854

Beaver

Issue 854 | 27.9.16

the

Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

LSE Appoints First Female BME University Director

Dame Menat (Minouche) Shafik to take up Directorship on 1st September 2017, with Research Pro-Director Dr Julia Black holding down fort as Interim Director until then, following Director Craig Calhoun’s departure.

Greg Sproston Managing Editor DAME NEMAT (MINOUCHE) Shafik has been unveiled as the new Director of the London School of Economics, making her the first female BME Director of the university.

Shafik will take up the position in time for the 2017-18 academic year; Professor Julia Black, who has been an LSE academic since 1994 and Pro-Director for Research since 2014, will act as Interim Director for this academic year.

Despite the LSE’s reputation as a world leader in the social sciences, it has been criticised in the past for the apparent disconnect between its innovative, impactful research on inequality, and its internal administrative processes which, for some at laest, have not been satisfactorally progressive. Through this lens, Shafik’s appointment has been greeted with enthusiasm by the majority of the LSE community, with many students and alumni feeling that the LSE acting on its own academic advice is long overdue. There is also broad consensus that the new Director better represents the diverse nature of the LSE student body.

Additionally, many students are impressed with the breadth and depth of Dr. Shafik’s experience; the incoming Director currently serves as a Bank of England (BoE) Deputy Governor and sits on its Monetary Policy Committee (MPC). Prior to this role, her positions have been diverse and varied, blending a mix of academic and professional; she has served as Permanent Secretary to the Department for

International Development, was the youngest Vice President of the World Bank, and has lectured or taught at Georgetown, Wharton and Oxford.

Speaking to The Beaver, LSESU Education Officer Jasmina Bidé stated, ‘I am very excited by Minouche Shafik’s appointment to the role of Director, not least because I think that it will provide greater stability to the LSE. It is of course also great to have such a highly qualified and well-experienced person as the head of the School - equally important is that she has had experience both in academia and in the professional world. As an African, it warms my heart to have a woman of African descent at the helm of LSE. Finally, I hope that the fact that she is an alumni means that she will be better attuned to what it means to be a student at the LSE, and that student experience and education will be at the forefront of her tenure. It is unfortunate that Calhoun was unable to satisfactorily direct the LSE, but hopefully we have turned a page and our School will continue to improve in the coming years.’

Jasmina’s comments on Calhoun are largely reflective of the opinions of students. The former Director is a very respected figure in Sociology who has contributed to the progressivist approach of using social science to solve the world’s most pressing issues; yet there was always the nagging feeling he did not have the non-academic experience or nous to successfully discharge the more administrative demands of his position. Calhoun’s tenure was marked by the school falling down The Guardian’s Complete University Guide on the back of

declining student satisfaction, and the Director was typically the lightning rod for dissatisfied students.

As Jasmina notes, students are generally hopeful that Shafik’s status as an LSE alumna will ensure she takes the frustrations and concerns of students more seriously, but not all students are entirely convinced her past experiences should be seen as a benefit. Undergraduate student Josh Hardman stated on social media, ‘Really conflicted, struggling to work out how I feel about this. Excited to see an Egyptian woman appointed to the role, for sure. But, there’s something inherently unnerving about someone who was deputy governor for the BoE, and more strikingly: deputy MD for the IMF.’ Academic critiques of the IMF’s heavy-handed approach to developing nations are mainstays in a number of LSE reading lists. According to the BoE, as a Deputy Governor there, Shafik was responsible for leading the ‘design and execution of quantitative easing by the MPC.’ The BoE’s own analysis in the Distributional Effects of Asset Purchases Report 2012, showed that the richest 5% of Britain’s population had gained most from QE - a stark contrast to the LSE’s mission to reduce inequality in the UK and abroad.

Regardless, there are obvious differences between Calhoun and Shafik, and the decision represents a significant change of thinking by senior management.

This appointment definitively marks the start of a new chapter for the LSE. Shafik. Photo Credit: Wikimedia, 2009.

News The NAB

LSE Takes Action to Tackle Pokemon GO: Which Fresher Are Gender Pay Gap You?!

Page 4 Page 9

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

Beaver

the

the

Beaver

Established in 1949 Issue No. 854 - Tuesday 27 September 2016 - issuu.com/readbeaveronline Telephone: 0207 955 6705 Email: editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk Website: www.beaveronline.co.uk Twitter: @beaveronline

Executive Editor Taryana Odayar

editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Managing Editor Greg Sproston

managing@thebeaveronline.co.uk

News Editor Joseph Briers

From the Executive Editor

Comment Editors Frank Morley Hakan Ustabas

Taryana Odayar

news@thebeaveronline.co.uk

comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk

PartB Editor Flo Edwards

partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The City Editor Alex Gray

city@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Features Editors Daniel Shears Stefanos Argyros

features@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Sports Editor Vacant

sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Online Editor Ellie Peake

online@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Collective Chair Vacant

collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The Collective:

A Doherty, A, Dugan, A Fyfe, A Hurst, A Laird, A Leung, A Lulache, A Moro, A Qazilbash, A Ryzhonkova, A Santhanham, A Tanwa, A Thomson, B Phillips, B Sreejith, C Cogne, C Holden, C Loughran, C Morgan, C Hu, D Hung, D Lai, D Shears, D Sippel, D Tighe, E Arnold, E Wilkie, E Smith, G Cafiero, G Ferris, G Harrison, G Kist, G Linford-Grayson, G Manners-Armstrong, G Saudelli, G Sproston, H Brentnall, H Prabu, H Toms, H Ustabas, I Plunkett, J Briers, J Clark, J Cusack, J Evans, J Foster, J Grabiner, J Heeks, J Momodu, J Ruther, J Wilken-Smith, J Wurr, K Budd, K Owusu, K Parida, K Quinn, K Yeung Goh, L Kang, L Kendall, L Erich, L Mai, L Montebello, L Schofield, L van der Linden, M BanerjeePalmer, M Crockett, M Gallo, M Jaganmohan, M Johnson, M Neergheen, M Pasha, M Pennill, M Strauss, M Williams, N Antoniou, N Bhaladhare, N Buckley-Irvine, N Stringer, N Webb, O Hill, O Gleeson, P Amoroso, P Blinkhorn, P Gederi, P Grabosch, R Browne, R J Charnock, R ConnellyWebster, R Huq, R Kouros, R Serunjogi, R Siddique, R Uddin, R Way, S Ali, S Argyros, S Chandrashekhar, S Crabbe-Field, S Kunovska, S Povey, S Rahman, S Sebatindira, S Shehadi, S Taneja, 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.

