants for all?” was then up for discussion. The proposer of the motion, Lydia Hughes, stood up to
make her case to UGM, with her main line of argument being that students are leaving university with too much debt and with not enough support for living costs; this, she argued, is acting as a deterrent to many students who are considering higher education. Hughes noted how hugely important grants are and that we should all be willing to fight for them as well as against further cuts adding that we need to challenge the idea that education is a commodity. Seconder of the motion, Eleanor Boiling, added that students would feel safer and more comfortable at the protest on 4th November if the SU formally supported it adding that it could be even better if the SU facilitated workshops as this would maximise the impact at the protest. There was no opposition in attendance as Josh Hitchens was absent and he did not have a seconder to the motion. The votes opened at 2pm on Thursday 8th September; after the UGM had finished. The motion to support the 4th November student demonstration, calling for free education and living grants for all reached its quoracy; quoracy is two hundred and fifty votes, this motion saw three hundred and fourteen votes placed. Eighty-seven per cent of votes cast, two hundred and seventy six, voted in favour of supporting the motion to support the November 4th demonstration.
News | 5
London Uni Roundup A petition has gained over 200 signatures in just under 2 days on Change.org lobbying King’s College London and its Student Union to provide more dedicated gender neutral toilets for their students. The petition description argues that “searching for gender neutral toilets should not be a strenuous task for students on campus. There should be enough non-gendered toilets, clearly located, for all students to use”.
Super markets are hoping to help find a cure for dementia by using cash from the plastic bag levy to build the world’s biggest research centre in London. Waitrose, Iceland and Morrisons pledged to give cash raised by the 5p charge to a Dementia Research Institute being set up by University College London. The Dementia Research Institute will bring together researchers from across UCL and UCLH to find treatments and improve the lives of those with dementia.
The Students’ Union have refused to comply with a secret working group set up by university administration to explore the implementation of the Prevent strategy within SOAS. The controversial strategy has now been widely criticised as Islamophobic, with the Students’ Union co-presidents saying that the ‘intention is for this to target Muslims and people of colour’. The Students’ Union have decided to withdraw from SOAS’ working group discussing how to implement Prevent duties, criticising it as an ‘Islamophobic programme which poses a fundamental threat to academic freedom’.
6|
Tuesday October 6, 2015
LSE To Host Talk from North Korean Defector
Megan Preston General Course Student
NOT MANY OF US CAN say that we’ve escaped a dictatorship, risked our lives, and inspired millions through the experience. Hyeonseo Lee can. Lee is a North Korean refugee who fled the harsh country as a child for the brighter land of China. Considered an illegal immigrant in China, she eventually moved again to South Korea to ensure her safety. Today Lee spends her time advocating on behalf of North Korean refugees and providing a voice for the family and friends who remain in North Korea. The London School of Economics Students’ Union (LSESU) Korea Future Forum (KFF) and the Centre for the Study of Human Rights at LSE have teamed up to invite Lee to campus this Friday, October 16th, where she will be speaking about the issues that North Korean defectors face when trying to rebuild their lives. Such obstacles include language barriers, poverty, and the desperate conditions that drive North Koreans to risk escape in the first place. Those interested in a preview of the event can check out Lee’s inspiring 2013 TED talk,
in which she elaborated on her own journey as well as the difficulties faced by North Korean refugees. In her talk, she clarified that “getting to freedom is only half the battle,” since many defectors “are separated from their families and when they arrive in their new countries they start with little or no money.” 400 people are expected to attend Lee’s speech, which will be held in the Sheikh Zayed Theatre of the New Academic Building from 6:30-8:00pm.
The evening will begin with introductions by both the KFF President and Professor Chetan Bhatt, Centre Director for the Study of Human Rights. Professor Bhatt is also chairing the event and will be the official liaison between the audience and Lee during the Q&A session afterwards. Lee published a longawaited memoir this summer and a book signing will occur later in the evening. This will be the KFF’s first event as an independent society at the SU. They hope “that
this event will raise awareness, and moreover, inspire key discussion on such a significant contemporary matter of the Korean peninsula, as well as the broader issues facing refugees and defectors around the world.” The subject of human rights and their violations in relation to refugees has been gaining increasing attention lately, and the KFF describes the talk as an “opportunity to hear about [Lee’s] struggles of living in perhaps the most controversial State of the modern
day, including her works for human rights for her home country”. The link to reserve a ticket to Friday’s talk can be found on the event’s Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/ events/444481625738455/. The KFF’s next event will be held February 6th, 2016, the provisional topic of which is the EU’s free trade agreement with South Korea. More updates will be released on the KFF’s Facebook page as the year progresses.
Michaelmas Term Election Nominations Now Open James Clark Staff Writer
THE SECOND WEEK OF Michaelmas term has come and gone, and impending Michaelmas Term Elections are on the horizon for the student body at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). A staple of any teaching term at LSE, the Students’ Union has announced the timeframe for this term’s elections and the positions available to run for. The LSESU has 25 positions, which are elected each year, and this year, 9 positions are up for grabs in Michaelmas Term, with the remainder available in Lent Term. However a number of positions have multiple spaces, such as NUS Delegate with 2 positions (although one position is guaranteed for a self-defining woman) and Court of Governors with 5 positions available. This means that in total, 15 students will start representing the student body in different ways come the 30th October. In a blog post on the LSESU Tumblr page, the SU has announced that nomi-
nations for positions will run for a 7-day period from 12th October to 17th October. After this period, campaigning begins on the 22nd of October and continues until the closing of voting. However, the SU have not announced the dates of hustings, which will bring manifestos and debates to areas around the LSE campus. Topics from previous years included availability of microwaves, and sports for Postgraduates on Wednesday afternoons. Concluding the 2-week plan is voting, in which the LSESU student body is allowed vote for the candidates, with no restrictions in place apart from only General Course Students are eligible to vote for the General Course President and Postgraduate Research Students eligible to vote for their relevant officer. The campaigning and voting period ends at 7pm on 29th October after of 33 hours of voting, with results to be announced from 8pm onwards. LSE has one of the highest turnout rates across UK Student Union elections. To get involved go to lsesu.com/democracy/elections to find out more and to nominate yourself go to lsesu.com/ elections once nominations open.
Question Time at ‘What is an LSE Education? The Academics Speak’ Sehr Taneja Undergraduate Student “WHAT IS AN LSE EDUCATION?” “It’s you! It’s LSE students educating each-other.” – Professor Craig Calhoun, Director of LSE. Do you often question why you chose to come to the London School of Economics (LSE)? Why you chose to pursue your field of study? How you hope to make a difference in the world with what you have learnt? Why you deserve this education or what is wrong with this education? If so, then your education has not failed you. A group of 35 students came together on the evening of 8th October to discuss these very questions with a distinguished panel of speakers from LSE in an event organized by LSE Students’ Union initiative ‘What is an LSE Education?’. The panel constituted of Prof Craig Calhoun, Prof Michael Cox, Dr Shakuntala Banaji and Dr Vanessa Iwowo. The discussion lasted for an hour and a half, followed by casual drinks and snacks to explore the matter in more depth. While it is not appropriate to simplify the content of a dialogue of such importance into a mere 500 words, there are some conclusions and de-
bates that all at the LSE must be aware of and ponder. Professor Cox, Professor of International Relations and Director of IDEAS, opened the discussion with an engaging talk on the history of the LSE, echoing sentiments, ideas and missions from the past. He stressed that although the school has charted a great journey and come a long way, it has in the past and should continue to engage with the surrounding realities and critically engage with real issues of the present day. Cox highlighted that we should still be asking the same fundamental questions on matters such as inequalities, poverty and the state of war that were asked in 1895. The next panelist, Dr Banaji, Lecturer and Programme Director, Media, Communication and Development, led the transition from history to the current situation focusing on what she considers an important part of an education including analyzing, deconstructing, destabilizing and questioning. The crux of her argument lies in the following words: “If your education does not force you to question everything, yourself included, it is not good enough.” Following this, Dr Iwowo, Fellow, Department of Management, highlighted an LSE education as an opportunity, brimming with privilege and
uniqueness, and leading to intellectual maturity. In the concluding speech, Professor Craig Calhoun, Director of LSE, steered away from sheer positivity to shed light on the issues that many face at the school, identifying the obsession with exam marks and a focus on disciplines without realizing the value of application of knowledge in different ways as the key problems. On the other hand, he laid emphasis on the fact that the LSE brings together bright students from 152 different countries and that most learning happens among students, for whom it is crucial to delve into deep arguments and hard questions.
After the speeches, the students used the opportunity to question the LSE system; important subjects included the lack of contact with Professors, absence of feedback on final exams, elitism at LSE, student dissatisfaction and the status of undergraduates. All in all, this event was a successful start to the ‘Reimagine Your Education Series’ brought to LSE by the Student Union. At the end of the discussion, the audience was left with two important questions about the institution: firstly, do we value undergraduates as much as we should? and secondly, do we value teaching as much as research?
THE LONDON SCHOOL OF Economics and Political Science (LSE) has launched a major research project about the influence of media on moulding the public’s opinion and understanding of the migration and refugee crisis. The beginning of this project follows
Photocredit: The Guardian
LSE’s previous announcement of increasing its funding for scholarships for asylum seekers and refugees to nearly £500,000 per year. The on-going crisis may be the most stringent challenge faced by European politicians and policy makers since perhaps the debt crisis. The vast influx of migrants and refugees into Europe from Africa, the Middle East and South Africa has called into action the leaders of
News In Brief Champagne Society Event Bubbles Over Newly established LSESU Champagne Society hosted their welcome event on Monday 5th October, a wine tasting event with a top sommelier and an afterparty at Mahiki. 120 spots for the event sold out in 40 minutes, with a long reserve list for hopefuls on the night. Membership for the society is £15 and can be purchased from the LSESU website.
Historic Suffragette Film Opens with LSE Links
European Migration And The Media: LSE Launches New Research Project Saleha Malik Postgraduate Student
News | 7
the European Union to present an effective policy of lasting asylum or immigration reforms. Various media outlets are being flooded with images of the desperate situation faced by refugees who put their lives in peril in hopes of finding a better future in Europe. The image of three-year old Aylan Kurdi’s body, washed ashore the Turkish coast, spread like wildfire across social media and news, stirring the conscience of people across the world. Despite this, the European Union’s policy towards the crisis has been ad hoc, with member states unable to form a united policy. One of the objectives of the new research project from LSE’s Department of Media and Communications is to focus on understanding how the diverse histories and politics of the European countries have influenced their differing approaches towards the crisis. Over the course of 12 months, the project will set out to answer
a number of questions. First and foremost, the project will aim to discern whether or not there is a pattern regarding media treatment of the crisis in different European countries such as UK, Denmark, France, Greece, Germany, Hungary, Serbia and Spain. To gain a more in-depth understanding, fieldwork will be carried out close to point of entry for the migrants and particular importance will be given to their encounters with the local population. Through this, the Research Project aims to garner a better understanding of how the media uses the image of migrants, its effects on the population and what lies in store regarding the future of the ideal of a “hospitable” Europe. The findings of the Research Project will be published in a report by the summer of 2016. However, initial findings will also be presented beforehand at the annual Polis conference as well various other public events from April 2016.
This week saw the (albeit controversial on the red carpet) opening night of the historic film Suffragette, starring Meryl Streep and Carey Mulligan. The film is the first ever production to be shot in the Houses of Parliament with permission given from current MPs, and The Beaver has heard that some scenes were also filmed in Lincoln’s Inn Fields over the last academic year. Streep stars as Emmeline Pankhurst, leader of the Women’s Social and Political Union, the offices of which were close to the heart of LSE across Clement’s Inn and Clare Market.
LSE Launches United States Centre LSE has established a new academic centre focused on the United States, which serves as a hub for research, analysis and commentary on America. Part of the Institute of Global Affairs, the US Centre will further strengthen LSE’s research on and engagement with the US, including its connections with the 18,000 LSE alumni who live ‘across the pond’. Led by Peter Trubowitz, Professor of International Relations at LSE and a leading expert on America, the new Centre will promote innovative research that breaks down the boundaries between the international and domestic sides of American political life.
8
| Tuesday October 13, 2015
Our Capitalist Welcome Fair
LSESU Welcome Fair demonstrated our commercialised education system Mathieu Harnois-Blouin Postgraduate Student
I ALREADY KNEW THAT the English education system had been transformed and shaped by our economic structure and its inherent values, as well as many other western education systems. I had already noticed that it has been commercialised. Even though this could be considered normal, for the education system is part of society and could therefore rely on the same principles, I believe this is an undesirable situation. It should not cost us £18,600 to study social inequalities and wealth redistribution – or the lack of wealth redistribution. But they say you need to know your enemy, so here I am. But still, I had an unexpected passage at the LSESU Welcome Fair. I went there for the simple reason that I was curious to know more about LSESU’s clubs and societies, to talk to people, and to socialise.
Comment
Section Editor: Mali Williams Deputy Editors: Vacant
“This Welcome Fair was transformed into a capitalist market.”
But the things happening there soon disoriented me. The first student I talked to was from the Debate Society. He/ she presented me a quick selling pitch, offered me a flyer, and was ready to do the same with the next person. Yet, I changed his/ her plans and started what one could call a basic social interaction. “Hello. My name is Mathieu. I would like to know more about
the Debate Society.” “Well, it costs three pounds if you want to join the Debate Society.” “Hmm. Three pounds to join a debate society? That’s weird.” “Well, I’m not here to convince you or to argue with you. You can go to the next stand if it does not make you happy. But they’re also selling memberships.” “Oh, sorry. I didn’t know. Why do you ask for money?” “We use that money to fund the Debate Society.” “Ok. Then, what kind of debates do you organise, what do you do with that money? I thought it did not take more than a classroom and two people to have a debate.” “We do not only have debates at LSE. We also send representative to very expensive debate tournaments that are taking place in other places.” “Now I can understand. Thank you very much for your answer. I will think about joining your society. Have a good day.” “Bye.” This was an awkward talk to have with a student from the Debate Society. That person seemed to focus on recruiting as many members as possible by using quick and efficient marketing techniques. The result was that it looked like I disappointed him/her when I tried to engage in what I thought was a normal conversation. Smiling people who wanted me to take one of their flyers constantly called me out as I continued my way through this jungle. Of course, some people were ready to engage discussion, but my impression was that a lot of them simply wanted to convince students to ‘buy’ a membership to their society. The fair’s main objective did not seem to be providing students a place for social interaction. Moreover, it was
amazing how some – of course not all – students could not tell anything more about their society than the few things that were already written on their flyer.
“Let’s collectively and individually decide not to participate in this commercialisation of our education” The societies’ representatives were sellers. I was a potential buyer. They were selling me social involvement. I was ready to get involved, but not ready to buy. It is nothing about the price. I know that these societies did not ask for much. It is all about the method. This Welcome Fair was transformed into a market: a capitalist market. A market that even had a well organised system of payment, with very sophisticated cashiers services. And this market has changed the dynamic of students’ involvement at the school. Participation in social activities is no longer seen as a non-economic activity, it also has a price. I then realised that the commercialisation of our educational system has not only been achieved at the macro level, but also at the micro level. The students’ activities now respond, at least to a certain extent, to the principles of capitalism. Is it the only way to do it? Is it the best way to do it? I don’t have the answer, as I don’t know anything about the funding of the LSESU and its societies. How much did it cost the LSESU and its societies – I should say the students – to implement this cashier system, and how much did it cost to pay the people who
were working there, if they were paid at all? How much did it cost to print all those flyers? Wasn’t it possible to ‘only’ explain things with words? Weren’t new technologies (internet, emails, Facebook, etc.) enough to communicate the necessary supplementary information? Regarding this ‘paper issue’, the saddest thing about it was that not only a lot of it was printed, but so much paper lay on the ground when the Welcome Fair finished, even after the first day. Not only was this paper an artificial and inefficient means of communication, but a lot of it was simply wasted and thrown away. Ironically, LSE employees were paid to clean up this mess. And the funniest thing is that they were throwing all this paper in the garbage, and not in recycling bins. This whole situation raises the question of the accessibility of education and its commercialisation. It is a vast problem that cannot be solved by any simple strategy. However, I believe that part of this solution lies in opposing the commercialisation of education in our students’ union, and more particularly in social and extracurricular activities taking place on campus. Is this situation the LSESU officers’ fault? No. Is it the societies’ members fault? No. At least, they do not hold the entire responsibility for all of this. Then, whose fault is it? The system’s fault? What is this thing we call the ‘system’? Is it the government, the economic elites, an invisible hand? It is all of us. All of us who blindly obey, without questioning this wicked reality that surrounds us. Because we do always have a choice. Let’s collectively and individually decide not to participate in this commercialisation of our education.