Printed at Mortons Printing

Another One Bites the Dust!

AND WE ARE OFF! Welcome to yet another year at the LSE! What with Corbyn being recently re-elected leader of the Labour Party, Cruz’s Texan turnaround in endorsing Trump’s presidential candidacy, and His Holiness the Dalai Lama expressing his thoughts on Brad and Angelina’s split on British morning television, this already promises to be an interesting year for student journalism.

Since taking up this position in January, my main mission for the paper has revolved around innovation and integrity. Thomas Edison famously challenged his staff with a phrase that would soon become known as ‘Edison’s motto’, which was, “There’s a way to do it better - find it.” I could not agree more with Edison, nor can I stress enough the importance of innovation, as without it, any endeavour inevitably comes to a standstill. It is therefore a chief concern for us, the Editorial board, to ensure that under our stewardship the newspaper makes measurable progress in increasing our accessibility, readership and relevance.

With this in mind, we published

‘The Beaver LSE’ App for iPhones over the Summer holidays, with the intention of making it easier and more enjoyable for LSE students to skim through the multitude of articles and features on our website.

With the Beaver app, now you only have to reach into your pocket to get up to speed on all of the latest breaking news on campus, submit pictures and text, and have direct access to our live Facebook and Twitter feeds. We are also in the process of upgrading our web platform to display our content in a more dynamic and engaging way, and hope to give you a snazzy and ultra-modern looking website later this year.

With regard to the print edition, we recently introduced a dedicated ‘Interviews’ section, which features thought-provoking discussions with academics and high-profile public figures, such as the President of Kiribati HE Anote Tong, the Vice President of Panama Isabel Saint Malo, Amartya Sen, Yanis Varoufakis, amongst others. For the first time ever at The Beaver, we also started filming these weekly interviews in collaboration with LooSE TV and publishing them on social media,

and are looking at ways in which we can extend this video coverage to important events on campus.

However, whilst innovation is important, protecting the integrity of the newspaper is of the utmost necessity. As your student newspaper, we have been entrusted by the LSE SU with the responsibility of creating and sourcing content that adheres to the highest possible degree of accuracy, as well as upholding the hard-earned trust of our readers within the LSE community; many of whom we look forward to working with as writers and contributors.

Whether you’re a fresher, returning undergraduate or postgraduate, The Beaver is bound to have something that interests and intrigues you. So if you’d like to get involved as a writer, cartoonist, or photographer, then refer to the column on the left to contact the relevant section Editor. If, on the other hand, you would like to take on the bigger challenge of editing the paper, you will be pleased to know that we are on the lookout for Editors and a Collective Chair to fill out our team - refer to the column on page 4 to learn more.

Either way, do come along to our ‘Give It A Go’ session on the 7th of October at the Venue in the Saw Swee Hock centre. The GIAG is a fantastic opportunity to meet all of us on the Editorial board in an informal setting and learn more about how the paper works, and we look forward to seeing you there.

As for all the quintessentially LSE Freshers who asked me at Freshers Fair if writing for The Beaver would look good on their CVs, here is my answer to you. As Executive Editor, I feel obligated to tell you that one should not write for The Beaver as a means of plumping up one’s CV, but for the love of writing. But as a fellow LSE student, I can assure you that the Beaver has a rich history as the oldest student newspaper in the UK, with our first issue on 5th May 1949 being christened by LSE founder George Bernard Shaw.

Today, we have a print circulation of 1,500 copies each week, a strong online presence, and a longstanding reputation for distinctive and authentic reporting. So congratulations on earning a place at the LSE, and congratulations in advance on your outstanding CV!

From the Managing Editor Welcome (Back) to LSE! Greg Sposton WHAT AN EXCITING START to the year - we already have timetables! This may not seem a big deal to new students, but a lot of us were waiting until November to get them last year. We spent two months bumbling around, desperately hoping we weren’t fucking things up. I can only presume the timetables staff were applying a similar strategy.

I don’t know if Fresher’s Fair was particularly great this year, or whether I was just far too hungover to properly appreciate it in the previous 2 years, but what really impressed me was how well the SU dealt with the fire alarm on the second day. People were frustrated, but the situation was handled safely and calmly. If you happened to miss the fire alarm, don’t worry;

spend enough time in the library and you’ll be sure to experience a few this year.

On a more serious note, life at LSE is always interesting and controversial - 2016/17 will be no different. Last year, I became a news editor with no experience at all and by the end of the year I was involved in coverage of unfair labour practices, legal

discrimination and a first-of-its-kind student body election. Being part of The Beaver has been the highlight of my student experience and I’d massively encourage everyone to take part. We rarely turn away contributions, and there’s elections coming up for staff positions too. If you’re interested, drop me an email at managing@thebeaveronline. co.uk for more information.

RAG Week 2016 Raises £28,000 David Zhao RAG President

WHAT A WELCOME WEEK. We ate. We raised over £28,000 for charity. We most certainly repeated in the first LSE welcome week to last for five electrifying nights. And now it’s definitely time to catch up on some much needed sleep but before everyone descends into their first nap in Peacock for the new school year, lets do a RAG roundup of the staggering number of triumphs welcome week has brought.

Sunday was LSE’s first ever Sunday icebreaker event at Tiger Tiger. You came out in force for a very big opening night that set the tone for the entire week.

If you’re a fresher, go thank your halls committee for putting on pre-drinks, corralling you to

and from the venue, and probably saving a few of you from a grim time in A&E. Monday saw no drop off in attendance unlike the lectures you will swarm to these few weeks but will deliberately ignore by week six. As your first experience with the saucy venue we hope you had a positive introduction to a place you’ll spend a lot of your time in over your tenure at LSE. Tuesday, with Coronet’s massive stage, some top notch MCing and judging from your sabbatical team, great performances from all of the competing halls, and one of the closest dance-offs in recent history, was an unmitigated success. Although Passfield’s Hotline Bling made the crowd sway to the beat, Bankside’s Single Ladies

lift hands in the air, and Rosebery’s Uptown Funk energize the masses, Carr-Saunders prevailed in the end and took home the coveted title of Battle of the Halls Champion 2016.

If on Wednesday morning you didn’t wake up hoarse - did you even go to Battle of the Halls? That morning, everyone combatted extreme hangovers and crushing exhaustion to dress to the nines for the formal at Shaka Zulu. I know by this point in the week, I ate a salad for the express purpose of having something that wasn’t actively trying to destroy my body.

And Thursday, the big one, had 2000 people walk through the doors of EGG for the first ever act on a RAG Pack, Charlie Sloth. Freshers, secondyears, third-years, everyone was

there. There was no better way to end the most successful week of RAG fundraising ever.

To sign off, a massive thanks to the entire RAG committee for keeping a vigilant eye on the entire week and weathering the crises that emerged. And above all else, my most heartfelt appreciation to the mastermind behind the most successful fresher’s week in LSE history— Richard Adkins—and the communications team that among other achievements had a subtwo-minute response time to questions on Facebook—Valentin Wiesner and Tasha Davies.

Without each of you this week wouldn’t have been possible.

I couldn’t ask for a better start to the year. Now onto Thursday at XOYO. Big RAG Love.

News | 3

Section Editor: Joseph Briers Deputy Editor: Bhadra Sreejith

Pollution Leads to Exam Flops Bhadra Sreejith Deputy News Editor

rying reading for LSE students who live in a city where pollution levels regularly exceed the legal limit.

The second point raised is that it is actually harming students from more disadvantaged backgrounds.

They also found that the parts of cities most exposed to pollution were the poorest areas of cities,

and therefore underprivileged students were the most likely to be affected, leading to further socioeconomic inequality.

The LSE itself has seen a shift to more modular forms of assessment, with the introduction of January exams for the Economics department.

News

THE EXAMINATION SYSTEM in the UK relies heavily on highstakes testing in the form of GCSEs and A-Levels. These exams, which tens of thousands of students take each year, determine test scores, university places, and by extension, long-term educational attainment and earnings.

Worryingly, an LSE study has revealed the negative impact of random events such as ambient pollution on exam scores. The results showed that an exposure to a tiny amount of pollution (10 units of AQI) during exams was associated with a 2.1% decline in monthly earnings in adulthood, controlling for other factors.

The report raised two points; firstly, that high-stakes exams are not the best way of testing knowledge, something that educators have consisently argued. They argue that a student’s entire academic progress can be determined by how they perform on one day. Researchers found that students who

sat exams on high pollution days had a greater chance of failing and not obtaining a place at university.

“Students who took their matriculation exams on high pollution days have significantly worse academic and economic outcomes even a decade after the exam,” Dr Roth added. This will surely make wor-

4

| Tuesday 27 September, 2016

LSE Academics Set for Pay Rise After Report Finds Embarassing Gender Gap Joseph Briers News Editor WITH DAME MINOUCHE Shafik confirmed as LSE’s first female, BME director, school heads might be excused for at least briefly basking in the contribution to female advancement. However, any sense of major achievement will have been dealt a swift blow by a new report from the School’s ‘Equity, Inclusion, and Diversity Taskforce’ (EDI). Research by Professor of Economics, Oriana Bandiera, has uncovered a considerable and growing pay gap between male and female academics at the LSE. Professor Bandiera found that female academics at LSE currently earn 11% less than their male counterparts of similar age, experience, and productivity. Even more troubling is the news that this gap has been widening since 1998. Professor Bandiera told the Times Educational Supplement that “there should be no pay gap if people are of similar ability and experience; there is no reason why women should be paid any less... but I am happy that we are having serious conversations about these things. Bandiera has described the findings as more perturbing than

they are surprising. She explains that the discrepancy in earnings can be explained as a result of a combination of the fact that men are more mobile (allowing them to compete for more jobs) and the reality that women are still massively undervalued by high paying and prestigious faculties such as economics. Bandiera claims, “It’s a lot more credible for a man to say: ‘Stanford made me an offer; I’m going,’”.

The inequality by no means ends with simple salary differentials. The study also found that, for many of LSE’s female academics, it is a long, hard, slog to the top. Whereas, after spending 15 years at the institution, 24% of men will become professors, the figure more than halves for women with only 11% attaining full professorship. It is this inequality in promotion opportunities, Bandiera argues, that has lead to the pay gap growing from 3% in 1998 to 11% in 2014. Furthermore, once women reach the upper echelons of academia, they face an even steeper discrepancy in their earnings when compared to male counterparts.

Professor Bandiera found that pay inequality is particularly pronounced amongst top earners with women in the 90th percentile

bringing home 30% less than men in the same position.

Interim Director Julia Black has moved to address the inequity faced by her female academic staff.

Nominations for pay rises will be handled with a “particular but not exclusive focus on women” and a

IN ONE OF THE MORE predictable news stories you may have missed over the summer, the LSE ranked 155th of 160 higher education institutions in the UK for student satisfaction. The dissatisfaction of our student body, and the almost complete incongruence between what the School says about student satisfaction and what it actually does, will not come as a surprise to most at LSE. The LSE is only the 97th largest university in the UK by enrollment, and yet its endowment is the 7th largest in the country. The six universities with larger endowments have, without exception, more students enrolled in courses and it is not clear how management at the LSE have failed to use their resources to provide a broad, enjoyable experience for those studying here.