Comment | 9
Tiring, Insulting and Disappointing
UN Women HeForShe campaign is problematic not only in content, but also in agenda
Purvaja Kavattur Undergraduate Student
Continued from the Cover CHARLES STEPHENS, THE Head of Global Gender Agenda for Barclays plc, made xenophobic comments before and during the panel. To quote him directly during the panel discussion, ‘I was recently…(in) a small grocery grab and go...in the centre of London... There was a veiled woman working behind the counter and this guy came in and grabbed her breast. And I’m like, I said something not very polite in very loud terms out of a reaction. I’m blown away, like, I’m in the centre of London and this is happening. This isn’t a rural village in Africa or the rural United States’. Stephens’s statement is at best uninformed and at worst
disgustingly xenophobic. When I personally asked Elizabeth Nyamayaro, the head of HeForShe, why she would allow those people a platform, she replied LSE invited them and not HeForShe. This then raised my second question as to why no one on the panel challenged these statements made, however this query was left unaddressed. These offensive comments coupled with the lack of rebuttal from the panel makes me question how much of a solidarity movement HeForShe really is. For this combination must only further alienate BME and LGBT+ persons from an organisation supposedly about increasing their social, political and economic navigations of the world. After the event, feeling completely dissatisfied by the panel, I further questioned Nyamayaro about the trans-exclusivity apparent in the name (a question which I raised in the Q&A yet
to no surprise was largely prevaricated). To which Nyamayaro replied that the organisation currently isn’t big enough, but perhaps when it is big enough there can be a discussion of changing to the name to WeForWe. This left me feeling even more perplexed, for surely once HeForShe has entered mainstream consciousness the transphobia inherent in its name will be evermore cemented in the mainstream, making the WeForWe change futile at that point. Logistically speaking also, surely it must be harder to rebrand a larger organisation. The reason why all this is so problematic is that the feminist movement has had a whitesupremacist, heteronormative, cissexist past, wherein persons of the LGBT+ and/or BME communities have been systematically excluded from discussions. From NOW excluding les-
bian feminist activists from their 1970s abortion and childcare campaigns, to the biologically reductionist, trans-exclusionary ‘radfems’ that LSESU Feminist Society challenged at Reclaim the Night. Who can overlook the exclusion and erasure of black women of colour from both the British women’s suffrage movement and the recent movie about the aforementioned? This history has made it hard for these people to get involved in larger wide scale liberation movements, especially since their own liberation is rarely addressed. The answer to engagement isn’t evading social responsibility. To help people enter and engage in feminist dialogue and debate is not to forget the atrocities of our past, but rather to always keep it in mind. We must ensure these mistakes inform our feminist activism, make us critical of the privilege barriers, and forge
a commitment to ensure such atrocities are never committed again. This is what will help those marginalised feel comfortable and safe enough to get involved. It is not about pandering to those who already exist in the power seats, as this leads to no one’s liberation. It is about focussing our attention and resources on those structurally silenced giving them their much needed platforms and tools, as they themselves know the best terms for their own liberation. So dear HeForShe, my take home message for you is this: choosing not to focus on people from these marginalised groups, but rather on people benefiting from current and inherited positions of power, doesn’t change the landscape of the gender equality debate. Rather, it fortifies the existing power dynamics which make achieving gender equality so difficult.
The Case For University Tuition Fees In response to the UGM vote to support national student protest against student fees
Hakan Ustabas Undergraduate Student BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I am about to make the case for university tuition fees. In last week’s edition of The Beaver, Deborah Hermanns wrote an article about why LSE students should vote to support the National Student Protest against tuition fees. In her piece, she argues in favour completely free university education. I have no doubt that this is a view held by many students, but the real reason for the support has selfish undertones. It was argued that, as a public good, university education should be free. I question this notion. Granted, education as an institution has benefits to society, but as Milton Friedman noted in ‘Capitalism and Freedom’, there is a law of diminishing returns as the age of the student increases. Naturally, during the first years of education, a child learns basic moral values, and necessary literacy and numeracy skills. This is more than simply giving someone a skill, it teaches people how to be a citizen of the United Kingdom. However, at university level, such education is not needed. The purpose of university education is either for the enjoyment of the degree, or the skill set you receive from the course. You may ask, ‘how is that not a public good?’ It should seem apparent why the enjoyment of education itself is not
a public good. I would not expect the taxpayer to buy me an Xbox purely because I enjoyed it. As to the latter, more prudent point, the benefits to the individual far outweigh that to society. Of course, a person with a good degree has a skill set which will increase their productivity and through that, the productive capacity of the economy. This will lead to lower prices and increased economic growth. However, through state provision, an excess of demand for university places will be created, and we risk losing these benefits.
“If university is free, there is no incentive to work hard because the burden doesn’t fall on you if you fail.” Currently, market forces partly determine the numbers of people who attend university. Those who perceive that they will face a net increase in wages over that of their tuition fees are willing to undertake a degree. Those who do not, or wish to work in nondegree or manual occupations, will naturally not wish to take a degree. This is a rational choice by individuals based on a costbenefit analysis. When wages in jobs where a degree is needed increase, more people take degrees because the benefit to the cost
increases. However, with state provision, the cost of degrees is artificially reduced. Too many people will take degrees, and the skills needed in the wider economy will diminish. Furthermore, a sense of responsibility on the part of many pupils will simply vanish. If university is free, there is no incentive to work hard for many people because the burden doesn’t fall on you if you fail. Don’t believe me? Look to our failing secondary schools where the same principle applies. Continuing to the point regarding maintenance grant cuts. It is true that these will hurt the poorest of students, but as one of these students, let me tell you why I support the cut. I am an ambitious person, and while nothing is guaranteed in this competitive world, I hope that I will achieve my dreams in a lucrative career when I qualify. If I succeed, it will not be because I have been born with a silver spoon in my mouth, but because I have worked hard to ensure that I do succeed. In light of this, I would rather take that risk myself, and pay back every penny to the taxpayer. This way, I can say that I have taken self-responsibility and owe no debt to society. Why should I, or any other hard working person, have to pay the debts of those who did not work as hard? The cost of free tuition fees will be over £20bn to the taxpayer, based on figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency. This will mean that the country will be plunged further into debt. Deborah Hermanns
noted that we have a system of progressive taxation to pay for this. This is true, but do the hardworking taxpayers of this system really want to pay more than they already do? Fallacies about recuperating billions of pounds from tax evasion simply won’t balance the books. If it were as easy as that Parliament would have already recuperated the debt.
“I can say that I have taken selfresponsibility and owe no debt to society” Next, I must contest the figures given in the article regarding the number of students who will no longer apply following the maintenance grant cuts. Figures drawn from the National Union of Students, says Deborah Hermanns, state that up to a third of university students would have never gone to university without access to the grants. I sincerely doubt that. Firstly, as to the source, a student poll on tuition
fees where a simple click rather than a reasoned decision dictates that the answer will hardly provide the true statistics. Secondly, when tuition fees tripled in 2012, the number of applicants to university increased despite an additional cost of £6,000 per year. If £6,000 per year isn’t enough to put anyone off, how will maintenance grant cuts of up to £3,000 decimate the student number by a third? Not only that, but the proportion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds has also continued to grow. Whichever argument you side with, the truth will be revealed in 2016, and I’m willing to bet that the number of applicants increases yet again. All I ask is for students to consider the question of tuition fees with a little more sincerity before staunchly opposing them altogether. While in the short term it means that you have a little weight off of your back, it is likely to reduce your long term financial benefit. Further to that, it harms the interests of everyday taxpayers, regardless of their background or income, who will have to pay higher taxes to fund our choices. I support the taxpayers of the United Kingdom, and I support its students. This is why I support tuition fees.
Do you agree?
Tweet @BeaverOnline or email comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk
10 |
Tuesday October 13, 2015
Corbyn Will Galvanise The Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn’s ‘new politics’ will encourage young voters and support for his party
Josh Davies Undergraduate Student AS A YOUNG AND enthusiastic new member of the Labour Party, it seems appropriate to share some thoughts and feelings about our new leader, Jeremy Corbyn. During the recent Labour Party Conference, Corbyn delivered his most important speech to date. In many ways it was commanding, confident and, above all, inspiring. It is no secret that many doubt his credentials to both lead the Labour party in opposition and to also run a successful campaign in the 2020 general election. The leadership race caused a personal conflict for me; a vote for what I believe in most, an anti-austerity machine, or a vote for a leader who might restore Labour’s position at the pinnacle of Westminster politics. In the end, it was the former that succeeded, but it was only after Corbyn’s speech that I finally felt at ease with my choice. He was defiant in blasting Cameron on issues ranging from the Human Rights Act to the ever present foodbanks in Britain. However, what I found most inspiring was Corbyn’s preaching of a new
political game. The new leader promised to listen to his shadow cabinet, and indeed his entire party, expressing his belief that ‘we all have ideas and a vision of how things can be better.’ It didn’t stop there; Corbyn continued to state that politics must be ‘kinder’ and operate from the ‘bottom up, not top down.’ In theory, these ideas appeal to all those young voters, such as myself, who are fed up with the current ‘game’ that so many politicians play. This being the idea that one can simply campaign in rhetoric, and govern an entirely different agenda in practice. Although time will tell whether or not ‘straight-talking, honest politics’ is an ideal or a practical way of governing, for now it does not matter because it is both galvanising support and refreshing the political forum. It appears that Corbyn has two major challenges facing him. Firstly, the test of being an effective and worthy leader of the main opposition party. Does he have the political strength to speak up against Cameron and the Conservative government? If his conference speech is anything to go by, the answer would appear to be a resounding ‘yes’. Corbyn was adamant with his criticism of Cameron’s lack of campaign
on the issue of the young Saudi, Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who is currently being threatened with the death penalty. He mocked the Conservatives’ claim that he was a ‘threat to national security’ by pointing towards Tory cuts on welfare budgets, their policies on private leasing, and recent adjustments to tax credits. He preached that the people of Britain both deserved and should expect better. This was a man in a defiant mood, eager to make his mark. Many ask whether the media tormenting Corbyn will weaken his political position, but in many ways it is asymmetric. Intense criticism unites Corbyn’s supporters, whilst also meaning that Cameron cannot push Corbyn around because he’ll look like a ‘bully’. Second on Corbyn’s list of challenges, is whether or not he can lead a successful general election campaign. Many have stated that his appointment has resulted in the ‘death of The Labour Party’, appearing to rule out any chance of a Labour victory in 2020. It is crucial, however, to not forget the fickle and unpredictable nature of politics. Up until the exit poll on the day of the general election earlier this year, it appeared that the result was a foregone conclusion: a hung
parliament. Of course this is not what happened, and the Conservatives won a majority. In fact, many would never have given Jeremy Corbyn a chance of even being able to enter the leadership race, let alone win it, but he won with a comfortable 59 percent of the vote. It is utterly pointless trying to predict the result of an election five years away, and at the moment it just doesn’t matter for Corbyn. His priority is to gal-
vanise the support of his party, a united Labour, and tackle the Conservative agenda head on. Currently, Corbyn continues to promote his ‘new politics’, an idea which encourages young voters to become more politically active. The message is clear: ‘straight talking, honest politics’. We will have to wait to see whether or not the times really are a changing, but for now, Corbyn looks like a man on form.
photo credit:Wikimedia Commons
Corbyn Will Not Change UK Politics
Why the election of the left-wing veteran means very little to British politics Hakan Ustabas Undergraduate Student PEOPLE HAVE HAILED THE ‘surprising’ victory of Jeremy Corbyn as an opportunity to revitalise the socialist movement in the UK. In reality however, his win was wasn’t surprising does not present any realistic chance of electoral success. The Labour leadership contest consisted of members of the party, and controversial ‘supporters’ who could pay £3 in order to vote, and cast a ballot in favour of the MP they wished to take the lead. By opening the system in this way, Labour incentivised a lot of people to vote who otherwise might not have done. The problem is that it created a sense of real power for a lot of disillusioned, angry people. Such people will naturally rally behind the leader who cries the loudest. Corbyn was by far the most radical candidate. Amongst his unique policy list is the scrapping of the Trident nuclear defence program, abolition of tuition fees, and the printing of money through forced quantitative easing. This, in addition to his un-
conventional appearance and practice, made him the clear-cut opposition of the recently elected Conservative government. Where angry people had such access to the party, and Corbyn voiced their emotions, was it any surprise that he was the only choice? The optimism of Ollie Hill, President of the LSESU Labour Society, who wrote a piece about the Labour leader in The Beaver, will be rather short lived. Not even a month has passed since Corbyn was elected and already his will has been bent over policy issues. Other Labour MPs, as well as supporting unions, have rejected his plans to scrap Trident - a policy which gained him much support amongst students. He has stated that he is happy to allow the party to have free votes in the House of Commons, which means he won’t use the whip convention to ensure Labour get a victory. As it stands, a Conservative majority will make it difficult for Labour to defeat government legislation. Corbyn’s weakness at the helm will only allow backbenchers to help the opposition steer themselves further into the storm.
This short term turmoil is nothing in comparison with the perils of Corbyn’s long term expedition. The country has just had a general election in which even more people voted Conservative than the previous election.
“This short term turmoil is nothing in comparison with the perils of Corbyn’s long term expedition.” A strong economy, immigration controls, and welfare reform are high on the public agenda. For the Labour leadership ‘selectorate’ however, they are failing to see the broader desires of the community. According to a poll for The Observer, only 22% of the public think the Labour leader would be a good Prime Minister. David Cameron has double this support. For Corbyn, if he
chooses to leave the frying pan of backbench rebellions, he can only jump into the fire of electoral defeat. In economic terms, experts have been incredibly sceptical about Corbyn’s plan for Britain. Firstly his ‘People’s Quantitative Easing’ rhetoric completely disregards the independence of the Bank of England, and the teaching of monetary economics by the likes of Milton Friedman. Modern politicians and economists alike have condemned the policy as inflationary; this will hurt those on low incomes the most, and drive them deeper into poverty. Secondly, his apparent lack of knowledge of the national debt is worrying. His proposals to renationalise railways, build roads, and pay for tuition fees may sound good, but how are they being paid for? The Telegraph has reported that of the £120bn Corbyn proposes to generate through closing down tax-avoidance loopholes, only £20bn can be realistically recovered. His unfinanced plans threaten to drive the country deeper into debt, and hurt the future taxpayers who have had no say in his fantasies. For this
reason, regardless of the promises he makes, they are going to be broken. It is easy to see why people are lured by Corbyn’s ‘anti-establishment’ rhetoric, but it is hard to believe those people genuinely think that he is influential. As Boris Johnson noted, some constituents often vote in line “with feeling, and not reason.” While there are many injustices in today’s society, being blinded by hope, passion, and internet activism is not enough to solve them. It is ironic that in Corbyn’s attempt to help the poor, he threatens to condemn his party to electoral oblivion, thus securing a Conservative government for another ten years. Labour MPs are fully aware of the threat Corbyn poses to their success at the 2020 election. While no one has explicitly said the incumbent leader will be replaced, backbenchers have the authority and the motive to overthrow Corbyn. They, and the wider public, are well aware that his dogmatic socialist ideals have been confined to the failures of history. When will Corbyn and his small troop of supporters see the same?