The school has acknowledged its poor performance, and

said that it is taking urgent steps to rectify problems - most notably with an £11m investment into teaching and learning over the next 3 years. In real terms, this equates to a spending increase of around £350 per year; hardly impressive when the minimum cost for a year’s tuition which stands at £9,000 is likely to rise in the future. It seems less impressive still when compared to the £123m ‘centre buildings redevelopment’. The school is right to state that these buildings are not

Busayo Twins @busayo_twins sitting here thinking whether @Nike does wedding dresses

Craig Calhoun @craigjcalhoun school spokesperson told the TES If there are still thinking that it would be taking decisive people supporting Donald action”. “This process to reduce Trump, please think again. pay inequity will be accompanied by additional work to address other factors affecting recruitment, Craig Calhoun promotion and retention at the @craigjcalhoun school”, the LSE said.

Door off an LAX Men’s room.

Ominous.

Liam Hill @liamjlhill Future money has arrived.

Breaking News: LSE Students Still Fed Up Greg Sproston Managing Editor

TWEETS OF THE WEEK

fit for purpose and ‘perform poorly as academic offices and as teaching spaces’, but the location teaching takes place in is far down the list of priorities for most LSE students at a time when the quality of teaching and assessment varies wildly across departments, and in an environment where it can take weeks to receive mental health support and pastoral care.

In addition to the National Student Survey, plummeting standards have been acknowledge by The

Guardian’s University League Table has seen the LSE drop from 3rd to 13th in 3 years, based largely on a poor student experience and dissatisfied learners.

Despite upbeat rhetoric, it is not entirely clear that the LSE is taking these surveys seriously. The lived experiences of the student body at large is becoming an embarrassment to the institution; addressing the disparity should be top of the agenda for senior management for the coming year and beyond.

BEAVER ELECTIONS! The Beaver is looking for section Editors to join our Editorial board! Positions up for grabs include: 2x News Editors 1x Sports Editor 1x Part B Editor 1x Collective Chair 2x Features Deputy Editors 2xComment Deputy Editors 2x News Deputy Editors 1x Online Deputy Editor Please send in a manifesto for the position you are applying for to collective@ t h eb e a ve ro n l i n e. c o. u k , outlining your relevant experience and ability to contribute towards your respective role, by midnight on Sunday 9th October.

Oscar Winner, Professor,Baroness?

Jolie reportedly eyes up Peerage Joseph Briers News Editor

LSE VISITING PROFESSOR Angelina Jolie has set her sights on a peerage if reports from her unofficial biographer, Ian Halperin, are to be believed.

According to Halperin, Professor Jolie, who is due to begin teaching on LSE’s Women and Conflict Masters course this autumn, has once again enlisted the help of close friend and LSE Alumna Lady Arminka Helic in helping her shimmy up the political ladder.

It has been reported that Lady Helic has been instrumental in Jolie’s foray into foreign affairs and is now working on winning the Academy Award Winner and UN Ambassador a seat in the House of Lords. Not

content with her insignia of an Honorary Dame Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of St Michael and St George, UN ambassadorship, and honorary professorship, Angie is reportedly looking to join her LSE colleague William Hague in bagging a peerage.

Jolie’s fulfilment of the UK residency requirement suddenly seems far more feasible given the combination of her teaching role in London and her well-publicised divorce from fellow Hollywood heavyweight Brad Pitt. The scene looks set for Prof Jolie’s ascension to Parliament’s grandest chamber.

Having already been awarded a Damehood for her services to British foreign policy for her work on the abuse of women in conflict zones, she could doubtless make a strong argument for her having demonstrated “outstanding

personal qualities” - another requirement for nomination.

The actress and charity worker has built up an impressive network of political contacts in the United Kingdom. She has previously co-chaired a summit with Lord Hague and the two worked together regularly during the final years of his tenure as Foreign Secretary.

Hague’s former aide, Chloe Dalton, now works for Jolie’s Charity alongside former government policy adviser Lady Helic. The pair have been described as her ‘righthand women’. The disturbingly accomplished Jolie has said she we will be doing ‘a lot less acting’ and her time at the LSE looks as if it will coincide with an important stage in the development of her burgeoning political profile.

THE COMMON PERCEPTION is that the Olympic Games have little to no net benefit for the host city, with its main outcome being a massive depletion in the city’s funds. Most academic studies back this up, concluding that in most cases the Olympics lose the host city money.

However, a recent LSE study, “The Host with the Most? The Effects of the Olympic Games on Happiness” has found that the 2012 Olympic Games caused an increase in happiness among Londoners.

The researchers came to this

conclusion by using measures of subjective well being, and “focusing on intangibles such as inspiring a generation of children and young people, community engagement, and enthusiasm for volunteering”.

Paul Dolan, Professor of Behavioural Science at LSE, found that Londoners were happier than Parisians and Berliners during the 2012 games, but this was short-lived, and levels of happiness returned to the status quo during the following year.

The greatest increase in happiness was seen during the opening and closing ceremonies.

The London Olympics cost approximately $15 billion, compared to the $4.6 billion that

the games cost the people of Rio. However, the stimulus to the construction sector that the London Olympics provided can be argued to have generated benefits—for example, developments such as Westfield were instrumental in the regeneration in East London. In addition, the Olympic facilities have subsequently been re-used in London. The Olympic stadium, for example, has been controversially converted (at not insignificant cost to the taxpayer) into a 60,000 seat football stadium and is now home to Premiership side West Ham United.

Despite all this, economists such as Andrew Zimablist still argue that there isn’t enough

News In Brief Kill Cats, Says US Academic Dr Peter Marra, a US academic, has written a book in which he recommends that all stray felines should be eradicated unless they can be found a home, because of the huge numbers of birds they kill.