Comment | 11
We Must Abolish The House of Lords The House of Lords is an undemocratic, archaic, and dull partisan machine Daniel Huggins Undergraduate Student
I AM SURE THAT WHILE you’re sitting down reading this, procrastinating to delay having to do this week’s reading, the one thing you probably aren’t thinking about is reforming the House of Lords. But you should be, as it’s one of the major constitutional issues of our time. I never thought I’d be saying this but it’s high time we abolished the House of Lords and attempted to create a second chamber that is reflective of public opinion. Gaining membership of the House of Lords, once an honourable and competent chamber, has become as easy as crawling to the big parties and
depositing a rather large pile of cash in their bank accounts. I doubt anyone at LSE is so utterly devoid of intellect as to honestly believe it’s just a coincidence that the largest donors to the Tories, Labour and the Liberal Democrats happen to be granted peerages? So, there it is: democracy has been sold to the highest bidder, and corruption has been institutionalized. The result? A worthless and pitiful second chamber, where power has been sold to individuals least deserving of it, circumventing the very democracy we claim to prize so highly. So then, the debate shouldn’t be whether to keep the House of Lords, it should be about what we will replace it with. I have no doubt that within the next cou-
ple of parliaments the House of Lords will be abolished, and we will do away with cronyism. Or will we? What’s the House of Lords likely to be replaced with? A senate, dominated by the party machine, full of the same dull, obedient and pre-selected candidates as the House of Commons? Just another chamber of career sycophants? I think we can do better. No, I think we must do better. The utopian in me would call for the senate to be 75 percent elected, with no parties being able to run candidates for election. Everyone standing would be an independent, hopefully in both name and mind-set. The remaining 25 percent would be appointed, by an independent commission, designed to appoint
the greatest minds from across the professions. In an ideal world this chamber would have equal power to the Commons. Yet, I have no doubt this would make passing legislation and actually running the country close to impossible, given how this would lead to one chamber reflecting public opinion and another reflecting an out of touch fauxliberal establishment. Can you guess which is which? But still, abolishing the Lords for a second chamber akin entirely to the Commons solves nothing. If anything, we would actually be in a worse position, losing the few Lords who actually deserve to be there, those intellectuals and experts who are able to understand and scrutinise the government’s legisla-
tion. What we need is a chamber that is able to scrutinise the government’s legislation free from molestation by the whips, a chamber that puts its electorate, not the party that selected them, first. Wouldn’t that be nice? Since a chamber full of independents is untenable, the best way to achieve this would be capping term limits to two. After these two terms have been served, it would not be possible for one to again stand for election in either chamber. This should allow for a more independent chamber, curtailing the power of the whips and allowing members to vote according to their consciences, and in the best interests of their constituencies, not their zombie parties. That’ll be the day.
Westminster Must Tackle A Letter To The LSE: Increasing Poverty Jake Howcroft and Peter Benham Undergraduate Students
T H E V E RY S H O C K I N G inequalities facing Westminster, the borough in which LSE is located, has recently been unmasked on the front page of the London Evening Standard. Inequality in Westminster has become an increasingly important issue. The Standard recently led two related articles. One reported the exuberant wealth of Westminster, highlighting the enormous revenue created by stamp duty. The other illustrated the poverty trap facing the poorest children in social and, increasingly, privately rented housing. This stark juxtaposition demonstrates the spiralling wealth disparity in the borough. This should be a concern to us all. LSE finds itself in one of the most affluent boroughs of the capital, yet Westminster faces a critical problem with child poverty. The Standard reports that Westminster currently pays more stamp duty
than Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland combined. There is clearly substantial wealth being generated in Westminster. However, this money is not being redistributed to the people who need it most, with Westminster having the fifth highest rate of child poverty in the UK. The extent of the inequality is made all the more alarming by the fact that Westminster contains the most deprived ward in London (Church Street) as well as one of the most affluent (Belgravia and Knightsbridge). Furthermore, within the borough there is also a life expectancy difference of 16.6 years between the most and least deprived 10 percent of the Westminster population, demonstrating how the division of wealth in Westminster is directly affecting the lives of its residents. In addition to this, there have been severe city council cutbacks affecting the organisations which are trying to tackle inequality in Westminster, with a number of chari-
ties now receiving no statutory support. These organisations are reliant on independent funding and on the work of volunteers at every level. One such example is Westminster Befriend a Family. They work to mitigate these inequalities by providing support to some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged residents in the borough. Their aim is to offer a service which enables these families to build themselves a better future. Given that the total wealth in Westminster is so great, issues of poverty are often hidden behind the façade of Buckingham Palace and the Houses of Parliament, meaning that residents facing the most devastating of circumstances are at risk of being forgotten. Therefore, it is essential that we now recognise and address this vital issue. For more information on this issue and the work of Westminster Befriend a Family visit: www.befriendafamily. co.uk or contact Bob Cornell at: bob@befriendafamily.co.uk
photo credit:Wikipedia
Laith Abu Ziad MSc Human Rights Alum Dear all, I have waited to write this note, to control my anger and hopelessness because I want my words to bring hearing and sight to the deaf and blind. I will not write about politics, strategy, history, or philosophy. I’m writing about my home. Since the beginning of October, violence has erupted all over the Occupied Palestinian Territories as a result of the ongoing settler violence against Palestinians and Israel’s illegitimate target of the Al-Aqsa Mosque Compound through limiting Palestinian access to the holy site, often in order to allow settlers to enter. These provocative actions have so far resulted in the death of more than 27 Palestinians and injured more than 1200. I could say that these people, who died fighting the injustice and brutality of the Israeli occupation, had a list of places to visit before they die or plan for a better life, even a TV show they have wanted to follow till the end, but it doesn’t matter anymore. I’m writing this email because many of you know nothing about what is happening now in Palestine, and because even the smallest people can do something, can rebuild a broken home or at least learn how to mourn and remember. But you are not small people, I’m writing to you because you are all really big in love and generosity, and I want to ask you, for me and my people, to do something little today. Write a poem, write to your local newspaper, tell your friends and family to light a candle, research the name of one
of the people who was killed last night, or one that was left alive, and keep them with you, make a piece of music, send this email, send any email about what’s going on. Do one thing that will ripple through your street, neighborhood, or country, and most importantly, believe that one little thing will mean something. I know for most of you these are news items, but this is my home. I have been mad at it for long, and I will continue to be critical and aware, but more importantly, I love it like we all love our messed up families. Having said that, I hope that you think about it, look in the mirror, and know that this pain is familiar, even if you have never heard gunshots or seen missiles falling. My sisters and brothers in Palestine are dying. Yet, these people have names and we must know them. Callousness has led us to this day. More callousness will not lead us to a new day. The names and faces I know are not garbage. The God I know is not garbage. And so I ask for a shelter of peace, to mend and repair torn bodies and souls. A shelter to pause. For I know a pause is all I can request. Politics and strategy and history and memory are for the future. A future uncertain and more so each day. But a pause, for my sisters and brothers in Palestine, for friends and loved ones. To remember that a home is not a news item and a body torn and shattered, bloodied and bruised has a name and a face and must be known. Yours, Laith -- “Give me a place to stand on, and I can move the earth.” ~~Archimedes
12 | Tuesday 13 October, 2015
Interview With A
There are four Part Time Officers with a license to liberate. The BME Officer, Disabled Students’ Officer, LGBT+ Officer and Womens’ Officer all work to make sure that the underrepresented sections of the student body are heard. Megan Crockett met with each of them to discuss what their role entails, their plans for the coming year and if they were a superhero, which one they would be.
The Union
What does your position as Disability Officer involve? Representing disabled students to the Union and to the School, but that’s probably an incredibly broad definition. My position is nice as I get to work quite closely with the Disability and Wellbeing Office and Counselling Service and try to cooperate with them on things we’re doing. But, the Union is a separate body so if students have any problems I am here to represent them. I also get to put on loads of fun events and get people more involved. What campaigns will you be focusing on this year? This year we have the wellbeing survey that I’m running with Aysha [Fekaiki, Community and Welfare Officer] which is coming out next month. For this we’re doing lots of research, I’m doing some research at the moment into the LSE counselling service; we’re asking questions such as why do you only get six sessions and trying to figure out what is going on there. Once we’ve collected all the results we’re hoping to be able to get a better picture of where we are with the School and where their services are. I’ll be working on campaigns around
BME OFFICER
Name: Mahatir Pasha Degree: BSc Government and History Responsibilities: Represents LSE’s BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) students in all aspects of their university career, working towards equal representation in the community and within the School
What does your position as BME Officer involve? Firstly, its about representing all BME groups at the University. Secondly, I think that there is a lot of empowerment which is involved as there is a strong belief here [at the LSE] that the BME Community are less well off than their white counterparts. I also have to be active more
that; I am also running more general campaigns. At the minute we have are filming a “time to change video” to try and tackle the stigma around mental health. We have another student who is really keen to do a physical accessibility campaign around the School (similar to Tim Zandenberg’s last year). So there is a lot going on! Also, I’ve just set up the Disabled Students’ Network which will try and co-ordinate what every is doing with disabled students, keep it all under one banner, make sure everyone can get involved and just make it a bit easier to access. One of the projects attached to this is the Neuron Project which is focusing on mental health, we have a facebook page and a library of resources that students can use. If you could make one change to LSE this year what would it be? Just one? I suppose I would make sure that all students know how to access all of the services at the Union. I think one of the major problems we have is that many students don’t know we have a counselling service and the ones that do know we have one often don’t know how to access it. Students don’t know what support we can
offer at the Union or what support the School can offer them. In the disability and wellbeing service there are loads of services people can access even if they’re just walking in. Similarly people don’t realise that there’s peer support, so if I could do one thing this year I would like to make sure people know what services are available to them. But I would like to do more than one thing this year! How can students get more involved with your events and campaigns? So, they can come and have a chat with me, I tend to be on the first floor [Saw Swee Hock] or they can email me at su.disability@ lse.ac.uk if they want to set up a meeting or do something more privately. Alternatively they can join the Facebook group which is the Disabled Students’ Network Group and all of our events will be posted on there so they can get involved that way! If you could be any liberation activist (dead or alive) who would you be? I can think of so many, there are so many people doing really cool things. I would be Julie Fernandez. She’s an actress who played Brenda in the Office. She was
born with osteogenesis imperfecta and uses a wheelchair. If you could be any Superhero, who would you be? I would be Batman because he has lots of gadgets. I could fix all of the accessibility problems in the School if I had all of his gadgets.
generally in organising events such as socials and networking events. I do as much as I can to push the BME Community to an equilibrium with their white counterparts. I also work closely with Jasmina [Bide, Anti-Racism Officer], Damien [Kemfack, International Students’ Officer] and Aysha [Fekaiki, Community and Welfare Officer]. What campaigns will you be focusing on this year? Well, there is a lot about Prevent going on, which really ties in with BME as most muslims are part of the BME Community. It affects black students as well in terms of how the government are going about it. So I am working with Islamic Society, to push forward the idea of not working with Prevent. I want the School to come forward and say they don’t like Prevent and don’t want to work with them. Obviously, its the law now so they have to but if we could get the School to release a statement it would be a huge step forward. “Why is my curriculum white” continues this year, the awareness part was launched last year but this time around we’re thinking of making an action plan and getting some sort
of change across. We’re working to try and get more black faculty in the university; we feel as the higher up the university you go the less BME people you see. We’re trying to get a plaque put at the Old Theatre as it is where Malcolm X spoke; it has been done by Sheffield University already. I think it would be a really good way to reassert ourselves as the revolutionary institution that we are. There will also be the re-launch of the BME Network. Finally, we’re looking at the Attainment Gap between BME and non-BME students. The SU are currently undertaking research around it, especially following the Student satisfaction survey where it came to light that BME students are not as happy as their white counterparts. If you could make one change to LSE this year what would it be? I would get a lot more black faculty involved; ideally it would be 50:50. If I could just wake up and have something done that is what it would be as I believe it starts the cycle. If there’s more black faculty then BME students will be more comfortable in terms of education but it might
also inspire them to get more involved in higher education. How can students get more involved with your events and campaigns? The BME Network is probably the best way to do this. When it comes to the launch students can come and speak to me about it. I also want to start up a BME Committee like we have the RAG Committee as I think it’s a lot better with regards to representation, especially as the BME Community is quite large. I will be looking to recruit people for that and that will be a great way to get involved. Also, students can get involved with campaigns through the network. If you could be any liberation activist (dead or alive) who would you be? It’s got to be Malcolm X. I’m reading his autobiography at the moment. I feel as though he’s the kind of guy who just didn’t give a shit; he would do what he wanted regardless of what anyone else thought. If you could be any Superhero, whio would you be? I would be Batman, no, I would be the Green Arrow. He hasn’t got any powers, he’s just a man with gadgets!
DISABLED STUDENTS’ OFFICER
Name: Isobel Clare Degree: BSc International Relations Responsibilities: Represents the interests of students with disabilities, wellbeing issues, or illness to the Union and the School. Works with the LSE Disability & Wellbeing Office and the staffstudent disabilities network. Plans awareness campaigns and events.
Liberation Officer What does your position as LGBT+ Of ficer involve? Essentially I am the connection between the LGBT community and the Students’ Union. As I’m very closely related to the LGBT+ society my role is split both in organising their events with them and and organising my own. This is split three ways, the first is social. This year has been a terrific year thus far; last year I was an executive member of the LGBT+ Society and we won most improved. It’s the biggest it’s ever been and this year we’re compounding on that! We’ve had a record breaking (in ter ms of numbers) start to the year. These socials are important at the beginning to create a really thriving community from which we can build on to host our campaigns, panel discussions and events. Secondly, I’m involved in networking and careers. We have our annual LGBT career networking event in November, so that’s a huge focus. Finally, my role most comes into play with regards to campaigning and advocacy. The LGBT alliance often needs to communicate with the SU and needs support in campaigning, so I’m a) going to launch my own campaigns and b) help the LGBT Executive members
WOMEN’S OFFICER
Name: Lena Schofield Degree: BSc Social Policy Responsibilities: Represents female students within the Union to ensure equality. Runs campaigns on issues that are important to female students
What does your position as Women’s Of ficer involve? So as Womens’ Officer I was elcted to represent women students on behalf of the SU. My role involves loads of things: holding general meetings for self-identifying women students so that they can address any concerns they have to me and then I can take those con-
launch theirs. What campaigns will you be focusing on this year? I have three main campaigns this year. The first focuses on intersectionality; I’ll be focusing on the different sects in the LGBT+ community that are under represented, often it is just the lesbians and the gays that get the attention so we want to promote trans awareness, bisexual awareness and genderqueer awareness. I aim to do this both by hosting independent events for them but also bringing them more into the light in our already present events. Secondly, I’ll be campaigning about mental health. Statistically the LGBT community are some of the most detrimentally affected people in the student population. I want to bring this to light within the LGBT community but also raise awareness on campus more generally. Finally, the third campaign and the one I feel quite strongly about is outreach. I will be lobbying the UK government to refor m their sexual education policies to include LGBT issues. The best way to combat ignorance is through education so if we start young and include non-generic family structures in education and talk to kids
about LGBT issues more generally; hopefully education will overcome ignorance
cerns back to the SU and turn them into policies and events. I also work with the campaigns network to bring in volunteers and make their ideas happen. It’s really nice to have that network there! I also campaign on issues with the School, meeting with their new Equity, Inclusion and Diversity Taskforce. We’re [liberation officers] are hopeful that going forward we will be able to do some really cool events with them. I run the Women’s Network and put on panel events for that.
is super important. It’s a great way to get those who show an interest involved.