Domestic cats, he writes, should be kept indoors or on a lead to stop the impact they have on wildlife, and to protect them from catching disease from other animals. He endorses the removal of “all free-ranging cats from the landscape by any means necessary”. A spokeswoman from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds rejected Marra’s conclusions about the impact of cats on Britain’s birdlife, saying that there is no evidence that cats are the main cause of decline in any bird species in the UK.

Did the 2012 Olympics Make Londoners Happy? More so than the French, but not for long Bhadra Sreejith Deputy News Editor

News | 5

evidence to show that the costs of the Olympics are made up over time. The Host with the Most concludes that “the evidence to date suggests that the Olympics do not have a significant economic benefit to the host city”, but there is a positive well being effect on local residents during the hosting of the games, although it does not last long.

However, with former Prime Minister David Cameron’s happiness survey showing that people living in London have the lowest life satisfaction and highest anxiety levels of anywhere in the UK, perhaps London was in desperate need of all the help it received from the Olympics.

LSE Academic finds prominent anti-Muslim bias amongst Europeans Dr Hangartner of LSE Government revealed a prominent anti-Muslim bias amongst Europeans of all ages and backgrounds. A large-scale survey experiment which aimed to understand the type of asylumseeker European citizens were willing to accept found that the factors affecting the success of an asylum bid were the expected economic potential of an individual, whether or not they were fleeing persecution, and whether or not the refugees were Muslim. Muslim asylum-seekers were 11 percentage points less likely to be accepted when compared to Christian asylum-seekers of similar background. Country of origin played only a minor role in generating support.

Schulz uses LSE Speech to Slam ‘nasty’ Referendum In a speech at the LSE last week, President of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, lambasted the bad nature of the campaign for Britain to leave the European Union. “Who would have anticipated precisely what came next? That the campaign would get so nasty that a Member of the UK Parliament, Jo Cox, would be brutally murdered, in broad daylight, for her political convictions?” said Schulz.

Predictably, Brexiteers including Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg were quick to voice their outrage at what they saw as the ‘trivialising’ of Mrs Cox’s death.

| Tuesday 27 September, 2016

MPs must now back Corbyn

Now the leadership circus is over, Labour must unite behind Corbyn.

Frank Morley Comment Editor

Section Editors: Frank Morley Hakan Ustabas Deputy Editors: Vacant

ON SATURDAY, JEREMY Corbyn won 62% of the vote in a landslide victory against his challenger, Owen Smith, for the Labour leadership election. The result shows once and for all, if anyone was in doubt, that Labour members categorically back Corbyn and his vision for the Labour Party and the country. It is a plain fact that Labour MPs for the past year have failed to grasp. Even with Corbyn’s original mandate of 59% last year, for the past 12 months MPs have systematically attacked his leadership, from votes on the Syrian airstrikes to a vote of no confidence in the aftermath of Brexit. Foreign intervention in the Middle East is a policy area which tarnished the New Labour years in the eyes of many voters and longstanding party activists ,and one which Corbyn was elected to oppose as well, is just one example of the hypocrisy of those on the Labour right who justified bombing ISIS in much the same language in which they justified invading Iraq.

Comment

6

“His... policies are backed by the British people by large majorities.”

New Labour MPs sit in their safe seats in Westminster, under the protection of the National Executive Committee that prevents them from being de-selected, a lack of accountability which allows them to be wildly out of touch with the values of real people within the party. Owen Smith’s own local Labour Party constituency endorsed Jeremy Corbyn. It begs the question- who is he representing? Maybe his own imagined view of what New Labour thinks the British public would elect, but it is impossible to believe that they have any idea what the British public actually want when they backed Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown. Corbyn, on the other hand, is a person the

British people could back given, if he’s given the chance actually connect to any video of Corbyn’s daily routine, meeting people in the real world outside Westminster and press conferences, can attest to him being a principled and decent man.

“Corbyn... needs to convince people to vote on economic issues over social ones.”

As for Corbyn’s ‘extremist’ policies... Trident is no way independent as it is reliant on American infrastructure. It would destroy life on earth if ever used. It is not needed in industrialised nations like Japan and Germany. And it is costing billions while the government cuts the disability living allowance, and abolishing Trident is considered ‘extreme’. His not so ‘radical’ policies are backed by the British people by large majorities. These include raising the minimum wage to £10, renationalising railways, water and other utilities, and a 60p tax rate for income over £150,000.

(61%, 58%, and 52% respectively, with less than 23% in each “opposing”, YouGov 06/08/2015).

A charge levelled against Corbyn in this leadership election is that he failed to convince enough of the public and Labour voters to switch to remain. This is misguided considering the majority of newspapers backed Brexit and have been fear-mongering about immigration for the past few decades. Secondly, global capitalism has impoverished vast swathes of this country, reducing education and political understanding, which are bulwarks against prejudice. These two factors created a ripe ground for the likes of Farage and Johnson to spread misinformation, most infamously the lie about an extra £350 million being able to be spent on the NHS. The idea that Jeremy Corbyn, against a flush of propaganda from the ma-

Photo Credit: Wikimedia, 2013.

jor newspapers, misinformation, and a lack of social citizenship among British people generally, could simply convince Brexit voters to change their minds is absurd.

Britain on economic policy is a left wing nation, yet majorities of people support right wing UKIP style social policies (see poll above). The rise of the far right is not a problem that neo-liberalism, Hillary Clinton, liberal elites, the Conservative Party, or many future LSE alumni can fix, for that group through its mismanagement of the economy helped create the problem. The only way is to go back to the tried and tested methods of social democracy pioneered by Roosevelt and Atlee, where the working and middle classes prospered, university was free, and there were no major financial crashes. Corbyn already has the British public backing his policies; he simply needs to convince people to vote on economic issues over social ones, to vote with their head and not their prejudice. Ironically it was Bill Clinton whose campaign slogan understood this; ‘It’s the Economy, Stupid!’