What campaigns will you be focusing on this year? I really want to bring the “I <3 consent” campaign to campus. It’s an NUS campaign that was piloted last year that I want to bring to LSE. They have already set up an online training process so I’m going to get trained so that I can then train student volunteers through the campaigns network and then we can bring this to halls etc. The reason it’s so good is because once you are trained you can then train other volunteers so it can be passed down through the years; hopefully it will be something that’s still here in five or ten years as I believe building a consent culture
If you could make one change to LSE this year what would it be? I would like to get the nonLGBT community to engage more with the LGBT community. I think one of the main problems is that LGBT events are attended only by LGBT peoples. I would like to bring LGBT issues to the wider community and also promote awareness and engagement beyond_ the LGBT spectrum. How can students get more involved with your events and campaigns? Ok, so the AU for All campaign last year was criticised for just being tokenism because they hosted events and invited us to them; they expected us to reach out to them. I think that this needs to be flipped, we need to host events and people need to engage with us and come to us. That’s why one of my biggest focuses of the year is hosting events that will not just be attended, as in every other year, by purely LGBT people. If you could be any liberation activist (dead or alive) who would you be?
If you could make one change to LSE this year what would it be? I suppose I really want to see the School (and this stuff is actually under review at the minute) have a woman who is dedicated to speaking to students who are trying to report incidents to the School. The School is currently reviewing the Dean procedures and I think alongside this they need to create a position so that there is a woman dedicated to claims. Additionally, I think the School needs to come in line with the SU and adopt a zero tolerance approach to sexual harrasament; at the moment their reposnses just aren’t adequate. People know that if they go to the School they’re not going to get anything; they’ll get six months of waiting around for nothing, and it’s not worth it. How can students get more involved with your events and campaigns? It will be possible to sign up to the Women’s Network and the Campaigns Network on the SU website (although the link
LGBT+ OFFICER
The Union | 13
Event Listings LGBT+ Events:
Name: Bryn LaxtonCoglon Degree: LLB Bachelor of Laws Responsibilities: Coordinates the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender+ (LGBT+) campaign to tackle homophobia and defend, extend and deepen the rights of LGBT+ students. Works closely with the LGBT+ Alliance
@ 6pm -16th October recious’ in Screening of ‘P ith Black combination w History Month -9th November Fair LGBT Careers
BME E - This vents: mont h tory ( and H is Black H erstor there isy a happe re loads of Month), e n so kee ing all ove vents r p you r eyes campus peele d! - 22n d Oct ober F loor on t of Laun the Saw S he 6th ch of I would have to say my stepthe B wee Hock mom, Heidi Coglon. She’s the work ME N etone who inspired me in highschool!
If you could be any Superhero, who would you be? I would be the F lash because he gets shit done fast! may not be there at the minute, the links are going up at some point soon). You can also get involved via Facebook. You can join the Women’s Network Community Group on Facebook and the Women’s Network Page; you can get in direct contact with me there and see our upcoming events. You can also email directly on su.womens@lse.ac.uk and I will get back to you; I like hearing from people. If you could be any liberation activist (dead or alive) who would you be? I would be Anna Paquin. I’m not always a big fan of celebrity activism but seeing her be outspoken in the media about being bisexual meant alot to me, and gave me courage to come out myself. If you could be any Superhero, who would you be? *Spoiler* Oh my god that’s so easy. I would be the new Thor character they’ve created in the comic books. What they’ve done is made Thor no longer worthy and so he couldn’t pick up his hammer so it was picked up by Jane Foster and she is now the new Thor, so Thor is a women. She’s so badass, she’s great!
Women’s Events: @ 6.30pm -28th October Swee Hock 6th F loor Saw s of ToWomen Leader CS host: morrow and A Network Black Women’s Event er -16th Novemb rnalism Women in Jou Event
nts:
dents’ Eve
Stu Disabled
@ October h t 4 1 y a d -Wednes m hit Chat C 2-4p a d n a ake Sofas, C ntal Health e about M f a “Time to o Filming Video Change” d for yes peele ise r u o y -Keep iscussion on D a a panel d Politics and also d ability in ight with disable n comedy s n ia d come Get in touch:
Isobel su.disability@ls e.ac.uk Mahatir su.bme@lse.ac .uk Bryn su.lgbt@lse.ac.u k Lena su.womens@ls e.ac.uk
14
14
| Tuesday 13 October, 2015
FILM Sarah Ku WITH THE RECENT festival premiere of the highly anticipated ‘Equals’, starring Hollywood A-listers Nicholas Hoult and Kristen Stewart, perhaps it would be appropriate to revisit some of the director Drake Doremus’s previous films. The exploration of the theme of love is always a focus in films directed by Doremus. As illustrated by the director himself in a recent interview with Indiewire, the Sundance Grand Jury Prize winner ‘Like Crazy’ is about reflecting on the past, ‘Equals’ is about reflecting on the future, and ‘Breathe In’ is about ‘confronting the present and not being able to escape the present’. ‘Breathe In’ explores a midlife crisis experienced by Keith Reynolds (Guy Pearce), a middleaged high school teacher who teaches music. Living in a small suburb with his wife Megan and daughter Lauren, he finds teaching mundane and seeks fulfilment from his regular performance in an orchestra. His stagnant life is disrupted when a British student, Sophie (Felicity Jones), comes to stay with his family for her exchange programme. As a talented pianist on the verge of giving up on music, Sophie starts to connect with Keith through their love of music and mutual understanding of each other. With his dissatisfaction over being tied down by his own family and his wife’s failure to appreciate his passion, he finds solace in Sophie, forms a forbidden relationship with her, and attempts to escape from the present to achieve his long-held dreams. As the first film that Doremus directed after ‘Like Crazy’, the director chose to work with Felicity Jones again, who previously starred as the main character Anna in ‘Like Crazy’. In the film, both Guy Pearce and Felicity Jones give impressive performances, with the former being a lonely and frustrated teacher who longs for excitement, passion and fulfilment in his life, and the latter
FILM
REVIEW
BREATHE IN (2013)
being a young, wide-eyed student with youthful promises that attract Keith’s attention and inspire him to be spontaneous. Their relationship gradually grows, and the close-up shots of their faces, the frequent silence and the use of music help to build up tension. With the use of lo-fi, handheld cameras and Doremus’s habitual use of improvised dialogue, these cinematic techniques inject genuineness into the film and create a realistic story with naturalist acting. At times, you would feel like you are eavesdropping on someone else’s family affairs. In terms of cinematography, every frame is beautiful and carefully crafted. Images are skilfully and powerfully used to convey the mood of the film. The colours of the film have been adjusted and toned carefully, with warm yellows to give an almost sepia-like, nostalgic feeling, and blues, greys and blacks to increase tension, which serve a foreboding purpose as to the development and the ending of the film. Plot-wise, the story is fairly simple, with Keith and Sophie developing their attraction to each other and plotting their escape, as they feel marginalised in their family and school respectively. There is not much action going on in this 97-minute film, and the climax and the ending can even be said to be too predictable. While some audience may find this too dull and slow, some might see this as the director’s attempt to stay faithful to the film’s role as an intimate and sensitive portrait of an episode in a family. The film opens with a scene of Keith’s family taking their annual family photo, and it closes with a photo shoot at the same location at their home that takes place a year after. While the people and the location are the same, drawing a parallel to the opening scene, and Keith continues his mundane life as a teacher in a suburb, the scars on Lauren’s face explain that nothing is ever the same.
part
B
FILM
editorial team partB
theatre
film
fashion
Vacant
Sarah Ku
Jamie Lloyd Maria Maleeva
Kemi Akinboyewa Vikki Hui music food & lifestyle Caroline SchurmanGrenier
Rob Funnell Will Locke
visual arts
literature
technology
Vacant
Camila Arias Buritica
Vacant
PHOTOGRAPHY TIME TO
Photo credits to: John Blanding
STOP AND STARE
Goh Kyi Yeung W H A T M A D E T H E H E A D L I N E S at this week’s premiere of Black Mass was not what occurred but rather what did not. In fact, the story carried by several news outlets simply centered around an old lady in the crowd standing and bearing witness to the marvel of a movie premiere. Yes, the headlines solely focused on a photo of an old lady standing and staring into the distance. Yet, the comparative absence of digital technology with her was what made it endearing. Whilst most were trying to digitally capture the reality of the moment at the red carpet through the glass screens of their mobile devices, all she did was to stand there and relish in the atmosphere of that moment. There was no doubt a tinge of meta in all of this: everyone whipping out their phones to take pictures of people whom they were going to catch on a cinema screen sooner or later as well as the point being made by a photograph of an old lady standing amidst the chaos. Where is all this leading to? Perhaps, the call to exercise some frugality where phototaking is concerned. A quick google search on the number of photos that would be taken this year yielded an astonishing figure of one trillion. To quote Mark Maclaren who quotes Ansel Adams, “twelve significant photos in a year is considered a good crop”. A combination of the proliferation of affordable digital storage, ease of access to cameras and social media platforms has lowered the barriers of entry into what was once a rather unaffordable hobby. Many like myself have benefitted from this but many like myself have also taken too much an advantage of this convenience. What took months to fill on a roll of film, of which only 36 pictures could be taken, now barely takes a fraction of that time on a mobile device. Clearly, the benefits of a smartphone camera outweigh its perceived drawbacks. It has allowed for us to not only capture memories on the go but at the same time has become an entry point for people who may be led to pursue photography at a more serious level. For now, however, one could perhaps redirect efforts and attention to distilling the essence of a site, memory or whatever it is you wish to capture into a few frames rather than seeking to amass infinite semblances of reality on a mobile device in the hopeful expectation that this would make that picture that much more meaningful and maybe, your memories that much fonder.
LABEL OF THE WEEK
AUS MUSIC Will Locke AUS MUSIC IS A UKBASED label cofounded by the Simple label boss, DJ, and occasional producer Will Saul, and by Fin Greenall of FINK, a Ninja Tune-affiliated band, although Greenall now has little influence over the label. It began as the sister label of Simple, with the intention of being a platform for more experimental electronic music, and has arguably outgrown Simple to become one of the most influential, respected and consistent labels in the independent dance music scene. In my opinion, it is predominantly a house label, but it also incorporates several other genres such as techno, electro, dubstep and dub frequently. In addition to this, Aus played a significant part in the post-dubstep movement, releasing important records by artists such as Ramadanman (or as he is now known, Pearson Sound), Midland, Joy Orbison and Appleblim. Despite the label accommodating several different musical styles and backgrounds, Aus has created its own signature sound which binds its discography together – melodic and club-ready dance music with a particular focus on musicality, and this style is what makes it one of many people’s favourite labels. I have compiled a playlist of my favourite ten tracks that have been released on Aus over its nine-year lifetime, with no two tracks by the same artist. Trimming down such a strong discography meant making a few notable omissions, so honourable mentions go to: Appleblim, Breach, Cottam, Lee Jones, Ramadanman (Pearson Sound), Second Story, Sei A, Sian and Will Saul himself. ‘I Want You’ – Huxley (from Blurred [2014]) With longing vocals, broken electric pianos, and unashamedly heavy pop ballad influences, this track would be equally fitting to listen to at 6AM on breakfast radio or as the last song in the club. ‘Rise’ – Bicep (from Stash [2013]) ‘Rise’ draws on 90s house in only the way Bicep can achieve, with a plucky and catchy synth progression and undeniable groove throughout.
15
MUSIC
‘Television’ – Sideshow feat. Cortney Tidwell (from Admit One [2009])
‘So Derobe’ – Joy Orbison (from The Shrew Would Have Cushioned The Blow [2010])
The most beautiful and peculiar song in this playlist, Cortney Tidwell’s vocals haunt the space above Sideshow’s (the alter alias of Aus cofounder FINK) dub-influenced live jam, complete with glittering synths and propulsive bass.
Despite potentially being the most recognisable name, Joy Orbison delivers the weirdest track on this list in ‘So Derobe’ – a post-dubstep classic sprinkled with chopped-and-screwed Mariah Carey vocals, off-kilter drums, and fizzing arpeggios.
‘Placement’ – Midland (from Placement [2012])
‘Beckett’s Racket’ – Tom Demac (from Smoke Stained Ivories [2015])
Midland is an amazingly consistent producer, and so it’s not surprise that ‘Placement’ is an exceptional track, full of interesting percussion, dreamy pads, and a nasal-sounding yet gripping hook. ‘Flute Dreams’ – Bwana (from Flute Dreams [2014]) Despite Bwana being one of the newest additions to Aus’ roster, ‘Flute Dreams’ encapsulates the Aus Music sound: luscious chords, arresting basslines, and pulsating rhythm. ‘FM Jam (Andres Remix)’ – Youandewan (from Youandewan [2014]) This song is somewhat unique in the context of this list, in that it demonstrates La Vidafounder and Moodymann-affiliate Andres’ classic house sound, but nonetheless, it’s the grooviest track in this playlist, and a magnificent showcase of Andres’ Detroit-inspired, George Clinton-esque music.
A groggy mixture of piano stabs reverberating over lazy bass synths, ‘Beckett’s Racket’ is a slow-building track with unpredictable elements but an almost relaxing feel. ‘3, 2, 1 (Nathan Fake Remix)’ – Gerry Read (from 3, 2, 1 [2014]) Nathan Fake has been contributing to the underground electronic music movement for more than a decade, and still sounds forward thinking, with this remix for Gerry Read featuring a discordant and nonrhythmic start building into an emotive and waltz-like end. ‘Space Katzle’ – Motorcitysoul (from Space Katzle [2007]) ‘Space Katzle’ is an unashamed nu-disco record, which predates Todd Terje’s wellknown output by many years, making its glistening pads, warm bass hums, and progressive feel all the more impressive.
16
| Tuesday 13 October, 2015
MUSIC TOP 10 UNDERRATED INDIE EMO SONGS 14
LIST Rob Funnell
EMO MUSIC HAS A REGRETTABLE STIGMA FOR BEING ASSOCIATED with excessive eyeliner, prepubescent wails about broken hearts and zealous fans who refuse to realise the merits of any bands outside the aforementioned prerequisites. However, there are many artists that are worthy of the emotional label, and are complex, impactful and deserve to be listened to, and are cruelly overlooked because of associations with the genre. If you’re a fan of any indie or rock music, or simply appreciate excellent songwriting, be sure to listen to these top ten tracks that represent the apex of emotive music. 1. Limousine - Brand New (from The Devil And God Are Raging Inside Me) The very definition of an emotional roller coaster. A song about the tragic death of a seven year old girl at the hands of a drunk driver, it starts sombre and haunting until it climaxes in complete cathartic chaos. At nearly eight minutes long, this magnum opus of the Long Island rock band is the defining example of modern music as an art form.
6. In Circles - Sunny Day Real Estate (from Diary) Forget My Chemical Romance or Fall Out Boy, as Sunny Day Real Estate are the true fathers of the emo genre. In Circles, from their 1994 masterpiece Diary, is the song about the monotony of an everyday working life that propelled them to critical acclaim and fame in the indie underground in an unfortunately short lived career.
7. Never Meant - American Football (from American Football) American Football are another one of the bands that provided the initial blueprint for indie rock and the emo genre, and even though they only released one album, the first track on their self titled effort has gained a reputation as one of the most influential songs in music. Hopefully rumours of the band entering the studio for the first time in 16 years have a legitimate basis.
2. An Introduction to the Album - The Hotelier (from Home, Like Noplace Is There) What starts as essentially a monologue of despair in the opening track (obviously) of The Hotelier’s 2014 sophomore album culminates in explosive hopelessness as Christian Holden screams an expletive and the listener is hit by an eruptive wall of noise that sets up a fantastic concept album of loss, identity and hopelessness.
3. January 10th, 2014 - The World Is A Beautiful Place And I Am No Longer Afraid To Die (from Har mlessness) A weird song title and an even weirder band name - they stress it’s ironic - but January 10th, 2014 is a fantastic song about an incident in Mexico regarding ‘Diana: the hunter of bus drivers’ who murdered such men as retaliation for sexual abuse they had inflicted on women. Covering questions such as the role of vigilantes and the moral dilemma over the incident, it’s a must listen off a fantastic 2015 indie release
4, Not My Blood - Gates (from Bloom And Breathe) Gates are a band who - to the best of this writer’s knowledge - haven’t even played a set in the UK yet. However, with their 2014 debut, they proved that they are an up and coming band to keep tabs on, and Not My Blood is an incredible example of post rock’s prowess and climaxes to a truly epic finish.
5. April - Pianos Become The Teeth (from Keep You) In April, frontman Kyle Durfey shouts over hauntingly beautiful instrumentation from the rest of the band “every April I’m reminded about those bright flowers they talk about, every May I’m reminded that it’s better buried in black and white” to explosively end a song of mourning and intense emotion that is highly recommended.
8. I Can Feel A Hot One - Manchester Orchestra (from Mean Everything To Nothing) Slowly, over the four minute and 19 second duration of Manchester Orchestra’s biggest song to date, more and more instrumentation is added over the extremely motive singing of Andy Hull expressing the anxieties of touring, working and relationships. As the singer narrates a haunting tale of a nightmarish car accident to end the song with a dramatically effective change of texture it brings the song’s message into perspective - sometimes it’s too late to realise what you have. An instant classic. 9. I Just Want To Sell Out My Funeral - The Wonder Years (from The Greatest Generation) Probably the closest to Fall Out Boy-esque bands on this list, yet is over seven minutes long. The Wonder Years pop punk opus defies convention to deliver a surprisingly mature reflection on the anxieties of life and death, and attempting to make the most of one’s life. If anything, this song shows the band have nothing to worry about regarding untapped potential.
10. Harbor - Touché Amoré (from Is Survived By) Instead of singing, Jeremy Bolm essentially shouts his lyrics over the rest of the band, creating some sort of amalgamation between poetry and hardcore rock, which is a surprisingly brilliant combination. While initially seeming a little harsh for a song about extreme affection and attraction, but shows how a love song should really be done versus the cookie cutter examples of the modern music mainstream.
FOOD&LIFESTYLE
WHEN HEALTHY MET TASTY
PROTEIN SCRAMBLE RECIPE
p a r t 17
B
Caroline Schurman-Grenier
PROTEIN. THE WORD ALL HEALTHY PEOPLE ARE OBSESSED WITH. “You need to get your protein intake for the day.” “Make sure you have protein in your meal!” “Shall I add some protein powder to your smoothie?” It’s everywhere. I’m not a huge believer in protein powder. I mean, sure, if you’re trying to bulk up, some extra protein can’t hurt, but you need to be careful not to have too much, or to only get it from powders. If you lear n the basics about food and nutrition, you can get everything you need without needing to add powder to your life. One way to do so is to eat quinoa. Quinoa is basically the superfood or all superfoods. Loaded with protein, it’s a healthy starch that does wonders for your body. All I can say is you should add it to your diet if you like the taste of it. Now, eating quinoa alone is like eating rice alone. It’s pretty boring. That is why I made this little protein scramble a few days ago. It’s also because I cooked way too much quinoa and needed to figure out a way to use it up before it went bad. Cooking is all about experiments and mistakes, sometimes they tur n into great success! For one person, you will need: - 2 eggs - Dash of milk of your choice - 1/2 cup quinoa, cooked - 1 cup kale - Olive oil - Salt - Pepper - Garlic Pepper - Paprika - Par mesan cheese to g rate
1. In a bowl, combine the eggs and milk. Whisk together and set aside. 2. Put some olive oil in your frying pan. Add the kale when it’s hot. Put spices on the kale and sauté it until the kale is soft. 3. Add a little par mesan cheese to the kale alone and then add the eggs and the cooked quinoa. Scramble all together, grating cheese on top as you go along. 4. Keep adding spices of your choice, you want there to be enough flavor to the dish! 5. When the eggs are done, add a drizzle of olive oil and a dash of paprika. Voila! You have a protein packed lunch.
DISCOVER SOMETHING NEW IN LONDON
DELICIOUSLY CHEAP EATS Caroline Schurman-Grenier
WE ALL LOVE LONDON, EXCEPT FOR ONE THING: IT’S TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE. The city is bursting with things to do, but we never feel like we can enjoy said things because…well…we’re all broke. Fear not, I have the solution for you. Believe it or not, there are places where you can have dinner in London that are relatively cheap and, more importantly, delicious. The places I am recommending to you will not cost you more than 15 pounds per person. Her man Ze Ger man This fantastic Ger man hot dog spot in the West End is the perfect place for a quick bite with taste. Quick and efficient, they have different types of wurst, chips and schnitzels to choose from. They bake their chips instead of deep frying them, an added bonus to all you health conscious students! You won’t be disappointed. They have two locations, the most famous one being this one: 33 Old Compton St, London W1D 5JU Honest Burgers Named one of the best burgers in London for a reason. The meat is very juicy, the toppings blend beautifully with the meat, the brioche bun is unbelievable and the chips are cooked in rosemary and salt. Mouthwatering. They even have chicken or veggie burgers if you’re not feeling the beef that night. Don’t
be skeptical because they have multiple locations. They’re just so popular that you need more than one in town! Closest to campus is this one: 4a Meard Street London W1F 0EF Yalla Yalla Lebanese food, it’s so good. And at Yalla yalla, it’s so good you may never be able to have it anywhere else in London again. They serve small plates to share or bigger plates for larger appetites. Everything from the hummus to the lamb and the pita and the baba ganoush are fantastic. A tasty treat for less than 20 pounds? That’s a pretty solid reason to try it out. They have a few around London, here is the closest one to LSE: 1 Green’s Ct, London W1F 0HA Franco Manca Who doesn’t love pizza? Will all the gluten intolerants please refrain from answering this question. The great thing about London is that pizza is really cheap. Seriously. Franco Manca is one of the best in the city and guess what? A pizza margarita costs 6 pounds. That’s right, you read right. One digit. Their sourdough crust will make it very difficult to not eat the whole pizza in one sitting. The atmosphere is very cute and welcoming, but the queue after 6pm makes people scared. Don’t worry, you can order for takeaway and skip the queue. Or you can go for lunch. Your choice. 98 Tottenham Court Rd, London W1T 4TR The Joint Alright, this one is not so close to LSE, but it’s worth the visit to Brixton or Marelybone. The Joint serves maybe the best pulled pork you will ever eat. The sandwich is absolutely massive. One often wonders how one will finish it. But one does finish the burger because, as stated earlier, it’s the best pulled pork you will ever have. Mondays they have 2 for 1 cocktails from 5 to 7. Need It say more? Find them here: 19 New Cavendish St, London W1G 9TZ The impossible came true. Students can enjoy the London life too! Caroline’s student lifestyle blog: www.mademoiselleaventure.com
18
14
| Tuesday 13 October, 2015
LITERATURE
TWILIGHT RETURNS
LAZY (RE)WRITING Camila Arias-Buritica THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE MAY MAKE YOU FEEL INCREDIBLY OLD… It has been ten years since a little book called Twilight hit the shelves. Now, ten years on, Twilight’s author Stephenie Meyer has announced a new book titled Life and Death: Twilight Reimagined, a retelling of Twilight with gender-swapped main characters. Whether your opinion on Twilight is vociferously on the negative side or defiantly positive, this book will most certainly be a bestseller. Is it an overreaction on my part to say that this is another nail in the coffin of imagination among popular writers? It seems to me that a ‘rewriting’ trend seems to be forming here. After all, Life and Times follows this year’s publication of Grey, a retelling of 50 Shades of Grey from the male lead’s perspective which broke book sale records. However what I see as the problem with this ‘rewrite’ in particular, is the process by which authors like Meyer are being supported and benefitting from the process of switching pronouns, changing names, and then packaging the end result as a ‘new’ book. Meyer has said herself that the process of writing Twilight Reimagined was “really fast and easy” – so has she made an effort to make Twilight a better book, or just different? Perhaps Meyer has been driven to this experiment in ‘rewriting’ by the fact that Twilight has
recently disappeared from public consciousness. With no new movies or books in over 3 years, its place in teen fiction royalty is endangered by series like The Hunger Games, which are more recent and more successful. I can’t help but think that authors like Meyer are simply finding new ways to cash in on their old, tried and proven equations for success, and get an extra 15 seconds of fame. Meyer has said that her aim with this rewrite was to fight criticisms of Twilight being sexist and prove that the central relationship was neither unhealthy nor a bad image of what a romantic relationship should be. However can this really be achieved by just switching pronouns? There’s a concerning assumption on Meyer’s part that men hold a monopoly over being abusive in relationships. If, as she had suggested, the story itself is exactly the same, surely the abusive elements of the relationship will remain? Although it remains to be seen how this gender-swapping will play out, some of the changes I have read about have included bedroom walls being changed from yellow to blue, and Beau (Bella’s male counterpart) being given a medical condition to explain his tendency to faint at the sight of blood (something that with Bella was simply down to her, I suppose, girlishness.) If Meyer’s real aim was to expand on the characters, and not merely to make more money, I don’t think this is the right way to do it. More important than the question of why the main characters’ names have been changed from the relatively ordinary Bella and Edward to Beaufort and Edythe
(perhaps to track their influence in baby naming trends?), a bigger question posed by this is whether this really is an unfortunate trend? Are rewrites encouraging lazy writing and telling people that you don’t need a great deal of imagination to be a success? Maybe not. After all, there are plenty of non-rewrite books on the market. Alternatively, the ‘rewrite’ could just be another trend in fiction, in the same way that gothic literature was a trend of the Victorian age, and the 1920s and 1930s were the ‘Golden Age of Detective Fiction’. Rewrites have worked, to a certain extent and to varying degrees, in film, and so why couldn’t they also work in fiction? It seems to me that the cause of this trend is the focus on books as brands. Many booklovers believe that the book industry is intellectually superior to other media industries and not driven by the same economic forces, but I disagree. It doesn’t take a long visit to a bookshop to realise that a great deal of books are developed into series. In turn, the likelihood of publication and subsequent success of a book series rests on its potential to be adapted into blockbuster movies or television series. Books are now even being described as ‘blockbusters,’ and some of the most financially successful movie franchises and television series are based on books – Game of Thrones, The Hunger Games, and Twilight itself. Can we really blame authors and publishing companies for judging books based on this scale? Are we, consumers, to blame for this trend of ‘lazy’ rewrites, and should they be written off as ‘lazy’ at all?
BESTSELLER LISTS ARE HELPFUL...
SHOULD WE STICK TO THEM? Polly Hatfield
TERRY HAYES’ I AM PILGRIM was ubiquitous amongst commuters and holidaymakers alike throughout the summer of 2014, while this season’s must read, Paula Hawkins’ The Girl on the Train, has featured on bestseller lists since its release earlier this year. Anyone looking for guidance as to what to read next could be forgiven for groaning at the unrelenting dominance of British Bestseller Lists by crime fiction, a monopoly challenged only occasionally by teen vampire fiction or celebrity memoirs. In an age of mass production of books in both physical and electronic format, one might arguably
consign the Bestseller List to history, judging it to be a redundant and dispiriting reflection upon a nation that has lost the ability to take risks with our reading. The publishing industry has of course been transformed by the advent of the Kindle and other e-readers. One of the great advantages of such technology is the instant gratification provided by downloading and reading a book straight away, without having to put aside time to go into a bookshop and browse the shelves. The replacement of traditional booksellers by international behemoths such as Amazon has contributed hugely to the homogeneity of contemporary bestseller lists and arguably facilitated a worrying passivity in our literary choices.
The number of books published in the UK has also steadily increased in recent years: last week’s so-called ‘Super Thursday’ saw the British publishing industry release some 500 books in hardback in preparation for the run up to Christmas. The sheer number of books available would perhaps suggest that Bestseller Lists are more important and valuable than ever, providing some welcome guidance for the reader overwhelmed by choice. But can the increasing quantity of books really be linked to any increase in overall quality? Given the predictable high number of cookbooks and celebrity memoirs published, Super Thursday might in fact be less illustrative of a thriving industry and more a reflection of
the way in which books are increasingly viewed as consumer products, ultimately disposable and of little lasting significance. Easy though it may be to criticise bestseller lists as eclipsing, rather than promoting, quality works of literature, it is harder to know where to turn in order to venture beyond their suggestions. An interesting article in The Times recently by Jenni Russell drew attention to the manipulation of the contemporary literary scene by large scale PR operations. She argues that publishing houses, driven by ever-more stringent financial targets, hype the release of books by big name authors regardless of quality, citing Jonathan Franzen’s latest work, Purity, as an example of an underwhelming
work surrounded, nonetheless, by a PR furore that would lead one to assume it was of exceptional quality. It is equally important not to forget that even prior to the arrival of the Kindle, book shopping was often a frustrating experience, so dominant are a small number of bookshop chains who dedicate shelf space and marketing materials to a limited range of novels. It seems crucial to remember that a Bestseller List is not an incontrovertible list of quality books. It is important to remember that the strength of Bestseller Lists lies in encouraging debate around and engagement with reading, and that they should remain a starting point rather than a final destination.
p a r t 19
B
PARTB OPPORTUNITIES If you’re interested in joining the partB team, we’re recruiting for the following roles: Technology Deputy Editor Theatre Deputy Editor Visual Arts Deputy Editor Please email partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk with a short paragraph about why you’re suitable for the role. We look forward to hearing from you!
NUS EXTRA: THE ESSENTIAL STUDENT DISCOUNT CARD Available to buy from the LSESU Shop and online: www.nus.org.uk/en/nus-extra
AND MUCH MORE
GENSEC SLAMS DOWN IRON FIST ON SPURIOUS SCRUTINY ATTEMPT NONA BUCKLEY-IRVINE, General Secretary of the LSE Students’ Union this week triumphed over The Beaver, the second most corrupt and opaque institution (following the LSE itself) that consistently promotes a hideous agenda of democracy and accountability. The Beaver’s reporting on Part Time SU Officer pay was entirely self serving in its scrutiny of the SU and unashamed it its delivery of information that had previously been withheld from the student body. The Beaver grossly flaunted their interest in freedom of speech and information in front of a disgusted student population. Horrified onlookers
watched as The Beaver questioned how democratic it was for the SU to legislate themselves a pay increase that had been overturned at UGM just months previously, without putting that decision to UGM. The Beaver was found guilty of requesting that the Soviet Students’ Union inform the student body they represent about internal pay increases of democratically elected officers. The sensationalised reporting that dared to criticise the infallible decisions made by the ever honourable Board of Trustees was destroyed when Nona entirely factually insisted that no ByeLaws had been broken.
A second year Economics student commented that “personally i have no problem with it. I thought tokenistic gestures that have no appreciable effect on the lives of students were what the SU was established to do”. In their coverage of the entirely acceptable actions of the Union, The Beaver were so brazen as to involve the President of RAG, an SU institution whose sole remit is the stingy, selfish pursuit of charitable giving. The NAB was astonished at The Beaver’s shameless conspiring with this noted egotistic renegade, who is amoral enough to work tirelessly in aid of others. The Beaver’s vain at-
tempt to reinstate democracy into Union proceedings were successfully crushed when Buckley-Irvine made her jubilant speech to the revering crowd she found before her at UGM this week. This audience was densely populated with Comrade Nona’s fellow Sabbatical Officers, some 2nd year management students eating their lunch and a bunch of empty chairs - although these were quickly done away with by Her Nonaness who considered them potential propagators of laddism. At the end of her tour de force oration BuckleyIrvine shouted ‘GoodByeLaws’ out to her adoring, absent audience, once and
for all making her stand against transparency, democracy, following Union procedure and stamping out any illusion of respect that she has for her student body subjects. The NAB looks forward to Buckley-Irvine’s upcoming campaign where she will be making a bold attempt to purge the Union of any remaining proponents of student rights. The NAB also commends the General Secretary’s humanitarian work for the honourable cause of the ‘collectivisation of The Beaver Collective’. Under some duress from the SU, The Beaver has agreed to ‘let bye-laws be bye-laws’.