Brexit, by showing how fundamentally decayed our social fabric has become through neoliberalism, is ever more of a reason

to support Corbyn. But without party unity, a Labour government in 2020 or 2017 is an impossible dream. Before the leadership election Labour was starting to draw near to the Conservatives and even overtaking them in many polls.

Since the renewed post Brexit attack on Corbyn by the media and the establishment, legitimised by the leadership campaign and attacks from within his own party, this lead has shrunk considerably. This shows above anything else that the party is shooting itself in the foot.

“Corbyn has received an unprecedented second mandate and is stronger than ever.”

For the past year infighting has reduced Labour’s chances.

But Corbyn has received an unprecedented second mandate and is stronger than ever. The reasons to support Corbyn are clear; the time to support him is now. The Party can win with him, but it must be united in order to do so.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia, 2015.

The Disunited Kingdom

Comment | 7

Why Brexit could lead to the breakup of the UK, and why that could be positive Giorgio Cacciaguerra Ranghieri HAVING LIVED IN THE United Kingdom for a little over 6 years, I have seen a great change in the way people in this sceptred Isle identify and see themselves. From what had previously been a United Kingdom, or a grand imperial enterprise which ruled the seas and the terra firma, arose a patchwork of different tribes and nations that for some reason no longer got along very well, nor saw each other eye to eye. British identity was once strong and majestic, and demonstrated what small nations could do together when they united and fought for shared values and interests. I was therefore shocked to see how the Scots were rubbished by a band of snobbish Notting Hill conservatives in the aftermath of their independence referendum.

Indeed, the build-up and aftermath of the Scottish and EU referendums gave me pause to think about the nature of the United Kingdom and where it is going.

“Brexit has revealed the patchwork of different tribes and nations that for some reason no longer get along very well.”

David Cameron’s speech the day after the referendum showed how the Conservative establishment couldn’t care less about Scottish nationalists and their concerns about political representation. His cabinet instead would carry on as if nothing happened, with permanent austerity, and continuous support for nuclear deterrents and benefit caps; all while alienating half of the population of Scotland. Never have I seen in a democratic country a political establishment so distant and unwilling to compromise with the wishes of a troublesome region on the verge of secession, which in this case is a historical nation in its own right. This demonstrated that a southern, genteel and suburbanbased, political constituency could afford to be so distant from the concerns of an entire demographic, only because the Conservatives had no seats to gain from Scotland in the next elections and they could win them without Scottish support. More so, they easily played the Scots’ demands as a political chip to whip fear among English voters and thus win a majority of seats in that country.

Undoubtedly, this was a politically

successful move, yet Britain might pay the price for such political expediency, as the country’s OneNation Conservatism is evidently only a farce aimed at perpetuating the control of the elites and to the benefit of ‘one nation’, England, especially its lower geographic tier.

All the talk of national sovereignty and democracy amongst Brexiteers is therefore a bit ludicrous when it is possible for a nation such as Scotland to be dragged out of a multilateral arrangement against its own wishes. This shows how misplaced their love for sovereignty is, and how unwilling they are to acknowledge the concerns of the Scots and the United kingdom’s own democratic deficit. Indeed, the possibility of having a nation’s interests outvoted on one hand, and at the same time having 59 Scottish MPs vote on English laws, makes the current arrangement a recipe for continuous national unhappiness, both for the English and the Scots. As demonstrated

by Brexit, where its final terms might in the end be frustrated by the intransigence of the Scottish leadership, potentially to the great disappointment of many English voters while the Scots had been disappointed even before the negotiations began.

If anything, the whole Brexit debacle should give Britons pause for thought on whether their union is worth preserving. Britain, having lost its empire, having lost its transcontinental trade links and also much of its industry, has made the raison d’etre behind the union go adrift as the imperial enterprise that justified it no longer favours its main constituting parts.

Instead, Britons ought to truly embrace their national identities, while shedding all illusions of a transcontinental identity facilitated by a vast anglosphere, which perturbs the thinking of many in the country’s establishment and is a constant source of grand disappointment. Indeed, so badly torn are the English, between those that express their Englishness loudly, which in turn are derided by those who extoll Britishness, who still subconsciously perceive it as an extension of English power.

Indeed, at the root of both little Englanders and grand imperial nostalgia, is a certain unease with present identities, which makes people long for glories past and fear foreign threats, whether they are leftist Scots or European Commissioners.

However, Brexit might have unintended but positive results and maybe the time has come to let the English and Scottish lions roar and finally have the Scots be Scots and the English be English. The time has come to shed a national British identity, which sits uneasily between the resurgent Englishness and Scottishness, and has increasingly

become the preserve of mainly marginalised ethnic minorities.

Beyond truly repatriating sovereign powers, the dissolution of the United Kingdom might have a few positive externalities; for one, Scotland might be able to preserve and build upon its social-democratic model and progressive political culture. Scottish and English identities might also become more civic and inclusive, task that has until now been relegated to a diminishing British identity.

Interestingly, the creation of an independent Scotland might turn it into a Northern magnet helping capital move from the South of

abroad as some of the EU capital which bloated London exuberantly is repatriated, partly as a result of the negative effects of Brexit. As some of the capital leaves London, so will some of the EU citizens in the capital region, having as an effect of making London more “English” and taking out some of its metropolitan allure that stood out so much from the rest of the country during the referendum, reducing stark differences. Making London a national capital, instead of a global capital might make England a more coherent national unit at greater ease with itself, devoid of the pretensions of grandeur

opportunities. The consequence of this, would be that Britain would now host two outward looking nations, as both England and Scotland become two progressive Northern European countries akin and linked to the Netherlands and Scandinavia. England and Scotland would maintain an unshakable bond and would be the closest of allies given their similarities and shared heritage. Whereas it very likely that an independent Scotland will stay in the EU, or quickly re-join it, an independent England might follow suit for the sake of European and British unity, changing politics and economic self-interest after they realise the full implications of Brexit. And what about the Irish? Indeed, after Scotland gains independence, Ulster protestants might start reconsidering their British identity, as their main historical link to Britain has severed itself from Westminster, dealing a deadly blow to Unionism. This is bound to strengthen the National

“Britons ought to truly embrace their national identities, while shedding all illusions of a transcontinental identity.”