Tuesday October 13, 2015
Photo
22 |
Photo |23
Clockwise from above: Volunteers at RAG Give It A Go bucket collection, Beyond The Classroom Launch event, Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Rugby team at AU Welcome Party, LSE Divest Town hall meeting in the Shaw Library, Student speaking at the first UGM of the year on whether this Union should support the Free Education demonstration next month, students clink glasses at the Mature and Part Time students social, panellists for the UN Women HeForShe event as part of their #getfree tour, International Students Officer, Anti-Racism Officer, BME Students Officer, Community and Welfare Officer and ACS President pose for a photo at the Black History Month launch event.
24 |
Tuesday October 13, 2015
Section Editor: Alex Gray Deputy Editors: Vacant
New Economics Or More of The Same? An interview with the James Meadway Chief Economist of one of the foremost heterodox Economic thinktanks Alex Gray The City Editor NEF, THE NEW ECONOMICS Foundation, is an independent thinktank that campaigns for ‘Economics as if people and the planet mattered’. Campaigning for new way of thinking about Economics as a discipline, advocating key policies like a higher minimum wage, ending austerity and reform of the financial sector. During August, I sat down with James Meadway, Chief Economist at NEF and graduate of LSE’s BSc Economics and Economic History to discuss NEF’s work, and his take on the events of the summer, and the shifting economic and political climate.
in departments now is the same as I was taught almost a decade ago. Economics degrees appear to teach undergraduates remarkably little about what is actually going on in the Economy. I think it really comes down to what we want Economics to do. I think there’s this big problem in Economics with reflexivity, the point that when you analyse humans, they change their behaviour in reaction to that. This means you can’t make assumptions in the way that Friedman would have wanted, like the natural sciences. This means that, unlike as is usually assumed, you do actually have to ensure that your assumptions are as realistic as possible.
You’re quite critical of the current way of teaching Economics, why is that? and what would you change? Currently the Economics syllabus of many Economics departments doesn’t seem really to reflect reality, a lot of the fundamental content being taught
What does NEF think of the Budget? The budget made it clear that the worst is yet to come. What Osborne has done is to have 2 years of very hard austerity, just after the election of the coalition and then to slow down the austerity, what has been called a sort of
The City
How did you end up working for NEF, and can you give an example of the kind of thing you work on? I graduated from LSE in 2001, going on to do an masters in Economics at Birkbeck. I worked first at the Treasury, then at the RSA (Royal Society of Arts). Whilst completing my PhD at SOAS I was working part time at NEF, which was very tough and I wouldn’t recommend it! After finishing my PhD I started working full time at NEF. One of the big projects that NEF is working on at the moment, is a new macroeconomic model of the economy that includes a better understanding of the financial system. One of the really big challenges is that we are taking money as an endogenous variable, which is much more reflective of reality, but also breaks new ground as far as macroeconomic theories go.
A lot of NEF’s work policies seem quite left wing, is this a fair characterisation? Can you be conservative and support NEF? Well I suppose if you start with the basic premise that the system that you’re working is fundamentally wrong, that is more likely to appeal to a more left wing politics because it is in a sense revolutionary, and focussed on change. But NEF isn’t per se a political organisation, and is independent of any political affiliations. You could be a conservative and support NEF, there’s not a necessary tension between the two. There’s certainly radical conservative tradition, with one nation conservatism and red toryism would probably be open to many of NEF’s ideas. But this is one of the big problems with the current tory party, very few of what Thatcher called the ‘wets’ remain, and their current policies are really about making the country institutionally thatcherite.
‘rollercoaster’ which is so damaging to the UK economy. By removing many of his own targets, Osborne has given himself some more breathing room, so that he can slow down the cutting and let the economy grow a little. Politically it was an excellent budget, giving us a living wage that wasn’t enough to live on, but was higher than Labour’s proposals and you saw this in the way that Harriet Harman was left almost completely unable to respond to it effectively, and was left looking foolish by Osborne. What would be in a NEF budget? The first thing that NEF would do would be immediately to reverse austerity that has been so damaging to the country, and has also been so regressive and even fatal for some. The question should be whose books do you balance, because at the moment the more the government reduces their deficit, the more households are becoming indebted. For governments, it is much more feasible to borrow - a default on UK debt would be absolutely extraordinary - so a NEF budget would utilise this fact to relieve some of the pressure on massively indebted households A NEF budget would include a real living wage, at something like £10 an hour which would immediately lift people out of poverty, whilst allowing for higher tax receipts and providing incentives for investment in the workforce. The final policy, off the top of the head, would be investment in renewable energy, this would give us the kind of high tech, high waged and sustainable jobs that we really need to compete internationally, but also to protect the environment for the future. This would also mean that the UK could begin exporting again, redressing the massive balance of payments deficit that we are currently having to finance. Does this make NEF interventionist, they all sound quite interventionist policies? I don’t think that’s the way that I would characterise it, because we would argue that we need a different type of economy with more collaboration and employee ownership, rather than the type of shareowners/employees relationship that we have at the moment. An example that I give is Welsh Water, which was privatised and subsequently went bankrupt. It was then taken over in 2000 by Glas Cymru, a company which is limited by guaran-
tee with no shareholders and all profits being reinvested for the benefit of customers. Its different ways of thinking like this, which NEF would really support to deliver better public services, and higher wages. The Evergreeen Co-operatives in Cleveland, Ohio are more good examples of the kind of cooperative approach that would go in tandem with the policies I gave above. What are your thoughts on the rise of Corbyn? Corbyn’s rise, with the packing out of town halls, seems to me to be the type of thing that is necessary for Labour to win in 2020. The last time we saw this kind of rise was during the Scottish Referendum, and we saw a massive engagement that appears to have been permanent. I think we’d also welcome the kinds of policies that Corbyn has talked about - national investment bank, people’s QE and renationalising railways are all things that align with NEF’s kind of thinking. Even if we don’t agree with him on every policy, the debate that he is bringing is at least welcome. I also think this is symptomatic of a wider shift in politics, we have real grassroots politicisation, looking at housing protests like Focus E15, Occupy and the rise of Bernie Saunders and Podemos. I think there’s a real feel of 1989 about this, with the decline of these really big neoliberal institutions like the EU really looking a lot weaker, as though as they are crumbling. I think that Jeremy Corbyn, and the rise of other left wing forces are also symptomatic of this. Finally, will Greece leave the Euro? Greece has to leave the Euro at some point, whether it’s now or in a few years time, the amount of debt that Greece has is totally untenable. The creditors could squeeze the people more, and try and get as much as possible from the people, before inevitably leaving. What should happen, is for Greece to have a controlled exit from the Eurozone, so that they can competitively devalue. No possible situation would be painless, but recovery from within the EU is impossible for Greece, whilst they are having to use the Euro. The answer would surely be a controlled exit for Greece, getting the best deal for the impoverished people of Greece, rather than for the creditors. Don’t get me wrong, this would be an incredibly painful process, but it is much better than the alternative.
Benefits for Benefactors
The City |25
Instead of demonising the poorest who rely on state support for survival, where is the debate about corporate welfare? Could it be to do with Tory Party donations? Henry Mitchell LSE Undergraduate AS THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY conference comes to an end and the new Government’s honeymoon period wanes, now seems a good time to assess the party’s aims and the real drivers of George Osborne’s economic policy. The Conservatives have always been tagged as the party of the rich, but supporters would simply say that their hard line taken on welfare yet generous approach to corporate tax give-aways is necessary to make the UK economy strong and competitive once again. But is this wellinformed economic policy or a case of gentle influence from behind the scenes? The Tory Party has directly or indirectly received donations from 27 of the 59 wealthiest hedge fund managers in the Sunday Times Rich List – is it any coincidence therefore that their policy is skewed in favour of the rich and elite? In fact the FT found that 35% of all party funding comes from 8 of the top 20 donors – all 8 are from city
backgrounds. It’s easy to see just how reliant the Conservatives are on these wealthy donors, this funding keeps the party afloat and as a result policy choices are made with this in mind. A clear example is the exemption of stock market transactions from stamp duty in 2013, estimated at lifting £147m worth of taxes from hedge funds – no wonder the donations are rolling in!
The Tory Party has directly or indirectly received donations from 27 of the 59 wealthiest hedge fund managers This type of corporate overfriendly policy making is rampant amongst Government announcements, as evidenced by George Osborne recently with the Tories intent on further reducing corporation tax from 20% to 18% by 2020, including a 1% interim cut
in 2017. The UK’s corporation tax rate is already the lowest in the G20 and more than half that of America’s. Osborne and Cameron have repeatedly spoken about the difficulty and importance of reducing the budget deficit, yet interestingly this policy conflicts directly with the austerity plan they set out by reducing one of the largest government revenue streams. Yet at the same time ordinary people of Britain face a reduction in tax credits, chronic lack of investment in public sector services, and pay freezes for public sector workers such as nurses and healthcare assistants, under the guise that we live beyond our means and tough cuts must be made. It is abundantly clear therefore that the rules for the people and the corporations are contradictory and divergent. Osborne cites the necessity for lower corporation tax in order to create business confidence and investment back into the economy, however the majority of large UK corporations are already sitting pretty on large sums of cash since the financial crisis, which could be used now to kick-start activity
rather than paid out in shareholder dividends. Lower corporation tax isn’t the economic panacea Osborne would have us believe, it simply serves as a hand-out to the corporate elite – whilst the same party argue for the need to tighten welfare payments with minimal potential savings and disastrous consequences for those most in need in our society. Not only is this abhorrent in modern Britain but deeply hypocritical given the countless tax breaks and subsidies given to corporations.
Thus as another party conference of the ‘long term economic plan’ and ‘a stronger Britain’ comes to an end I find myself asking the question: is the government here to serve the people of Britain or the corporate and city giants who fund them? As the taxpayer reconciles the £93bn a year given away in the great corporate tax bonanza against the ever-dwindling support from the state, it is high time the Conservatives correct the injustices of the welfare bills – both corporate and public.
A Good Return On Divestment
How does the “dismal science” deal with divestment, and what does this mean for LSE? Aristeidis Grivokostopoulos LSE Undergraduate
DIVESTMENT IS ONE OF the classic 21st century words. Why would some corporation, or in general an organisation, start a project of releasing investments? The rationale before the discovery of the global warming phenomenon (before late 20th century) was that projects should be concentrated on something meaningful and productive, such as an investment. Social and environmental sensitivity, according to economic theory, is irrational. No utility is derived for the shareholders or governors of the corporation or organisation respectively. Why would profitmaximisers or cost-minimisers pursue such objectives? First and foremost, we are humans, so sensitivity is at least rational, even though some microeconomists may disagree. Rather, it isn’t the microeconomists themselves who pose such inhumane ideals to their students, but rather their maths. Naturally, mathematics does not account for the costs, mostly emotional, that result from the destruction of our ecosystem. That forest that locals could visit, whose trees were chopped
down or burned for commercial activity. That lake or beach that no longer be used for recreative, or even commercial purposes, as it has become dangerously polluted. Such things, mathematics, and thus rational microeconomics, will never take into account. And as long as decision-makers are so heavily inf luenced by this neoliberalist lobby, who mistakenly quote renowned microeconomists and dress their consultation up as empirical, divestment will remain ‘irrational’. Secondly, even from an economic perspective, the development of the concept of negative externalities has accommodated for this new approach to decisionmaking. Nowadays, decisionmakers, including universities which develop such environmentally friendly concepts, have the knowledge and the tools to account for pollution issues which their organisations may be involved. In other words, the field of microeconomics has matured enough to have models of the real world - a world where there are not only costs to the firm in a direct sense, but also in an indirect sense. In this world, irrationality is actually investing in fossil fuels and missing the opportunity of divestment when the pressure from the community is not that burdensome.
And here is where we find a contradiction that ought to be looked carefully by both decision-makers, and especially pressure groups. There is a rather powerful argument against radical divestment in the current economic environment. Our environmentally unsound argument is based on a rather positively accidental phenomenon. It is accidental because it is the result of two def lationary forces on a fossil fuel that was characterised by the rigidity of its volume and price due its oligopolistic market, namely oil. In recent months, the price of oil, the most widely used fossil fuel in the Western pseudo-environmentally-sensitive world, has dropped to below half the value it was before. Microeconomists, once again the enemies of the environment, explain this global phenomenon with regards to two aspects. One is the decreased demand from the once growing emerging markets. The other aspect is an increased supply from the once unimportant developed world oil producers due to a technological breakthrough, fracking. Both are forces that make oil cheaper for its consumers, its net-importers most importantly. Returning to the decision-makers in organisations, who are in the dilemma whether to divest or not, the ef-
fect of this new norm is crucial. It is crucial because it moves the balance of costs and benefits of various energy sources towards fossil fuels, specifically oil and its complement, natural gas. Ironically, pressure groups are under pressure from 2015 and for years to come. When solar energy is compared to oil originated energy, even under the consideration of negative externalities of consumption and production, it is more expensive to society. The question raised by decisionmakers in organisations that are not that insistent in profit maximisation, e.g. universities, is why shouldn’t we utilise this rare chance of consuming the accessible oil at such a low price? To put it in economic terminology,
decision-makers are faced with much higher opportunity costs if they choose divestment, so there is a strong incentive to postpone it to a period where fossil fuel costs are much higher. To put it into context, LSE and many other universities are increasingly in a difficult position. Should they succumb to the pressures of their liberal student body by thoroughly investing in renewable energy sources? Or should they avoid such excessiveness and view this as issue from a less emotional and more economic prism, divesting more moderately? Possibly, the latter may signal the start of a new Great Moderation - one with a completely different meaning to the last.
26
|
Tuesday October 6, 2015
On the spread of nuclear weapons and the consequences they hold for mankind. Zwan Mahmod Undergraduate Student
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE often seen as a fear of the past, one which disappeared with the end of the Cold War. Yet, these fears cannot be relegated to the past, especially with the developments in the past decade. North Korea has acquired nuclear capability, Iran is suspected to have a nuclear weapon and there have been repeated attempts to smuggle nuclear material to the Middle East via Europe. Whilst it is true that the recent US-Iran Nuclear Deal is more cause for optimism than pessimism, this is solely restricted to Iran and does not and cannot address the wider issue of nuclear proliferation and security. The most recent development has been the interception of smugglers with nuclear material in Moldova. The BBC reported this month that Moldovan Police, in coordination with the FBI, have foiled several attempts over the past five years to smuggle nuclear material to the Middle
Features
Section Editor: Taryana Odayar Deputy Editors: Vacant
Nuclear Proliferation; The Greatest Existential Threat We Face East. The most recent attempts, from 2013-2015, are suspected to have been intended for IS (Islamic State). The smuggler told the client (who was actually an informant) ‘You can make a dirty bomb, which would be perfect for the Islamic State. If you have a connection with them, the business will go smoothly’ . It is a truism to say we don’t want a despotic, theocratic, and imperialistic group with a nuclear weapon but nonetheless we must counsel against complacency. To assume that nuclear weapons are not sought or that they will not be used is complacent and an attitude which is widespread, especially in the post-Cold War age. At the very least, nuclear capability will be a bargaining chip or a means of inducement used by the possessor. From a strategic perspective, putting aside the obvious moral danger, nuclear weapon possession by Iran, North Korea or IS will put the West at a significant disadvantage and may even encourage other nations and groups to acquire them. The argument for Nuclear non-proliferation is not an
argument for the retention of such weapons by the West. We, too, have destructive capabilities and we, too, are susceptible to error. Due to the nature of the weapons the possessor becomes almost irrelevant. In Rudolph Herzog’s book, ‘A Short History of Nuclear Folly’, he describes the countless times nuclear war or catastrophe has nearly occurred due to human error, or more aptly put, human stupidity. Perhaps most the most important was in 1961 when a B52 Bomber accidentally dropped a nuclear weapon over North Carolina. All the safety mechanisms, except for one, failed, thereby preventing an explosion. This goes to show just how harrowingly close the US had been to killing millions of its own citizens due to an ‘error’. Now, imagine a nuclear actor having an enemy in mind, under a state of panic and/or under a misapprehension, how much closer would that bring us to nuclear war? Consider the possibility and ask if its worth the risk. Luckily, history has provided a case study. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, a Russian Nuclear Submarine
drifted over the quarantine line set by Kennedy around Cuba. As a warning, depth charges were set off by the US, but this led the officers on the submarine to believe World War Three had started. The crew were close to firing their nuclear arsenal in retaliation but the composure and reason of one man named Vasili Arkhipov, singlehandedly, averted nuclear war. In the last 70 years we have been incredibly lucky to have avoided nuclear war or catastrophe, often it has been sheer luck and other times it has been the reason and good sense of individuals which has prevented human extinction. The most recent case of attempted nuclear proliferation into the Middle East should serve as a reminder as to the importance of severely restricting nuclear weapons. Human error compounded with capriciousness is not a combination to be welcomed. And if we are to survive the 21st century a global plan for their destruction is required, for as long as such weapons exist, self inflicted extinction is a bleak possibility.