Photo credit: Wikipedia Commons

England to the North, as English businesses move close to the border in order to better serve the Scottish market while Scottish capital drifts South to make use of the skills and infrastructure in the north of England, with Scotland becoming a veritable centre as opposed to merely a periphery and positive synergies develop. Brexit and the break-up of the union might have a positive impact on England, as it might take some of the shine off the oversized capital city that is London, and recalibrate some of its resources northwards and

“The time has come to shed a national British identity, which sits uneasily between the resurgent Englishness and Scottishness”

and its trappings that alienated many of its own inhabitants. And maybe, as Alex Salmond and Billy Bragg hope, the English will get reacquainted with their own forms of radicalism as England decentralises and the establishment’s imperial pretensions which fed high tory culture are dealt a blow and are starved of some of their geopolitical and economic clout.

Indeed, one might hope for a progressive backlash in the aftermath of Brexit and Scottish independence. As the toll of conservative policies becomes clear and the English start exploring new forms of politics, potentially inspired by the Scottish experience, they might introduce a more proportional electoral system, bringing about the political realignments necessary to develop an equitable political system, without a cynical Conservative Party and a Labour Party prone to entryism. As a result, it is not inconceivable that England might also pursue more progressive policies in the medium run, redistributing wealth and

side, which would eventually facilitate Irish reunification. As for Wales, its earlier and currently more complete integration with England makes any prospect of Welsh independence very unlikely.

It is clear that important economic and institutional issues will have to be settled in the meantime as it is yet unclear what the terms of the Brexit will be, and how it might affect these Isles, but the constitutional questions that will arise might lead these people to ponder different, yet close destinies, despite the costs and transitional pains. As we have now seen, occasionally passions and identities may trump economic self-interest, which provides the post-Brexit age with a blank canvass that ought to be fully seized by the people of Britain. Unwittingly, Brexit might bring about the end of a moribund union, and reignite this Isle with the energy and originality of the English and Scottish people, which in turn might resuscitate and reform that other, looser, but certainly not less moribund Union that is the EU, which only a progressive Britain without the Conservatives can.

| Tuesday 27 September, 2016

Freshers

8

From top to bottom; Icebreaker at Tiger Tiger, Freshers Formal at Shaka Zulu, Clockwise from left; Tiger Tiger, Battle of the Halls at Coronet, Coronet, freshers Fun House at The Venue.

Gotta catch ’em all! 10 types of Freshers and where to catch ’em on campus!

The Lightweights Abilities : Act like Tarzan, drink like Jane.

Weakness : Dropping like ninepins after three beers.

Catch ’em at : Saucy

The Mummy’s Boys & Daddy’s Girls Abilities : Single-mindedly following parental instructions to take vitamins, stay sober, etc.

Weakness : Mummy & Daddy.

Duh. Catch ’em at : LSE Library.

The “Lets be Bezzie Mates”

The Budding BNOCs

Abilities : Will befriend you faster than Garfield finds lasagne.

Abilities : Entering LSE with a bang, leaving with a whimper.

Weakness : Freshers in every shape and form.

Weakness : SU Sabbs, Sports captains, Society Presidents, Editor of the Beaver.

Catch ’em at : LSE Halls.

Catch ’em at : ZOO Bar.

The Really Hot Freshers

The Stoners

Abilities : Can physically stun you with just one look.

Abilities : Smoking so much weed that even Brexit & Corbyn’s re-election make sense.

Weakness : Third year students.

Catch ’em at : Beaver Give it a Go session on Oct 7th at the Venue (see what we did there ;) The Fancy Dress Freshers Abilities : Will attempt outfits that even Lady Gaga and Elton John would think twice about.

Weakness : Any and all themed costume events.

Weakness : Perpetually squinting like they’re trying to find Waldo.

Catch ’em at: Lincolns Inn Fields.

The Judgmental Postgrads Abilities : Emitting rays of pure condescension while maintaining a perfect resting bitch face.

Weakness : The Really Hot Freshers.

Catch ’em at : Houghton Street.

Catch ’em at : The 3 Tuns.

The Public School Boys

The Solitudinarians

Abilities : Morphing from English gent to English bulldog at will.

Abilities : Powers of invisibility and stealth movement.

Weakness : Mistakenly believing they can get more ass than a toilet seat.

Weakness : The Shaw Library.

Catch ’em at : George IV Pub.

Catch ’em at : SSH Rooftop.

10 | Tuesday 27 September, 2016

PARTB

14

SOCIETIES THE ARTS @ LSE Film Society Fact: there is no human being on the planet who truly dislikes watching films. There are people who think they dislike watching films, where in reality they have simply not seen the right films for them; there are Amazonian tribespeople who don’t know what films are – and then there is the rest of the human population who love the thrill of watching a good story unfold on the silver screen.

Because of this, I urge anyone and everyone to become a member of the LSESU Film Society. We will be showing two films per week – on campus and free to attend. In addition, we’ll also run cinema outings and offer a trip to an international film festival. All these events are great opportunities to meet and get to know people. Film brings people together: whether it be a friendship through mutual love of Space Jam or a romance through a viewing of The Notebook.

We, as committee members, will strive to create an atmosphere as open and inclusive as possible (even to fans of Michael Bay).

To those who love watching films: Film Soc offers ways to see more, and also to meet like-minded people with whom you can discuss, chat, and make friends. To those who think they dislike watching films: come along, see some more movies and be proved wrong. There is always more to learn: from films and from people.