Abenomics; Promise vs. Reality
Giving up on Abenomics? Japanese reform may be a doomed ambition. Chloe Mow Undergraduate Student
ELECTED IN 2012 WITH higher approval rates than his predecessors, Shinzo Abe was recently re-elected unopposed as Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, and with promises to revise Japan’s economic presence in the world. His policies, which he has referred to as “three arrows” derived from a Japanese folktale. The story begins with Motonari handing an arrow to each of his three sons, Mori Takamoto, Kikkawa Motoharu, and Kobayakawa Takakage, before asking them to snap it. He then handed three arrows to each son and requested them to snap all three at once, which each son found they were unable to do so. Motonari explained that the three arrows represented the strength of unity, which in
relation to Abe’s policies will include the unification of fiscal stimulus, monetary easing and structural reforms, all of which aim for a stronger economy with increased support for population expansion by providing stronger social services for child rearing, and care for the elderly in struggling homes. However, with Japan’s continuous decline since the boosted interest rates in 1990 caused by concerns over the bubble, which entailed a steep land and stock price decline in 1991, has in fact spiralled deeper with added taxation that caused recession and inflation in 1997. All of which have made Abe’s current ambitions to revive Japan appear questionable, especially given Japan’s current commitments to cut down its public debt at more than 1 quadrillion yen and rekindle ties with China (despite the Senkaku islands dispute), as well as South Korea.
The conflict between China and Japan over the ownership of the Senkaku Islands began in 1895 when the Japanese Government formally attained the Islands, whilst China argued that it had held sovereignty over the island for centuries. This caused decades of debate and bitterness between the two, which spewed into the SinoJapanese war in 1894; the war that allowed Japan to rule over Korea and thus lead to the Japan-Korea annexation treaty in 1910. Despite such a sensitive history, concerns from both were ignored during the recent decision for increased military security on September 24th. It could be perceived that the crux of these sudden changes derives from China’s growing reputation in the seas and North Korea’s nuclear and missile plans. More so, the party’s plans to reflate and prioritise structural reforms leaves hardly any monetary security
for the country to resurface from decades of deflation, or to increase its growth, which stood at a mere 0.3% during the second quarter of 2015. Could the Abenomics’ proposal simply be a scheme to boost confidence within the country itself ? Or is it an unbalanced attempt to remind fellow countries of Japan’s status as the third largest economy in the world? It all seems subjective. Abe declares that “Today Abenomics is entering a new stage, [where] Japan will become a society in which all can participate actively”, which is somewhat ironic when put beside the recent unpopular military legislation announced on Sept 24th this year. Despite all this, many citizens still believe that “Tomorrow will definitely be better than today!”, as Abe’s track record of being the most popular prime minister continues.
Will Catalonia Ever Truly Be A Part Of Spain?
The half-won battle of Catalan independence from the Spanish state Capucine Cogné Undergraduate Student ON THE 27TH OF September, the vote for the Catalonian parliament brought an absolute majority to the Catalan nationalist party. However, does this mean Catalonia will become independent? Do the Catalan people wish to be separated from Spain? And will this region ever truly be a part of Spain? The elections have been seen as the first major step in the path to Catalonian independence, with the separatist camp having presented these elections as a plebiscite for independence. Yet, it should also be noted that the “Citizens” (Ciudadanos) party who are firmly against separation from Spain became the second force in Catalan politics with 18% of the votes. Indeed, according to Francisco Camas Garcia of Metroscopia, only about 20% of Catalans support the idea of a unilateral declaration of independence. However, the lack of a right to vote for whether their region should be part of Spain has caused resentment towards Madrid and increased Catalan patriotism. This feeling of injustice, particularly strengthened by the recent Scottish referendum, helped cause the record turnout (77%) to these recent elections. This is not to say that the reaction to the lack of a referendum is
the only reason Catalans are turning against Madrid. As Katya Adler stated, Catalonia contributes roughly one-fifth of Spanish national GDP in taxes but feels it gets far less back. Not only was Mr Mas rebuffed by Prime Minister Rajoy when asking for greater fiscal powers in 2012, but also the state investment in Catalonia continues to drop: the 2015 draft national budget allocated 9.5% to Catalonia compared with nearly 16% in 2003. Meanwhile, Catalan industry makes up around 24% of Spain’s and Barcelona is still the top touristic destination in Spain. Nevertheless, the economic crisis has hit Catalonia hard and Catalans feel that in comparison to other regions, such as Andalusia, Catalonia is not receiving enough aid from the government. Despite it being unlikely Catalonia will become independent this year, the Catalan issue is still central to Spanish politics and it seems unlikely that Catalonia will ever feel and be as Spanish as other regions. When spending the summer working in the beautiful Catalan town of Sitges, what struck me was the Catalan patriotism. When entering the bakery, they assume you speak Catalan, as the language is taught alongside Spanish in most schools from an early
age. The National Day of Catalonia (notably the day the election campaign began this year) is avidly celebrated throughout the autonomous region, with more than a million people on the streets of Barcelona this year. When asking my colleagues about Catalan independence and their opinions, they were certain that Catalonia had the ability to be independent and proudly boasted of Catalonia’s economy and culture. Catalonia has always been slightly apart from the rest of Spain, and often caused problems for the government. It was annexed to Aragon (East of Spain) in the 12th century but kept its language, customs and parliament; already establishing that it was different from the rest of the Crown. When the Catholic Kings later unified Spain, they had little control over the region as the ‘Cortes’ (a sort of parliament) still retained most of the rights to rule, and the Spanish Inquisition was particularly resented in Catalonia, where coexistence had been valued by the state. Five centuries later, Catalonia was resistant in the Spanish Civil War. If you go to Barcelona today, the Catalans will proudly show you the bullet holes in the Cathedral that symbolise this resistance. However, this resistance was significant as it caused former Spanish leader Francisco Franco to resent the region and
create policies systematically neglecting it during his 40 years in power (especially with regard to economic infrastructure). The patriotism and feeling of Madrid’s disregard towards Catalonia today is also a reaction to these policies: in the 20th Century alone, the Spanish government has restored Catalan autonomy thrice and abolished it twice. This long history of separation suggests that Catalan regionalism will always be a problem for Spain and its government. The Catalan movement for independence is especially key to Spanish politics, with the run up to the elections being less than 3 months away. With a population of 7.5 million (2014), the Catalans have a large say in the election. The opposition socialists have already tried to make use of their discontent: although being against independence they have mooted a constitutional reform that would grant the region more powers. Moreover, the anti-capitalist ‘Podemos’ movement supports Catalonia’s right to a referendum. Catalonia gaining independence would not only impact Spain massively in both political and economic terms, but also impact other countries - particularly in the EU, such as Italy, where regionalism is prominent and would be encouraged by this Catalan example.
www.euractiv.com
Features | 27
The Pocket Philosopher Thoughts on the tension between the Self and the Self ’s experience of the world. Edmund Smith Undergraduate student Last week, I commented that the world’s capacity to shock us (particularly in moral situations) is perhaps the main reason why theists are faced with a very real problem of evil. But even those of a secular mindset have the open question of how we can live a good life, and how we can help others to do the same. Here, I am going to explore an intuition pump that can help us think about these problems. Imagine that there is a division between myself and my experience of the world. Suppose that in order to live a flourishing life, I must make the experience I have of the world agreeable (to a greater or lesser extent) myself. Now, I can manipulate parts of the world and thus manipulate my experience of the world. So to a certain extent I can compel the world to accord with that which would be agreeable to me. But I cannot do so completely. In order to achieve harmony between myself and the world, I must change my attitude towards the world such that the world we have is agreeable to me. Naturally, this still leaves open the matter of which attitude would help.
www.businessinsider.com
Send your own philosophical musings to: features@ thebeaveronline.co.uk
28 |
Tuesday October 13, 2015
Former Nigerian Minister Caught Up in Corruption Scandal Lisa Elkhoury Postgraduate Student
China’s Nationwide Cap-andTrade Plan Just Might Work China to launch the world’s largest cap-and-trade program.
africanbusinessmagazine.com
Kyi Yeung Undergraduate student
NIGERIA’S FORMER Petroleum Minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, was arrested for accusations of money laundering in London on Friday 2nd by the UK National Crime Agency, according to ibtimes. She was at the head of the ministry of oil from 2010 to 2015 and has been the president of the oil consortium OPEC since 2014. She is facing charges for fraud, money laundering and international corruption. $20bn of oil revenues were declared missing from the time when she was still in office. Last April, Online Nigeria News stated that $700 million were found in the house of Diezani Alison-Madueke which she claimed to be hers. Four other persons were arrested but their identities have not been revealed. They are reported to have been released on bail but the case is still under judicial enquiry. Nigeria is the largest oil producer of Africa, as given by the Energy Information Administration, but political corruption remains common practice in the country. Diezani Alison-Madueke was close to former president Goodluck Jonathan whose administration was denounced as corrupted. Muhammadu Buhari, who took over in May 2015, has thus driven his agenda in the fight against corruption, particularly regarding the oil industry. He has committed to restoring the millions of dollars that went missing with the past governments. Since the investiture, Diezani Alison-Madueke has allegedly been staying abroad.
Interested in writing for Features? email us at: features@ thebeaveronline. co.uk
IN RECENT MONTHS, news covering US-China relations have been dominated by disagreements ranging from cyber security to the South China Sea. However, some sliver of positivity came through last week in the form of enhanced and potentially significant cooperation by the two nations to combat climate change. Chief amongst the various initiatives introduced by the two nations is China’s plan to implement a nation-wide cap-and-trade system. What has surprised several commentators is the pace at which China has sought to wean itself off environmentally damaging economic growth; in fact, China had just earlier announced plans to peak its carbon emissions at a US-China summit back in November 2014. Cap-and-trade schemes, where nations set the amount of pollutants companies can emit throught the sale of licences, which in turn creates a market for pollution, have had mixed outcomes in implementation worldwide. For instance, while California’s cap-and-trade scheme has showed intial signs of promise with projections predicting a 2 percent decline in carbon emissions from 2012, the European Union’s program has had less success. Marked by massive price fluctuations in the pollution market, an oversupply of licenses and the resultant disincentivising of companies to clean up their act, the system has much room for improvement. Here, one might suspect
that the scale of cap-andtrade programmes determines the extent to which they are successful. Yet to underestimate China’s announcement on account of its sheer scale would neglect the quiet and manifold policy shifts the country has undertaken to ensure greater enviromental responsibility in recent years. For one, the cap-and-trade system is not an anomaly in China. Any apprehension should be countervailed by the various pilot projects that have been carried out in major cities such as Guangdong, Shanghai and Shenzhen for several years. According to a ‘Resources for the Future’ report, these programmes witnessed high compliance rates where cities like Shanghai achieved a full 100 percent compliance rate by companies where deadlines were concerned. They also and had in place strong measures to penalise non-complying companies with fines at around 3 to 5 times the normal trading amount per tonne of CO2 emitted. However, this is not to say that the pilot trials were completely perfect. On the other hand, several other challenges also emerge when such a scheme broadens from state to national level. Foremost is the issue of the cost incurred to stakeholders in the economy. Fudan University professor Zhang Zhongxiang draws attention to the dilemma that arises when a government fixes prices for essential utilities such as electricity. In this instance, how does the government decide the allocation of additional costs incurred as a result of the new
regulations between a company, operating in a free market system, or the consumer? In the event that the costs are not passed on to the consumer, there may be little incentive for the change of consumer habits towards the use of these resources. Significantly, problems familiar to the European Union system such as price fluctuations and regulatory issues have also emerged during the pilot phase of cap-and-trade systems in China; imperfections that could grow more profound with nationwide implementation. These include keeping tabs on the amount of pollutants emitted by companies nationwide and ensuring greater transparency in the licensing process. Furthermore, as noted by a Vox article, the new intiative opens up room for corruption on the local level along with the problematic task of deciding upon the amount of permits to be distributed, factors which will affect the effectiveness of the cap-and-trade system. This leads to the more pertinent question of why should we be concerned about China’s announcement and in what other contexts could it be viewed? Firstly, the environmental commitments jointly made by the EU, US and China in recent years have meant that the projections of the upper limits at which temperatures will rise from pre-industrial levels to 2100 will decline from 5.2oC to 3.8 oC. That translates into a lot less land being submerged by water. Secondly, the announcement could perhaps be seen in the context of China’s desire to
facilitate a peaceful ascent in the growth of its soft power. In his address to the United Nations in that same week, Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke of “the Chinese dream … bring[ing] more opportunities to other countries and contribut[ing] to global peace and development”. Commiting China to a global goal of reducing carbon emissions to combat climate change gels with the decision to contribute more resources to the United Nations peacekeeping forces as well as the decision to reduce the numbers in the People’s Liberation Army. In conclusion, the recent targets set by China reflects a growing resolve by world leaders to tackle the issue of climate change. The largely ineffective attempt by the Kyoto Protocol, which sought to reduce emissions from 2008 to 2012 by a value of 5 percent below 1990 levels, to meet its target, could be assuaged by renewed commitments from developing countries such as China to actively take measures to rein in carbon emissions through investments in green technologies and cap-andtrade systems amongst others. Moreover, political pressure could also increase for the United States to enact similar proposals: Congress has yet to pass the 2009 Waxman-Markley Bill meant to control carbon emissions. Either way, positive news such as China’s cap-and-trade announcement and cooperation with the US to combat climate change, are few and far between and when they come along, the week is made slightly better.
photo credit: ibtimes
Aylan Kurdi: Humanity Washed Ashore
Features | 29
The role of the Media in covering the story of Aylan Kurdi; did it make a difference? Cynthia Wang Undergraduate Student
THE PHOTOGRA PH OF Aylan Kurdi, the Syrian child from Kobane whose body was washed ashore, facing down as if he was in a deep sleep has sparked a furious debate. Global audiences have finally realized that conflicts are no longer concentrated in specific regions, and that in the same way the metaphorical butterfly flaps its wings in the most distant, unimaginable place to cause a storm in another, issues such as these will eventually come to influence the whole world. The spotlight has turned to this area as its impact can be seen everywhere on both traditional and social media. It is poignant images such as these which potentially hold the power to act as a turning point which flips the decision-making process of many policy makers in developed countries, especially in Europe. European countries have therefore come under heavy criticism about whether they should take in the huge number of asylum seekers pouring in from the Middle East. However, the question of whether the media can and should be justified for being the leader of forming public opinions still remains to be answered. Many experts have pointed out that audiences are making mistakes about the status of refugees, by not being able to distinguish in media
reports whether the refugees are seeking asylum or moving due to economic or political reasons. The information provided tends to be driven by sympathy generated by, for instance, the picture of the poor Syrian boy. Case in point, it was ironic when people found out that the little boy Aylan was actually not one of those so-called war refugees from Syria, but that he and his families were in fact economic immigrants. Several reports from international media and discussions on social media demanding decision makers to have more sympathy towards refugees have resulted in increasing the force of public opinion. Indeed, one cannot deny that the conflicts taking place in Syria and Afghanistan as well as other hidden humanitarian crises have led to a significant refugee movement, and that they do need our help. It does not mean however that countries should take in as many refugees as the media deems appropriate or that they should frame their point of view and public opinion on these reports. The executive director of Global Partners Digital, Puddephatt, argues in his study that media coverage in conflicts can lead to two opposite results; either it can help alleviate the conflict, or it can be mistaken as propaganda and provoke more violence. Too often, mass audiences are unfamiliar with the background of conflict reports and thus they can easily be manipulated with the absence of proper media
literacy. Some advice given by several researchers to increase the more positive impact of conflict reporting are as follows: First of all, access to accurate information provided by the media should be strengthened in all cases. It has been proven that information accuracy and time sensitivity can decrease misjudgments which could lead to negative reactions on the part of governments. Secondly, transparency between diverse media can help to maintain the objectivity of the reporting, balancing both sides and reducing misunderstandings arising from unfamiliarity with the cultures and language of the conflict zones from which the reporting is being done. Thirdly, international cooperation in the media could add pressure on leaders from both sides of the conflict, by involving audiences worldwide. Arguably, the most powerful weapon that the media can use is public opinion and public pressure. Last but not least, people should have better media literacy. This will take a longer period of time to achieve, but through cooperation between governments and schools, audiences could be taught the ability to read conscientiously to assuage the truth of the situation for themselves. Although there are several arguments for and against whether or not European countries should take in more refugees, we should never stop questioning the accuracy of the information presented in front of our eyes.
photo credit:Flickr: Freedom House
Ashley Madison: Hacktivists Up The Ante Were the Ashley Madison hackers justified in their actions? Bhadra Sreejith Undergraduate Student THE ASHLEY MADISON data leak made news headlines last month. The website, which exists so that people can cheat on their spouses, claims to be the “premier website for discreet encounters”. It had its’ data leaked by a group calling itself “The Impact Team”. Thirty-six million people had their emails, credit card information, home addresses, and sexual preferences posted up on the Internet for everyone to see. This leads to a pertinent question: was the leak justified, and if so, why? It is difficult to get very worked up about the loss of a website whose main purpose is
to promote adultery, especially when you realise that one in six married men in the U.S had a profile on Ashley Madison, essentially declaring their intention to cheat on their partner. While adultery is as old as the hills, the internet has made it easier than ever to have a quick and easy affair, without anyone knowing. Cheating is considered morally wrong for many reasons; you are breaking a promise, denying the other person the truth and therefore all the information they need to make a full and informed choice. So is naming and shaming those who commit adultery really that bad? Doesn’t everyone deserve the truth? Besides, Ashley Madison wouldn’t have won any awards for good corporate practice
anyway; Annalee Newitz of Gizmodo found out that only about 12,000 of the 5.5 million Ashley Madison female users were actually real; the rest were fake, having never talked to a man on the site after creating the profile. They were created by company employees, using the pictures of beautiful women, to make the prospect of signing up more attractive to men. Essentially, Ashley Maddison consisted of millions of men sending messages to nonexistent women. This (and the fact that the “paid deletion” service didn’t actually delete information from the servers) was how the hackers justified the data leak. However, releasing data about the millions of Ashley Madison users harms the customers more
than the company. Credit card numbers and home addresses were leaked; information that can be used for blackmail. Users who were trying to escape from bad marriages may now face violence. Since Ashley Madison never verified emails that were used to sign up, people could have used fake emails, which are now on the hackers’ servers. The people with those emails may face suspicion from their partners, even if they just created the account out of curiosity. The hackers claimed to be taking the moral high ground, saying “Too bad for those men, they’re cheating dirtbags and deserve no such discretion.” But can we make absolute value judgements about other peoples’ lives? And more importantly,
even if people make moral decisions we disagree with, are we entitled to act as the moral police? Even in the 21st century, there is a wish to punish people who stray off the accepted path; people are far too judgemental about the sex lives of others. The data leak is simultaneously an attack on personal freedom and privacy. Personal information should stay private, except in the case of major investigations into illegal activities. While cheating is morally reprehensible, it is not illegal. If we do not condemn the hackers who leaked the Ashley Madison data, we pave the way for them to invade our privacy at every sign of moral wrongdoing, leading to a very slippery slope indeed.
30 |
Tuesday 13 October, 2015
The Beaver’s Club of the Week: Netball Róisín Bennett-Odlum Netball Club Captain
THE NETBALL CLUB continues to be the biggest women’s sports club at LSE. With 8 teams of extremely ranging abilities, the club can cater for everyone who wants to get involved. Although we have now filled most competitive playing spots in teams 1 to 7, we still have plenty of room to get girls playing netball! We currently have teams 1 to 3 entered in the BUCS South Eastern league playing on Wednesday afternoons and teams 1 to 7 entered into the LUSL league playing on Monday nights. These games are of a competitive nature and are against other university clubs. Within the area, LSE are a strong force with our 1st team taking wins against UCL 1st and the 2nd team having an unbeaten Michaelmas term last year. With a strong intake of players in these last two years, we expect to see great things from all of our 7 competitive teams! The club is also proud to welcome beginners to the game and this year we will be working with Active Lifestyle to put on beginners’ sessions to train those who have never played or have limited experience. There will also be the opportunity to play competitive but casual games in Lincoln’s Inn
fields on a fortnightly basis to put the sessions into practice. These games are against local professional teams from lawyers to consultants from different companies. Training sessions will also take place in Lincoln’s Inn Fields from 2pm to 3pm on Wednesday afternoons. Last Wednesday the first Active Lifestyle girls came to give netball a go and by the end were taking part in a training match against our 7th team girls. We are always recruiting more girls for Active Lifestyle so if you are at all interested please get in touch. Netball is one of the most social clubs in the AU with a whole team of social members dedicated to Zoo Bar attendance. All those participating in Active Lifestyle are also welcomed in the Netball club events as 8th team social members. This year our socials will be bigger and better than ever accompanied by some on point fancy dress masterminded by Elin Harding and yes, we are tentatively hoping for a mini tour at some point.. This year we are excited to be sponsored by Credit Suisse to help develop the club further alongside creating opportunities for the girls in the club. If you are in any way hoping to get involved in the club to play in Active Lifestyle games or just as a social member please email r.bennett-odlum@lse.ac.uk.
Men’s Hockey Mens 1s won Lee Valley University Cup Men’s 2s vs Kings College won 3-2
Women’s Hockey Women’s 1s achieved 3rd place in the Lee Valley University Cup
Women’s Football Women’s 1s vs Royal Holloway won 3-0
Win, Lose or Draw, send results to sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk
‘TO ZOO OR NOT TO ZOO. That was the question. Whether ’tis nobler to.. wait! What?! £7 entry! 2 free drinks! Pitchers for the execs! And it’s in Saucy! What could possibly go wrong?! Turns out literally everything. Like pretty much everything. It was shit. It was really really shit. It was shitter than it would be to come home from a really hard day at work, say in some dead-end, minimal-qualification-required, customer service job, but not at a
nice supermarket where your main customers are godparents and war veterans, who, yes, ok, are a bit boring, but when you think about it are really sweet and caring, but at a really trashy, third-rate carpet store, where most of the customers are vindictive and evil, and you get home and your entire family are involved in a graphically inappropriate orgy, pets and all, and when you say Mum what’s going on what are you doing get off the sofa and put some clothes on you’re crazy she just looks at you and smiles and tells you your dinner is in the oven, but that it’s completely charred. But that’s the great thing about the Athletics’ Union LSE. Need us a well-staffed bar, reasonable queues and the ability to obtain our pre-paid (or were they free?) beverages to be happy, wild and
monumentally Craig Calhouned? We most certainly do not! Toilet humour was on offer from the FC Bo-ard of Trustees as one socialite took the piss while on a trip to the Jon. “Urine trouble now, mate!”, shouted passer-bys. “Su me!”, responded the defendant. Rugby’s Rhonda Rousey raged riotously, Donning his armour menacingly while weighing up the prosand cons of full-frontal battle with a crack team of Speshel investigators. Elsewhere, a Forma boxer and current kitchen appliance aficionado tested gravity and lost. Late 1950s and early 1960s British Prime Minister and his sidekick Bent the rules a touch and Poked thebeasts, desisting just prior to thunderous electrocution. The Champagne society’s finest had a taste for rugby but in
the end got So-maltreated that she got on her bike and headed for Amsterdam. Pikachu swapped a kettle bell for a kettle well as the Pokemon gym workout took a backseat for a hockey social sec. In conclusion, someone needed to try. Some brave and Ryteous leader needed to see whether the long-held Kantian mantra that Wednesday nights belong to the Jungle of Zoo Bar was in fact fallacious; a cunning plan by Dale & Jamma © to send revenues through the roof. But it wasn’t a fallacy. It proved to be very much true. Leicester Square, anyone? Despite being omnipotent and benevolent, the Bev Report lacks omniscience. Send in the escapades you witnessed to sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Women’s Football Kick Off the Season Zoe Oakley Women’s Football Club Captain ON SUNDAY LSE WOMEN’S Football Club ventured out to Royal Holloway to win our first LUSL game. The result: 3 goals and a clean sheet. On our walk to the pitch through farmland, we spotted ponies, which reminded us of our ‘My Little Pony’ selves last Wednesday. This was destiny. It was a sign that our social spirit would be married to our technical skill today. As we approached the 3G turf, we faced a shock to the system. But thanks to Coram’s Field, our Russell Square training ground, we’ve had 2 Friday’s experience of this. Little did we know, the 3G also symbolised 3 goals. Destiny was very busy today. Although the first couple of minutes started off shaky, we quickly picked up the pace and weaved together some key passes. As the game went on, we managed to kick some great balls into space for Lucia and Epo to run onto. The first one was successful as Epo effortlessly tapped it into the goal.
About 10 minutes later, Lori made a great run down the wing and smashed a goal into the top left corner. We continued strong, albeit sometimes forgetting to stretch wide but our coach James was on it from the sidelines. As the second half began we received another shock. Royal Holloway’s coach appeared! We’re not sure what activity she was getting up to during the first half, but she certainly made her presence known when she arrived 45 minutes in. After requesting precisely 20 tackles from her players, their organisation picked up. She threw out a few more numbers like this - 20 push-ups at one point. We fought back with fervor though. Then came my neardeath experience. I launched at the ball hoping to softly nestle it, but it boomed into my solar plexus, and at that moment I saw my life flash before my eyes. Winded, unable to breath, I saw a whirlwind of images pass before me. There was no breath coming out of me. 30 Seconds felt like years. But Epo proceeded to make a
goal next that would bring anyone back to life. She stormed through the defence, knocking players down one by one until she tapped the ball into the corner like the Belgian beast she is. Our defence was not letting our 3rd goal go to waste. Our clean sheet, as well as Laura’s massacred bleeding knees pay testament to this. 3G doesn’t stop LSE WFC. We fight. We fall. We bleed. We win. Lori may have gotten a bit too passionate when she yelled “get out my f-f****** way” to our ref. But he really wasn’t moving. The only real chance at the goal the opposition had was saved spectacularly by our goalie Steph. As the game drew to a close, Royal Holloway sent a long ball that loomed towards the post. Stephanie leaped into the air and swiped it, securing our 3-0 win. We felt like we’d been playing with each other for more than one match. WFC is looking forward to our first BUCS game next Wednesday! Let’s smash that league too!
Sport | 31
VISIT US AT BEAVERONLINE.CO.UK OR TWEET @BEAVERONLINE
Welcome to Disorder
Three Tuns management bring ruin to the AU Welcome Party Alex Dugan Guest Sports Editor WEDNESDAY NIGHT brought together the entire AU for the first time in all it’s glory. Snow White was seen prancing around the Tuns and even Fred Flintstone was on hand to bat away the encroachment of the various Pikachus bold enough to venture up to the Mezz. On stage the drinking challengees ensued with Women’s Rugby somewhat dominating the proceedings, perhaps with a little help from our AU President. The FC and Rugby rivalry picked up where they left off over a year ago as the verbals and even a bit of physical argby bargy ensued at the bar. Netball were pretty vocal at the front however other clubs languished at the back. The reason for this is because they arrived at a different time to all these other teams. They arrived when they were told to arrive by, 10pm, and this caused chaos. A 10 pm arrival time seemed a pretty reasonable demand from the AU Exec. 10pm allows ample time for everyone to get inside, the challenges to begin and for Philpot to crack on his (questionable) DJ set, it speaks volumes when the DJ hides behind a whiteboard but
Sport
Guest Editor: Alex Dugan Deputy Editors: Vacant
that’s beside the point. When teams arrived between 9:45 and 10pm they were greeted with an enormous queue. This queue was no different to a Saucy one in length however the management of it was appaling. Many teams were queueing for over 40 minutes which obviously caused people to sober up and start questioning why we all weren’t on the way to Zoo Bar. By the time I reached the front of the queue one of Tuns management team (I can never tell which one’s which), ordered the bouncers to employ “questionable” methods of speeding up the queue. This may have sped up the ridiculously slow queue, however the problems did not finish once you stepped through the
seemingly silent metal detector and into the venue. The next stage of dissappointment was the bar. Usually on a wednesday night the AU use the bars in the Tuns and the Venue so that the amount of time you spend queueing for a drink is kept to a minimum. However because the AU exec had technically hired the Venue only, the Tuns bar was off limits to anyone who who had bought a ticket. This meant that the entire AU had to pile into the downstairs bar which was dramatically understaffed. The result of which had people waiting over 45 minutes in a massive scrum by bar to get a drink. To rub salt into the already sore wounds, once most people had received their free
drink and the bar had quietened down, management put more staff behind the bar?! That’s because simple logic dictates that you put more staff behind the bar to cope with the quietest times, leaving it understaffed during the chaos periods. Whilst the AU exec are not to blame for any of this, I think they have learnt a lesson about the way the Tuns management functions. Long story short, unless you get the Three Tuns bar as part of the package, there’s next to no point in running a special event there on a wednesday because ultimately, no matter how good you make the proceedings, the vast majority of people will be thinking: “Let’s all go to Zoo Bar.”
Hockey Defeat King’s
Conor Rohan Men’s Hockey 3rd XI Captain
OUR MEN’S 2ND HOCKEY Team pulled off a shock victory against the King’s College 2s on Wednesday in a pre-season warm up match played at Honor Oak Park. With nothing to lose, LSE started at a furious pace, winning a short corner which was duly converted by Ashil Shah to put them one up. King’s tried to respond with a high press but a deft long ball picked out Alessandro Audretsch who slammed home to take the score to 2-0 for LSE in a classic counterattacking move. Debutant Adam Margulies then added a third after some good work inside the D. LSE began to let up as the first half drew to a close, conceding from a short corner to make the score at half time 3-1. A rejuvenated King’s started the second half much better, quickly adding a second to their account and mounting the pressure on
LSE’s back line. At 3-2, they smelt blood and came forward in numbers. The defensive toll (and summer fitness levels) began to tell as Ashil went down with cramp, and others started going down with real injuries. Despite missing a penalty flick to put the game out of sight, Krishna Aswani was named the Man of the Match for a herculean defensive effort alongside new boy Chris McGleughlin, which saw the game out for LSE. Far from being won by individuals however, the victory came from a strong team performance; they used the space on the pitch very well both on and off the ball, and ensured that attacking opposition players were always covered. Overall, the game was a promising indicator of things to come from the 2s, who have set themselves the target of promotion this year. They find themselves in the same league as the newly formed Men’s 3rd team, with the big grudge match between the two to be
played at 1:30pm on Wednesday 14th October at Mile End Leisure Centre, the first competitive fixture for each team. All are welcome to come and watch!
For the chance for your team’s match report to feature here, please email sports@thebeaveronline. co.uk