Come to our Give It A Go screening on Friday 30th September, 7pm (we will be showing a film voted for at the Welcome Fair). We look forward to seeing all of you soon!

Fashion Society LSE Fashion Society is gearing up for another year of incredible events, for both the fashion gurus and those who want to dabble in the most exciting industry in London.

The committee this year are working hard on creating a range of events, throughout the year, to help students network and explore the best parts of London’s fashion scene. London has so much offer and we are keen to provide a selection of the best events to the society members, be it attending the Vivienne Westwood speech at LSE or our networking/AGM session on top of the Saw Swee Hock Centre, we are keen to hit the ground running!

And we haven’t even touched on the RAG Fashion Show we will host next year. This year we hope to provide a more inclusive and welcoming fashion show, and anyone interested in helping with organization, planning or even walking in the show should keep an eye on our social media pages to receive the latest updates. We already have a number of designers interested in showcasing some truly gorgeous collections, and can’t wait to reveal more – watch this space!

Over the next few weeks we will be working on a calendar of events and do make sure to stop by our Freshers Fair stall to say hi,meet the committee and grab some goodies, including a personalized polaroid!

We look forward to meeting you all and showing you what we have planned.

We will be showcasing more of LSESU’s Arts’ Societies in the coming weeks.

part

B

editorial team PartB Editor

Fashion

Flo Edwards

Jamie Lloyd Maria Maleeva Music Rob Funnell Will Locke

Film

Food & Lifestyle

Literature

Sarah Ku Alexander Lye Camila Arias Tom Sayner Caroline Schurman-Grenier Buritica Sean Tan Visual Arts Technology Theatre Edward Tan

Noah D’Aeth

Hanna Lee Yo-en Chin

11

FRESHERS

Five things to do in your first five days in London Ellie Peake So it’s the first proper day. You probably said your final goodbye to your mum this morning in the middle of a Sainsbury’s local while she was buying you your very own marmite and basmati rice. Shit just got real. You walk back to Halls, alone and deflated. But fear not, we have some culture bashing to ease the pain. You don’t need to feel guilty either because this is probably the richest your gunna be for the next 3 years, you can definitely afford it.

Monday - Saatchi Gallery You’re new here, you’re an incubated egg still. So lets not get crazy with the culture at first. If you need to get out and experience some London, let it be the Saatchi. It’s free, it’s fun and it’s funky.

And it also has a gigantic oil room installation and tapestries made of human hair. It’s accessible modern art. I mean why not get a kale and avocado smoothie on your way out just for the hell of it

Tuesday - Angel Comedy Club After yesterday you’ll may want some laughs. However, you’ve probably just spent a disgusting amount in Pret. So if you’re feeling a bit economically vulnerable, take a trip to the Angel Comedy Club. Every Tuesday from 8pm they have acts on from Edinburgh Fringe. Lets be honest, Scala is shit and awkward so you may as well laugh at someone else rather than yourself. Again, it’s free.

Wednesday - Route 24: Pimlico - Hampstead The 24 has been driving past London’s most iconic spots since 1912 and is London’s oldest, most unchanged bus route which a collection of historic film locations. For this reason, it’s pretty cool.

Board at the very start — Grosvenor Terrace in Pimlico — and ride along the Thames. See Battersea Power Station, before Parliament Square, Horseguards and Trafalgar Square. Up Tottenham Court Road to Camden, you’ll go past Mornington Crescent. The bus climbs through Chalk Farm up to Hampstead Heath, where much of Monty Python and the Holy Grail and The Omen was filmed.

Essentially, screw all the over priced tourist shit.

Thursday - Pillow Cinema Get a glimpse at the essence of Shoreditch; kitschy and overpriced but ya know, kinda cool. It’s a cinema under a train bridge with bean bags and blankets. So if you have ever been tucked up on the sofa watching a film but wishing you were doing it somewhere else, this is the perfect thing for you. We are just another cog in this consumerist machine after all.

Friday - Canavans Probably time to sack off the Freshers nights now, you’ve paid your dues. You’ve worn a branded Facebook tshirt with your name on the back. It’s time. Venture south of the river and catch a glimpse of London gentrification at its peak. Canavans isn’t a replacement for Fabric but it should be.On friday it is serving something self-defined as ‘weirdo house’; make of that what you will.

‘Charmingly retro’ Pool house by day and night club by night, be sure to wear your choker. £5 entry.

12 Tuesday September 27th, 2016

Sub-Prime Car Loans: People Getting Ripped Off Again The economic malfeasance preceding the 2008 global crash is re-emerging anew.

Ahan Varkey Undergraduate student

Features

Section Editors: Daniel Shears Stefanos Argyros

Many people need a car. Public transport in most cities can be both unreliable and expensive.

Add to that drastically increasing commuting distances, and the car becomes very much a modern necessity. However, it can be an expensive one, with safe and reliable vehicles often costing thousands. So, many consumers who purchase cars do so on some kind of financing plan.

Ostensibly, this is a service that allows low-income individuals to purchase vehicles that significantly reduce their commuting times, allowing them to spend more time at home and at work. Of course, the majority of consumers who take out car loans do so at reasonable rates that allow them to drive a car they would otherwise be unable to afford.

For the most part, auto lending provides credit to people who need it, stimulating demand and benefitting the economy as a whole.

However, for the poorest segment of the car-owning population - those with bad credit scores and bankruptcy risk, there exists a separate kind of financing plan; one that is known as a ‘sub-prime loan’. These loans are given out to the riskiest of borrowers, and often come with astronomically high rates of interest, which forces people to pay well over the market price for their cars. For example, the average interest rate in a buy-here-pay-here auto dealer is 19%, with some people being charged as much as 29% (another example of things

being more expensive for poor people). Couple exploitative interest rates with add-ons and lock-ups, and many of the poorest consumers in the market are forced to pay up to three times the value for a vehicle. This example of corporate exploitation becomes even more damning when considering the fact that skyrocketing house prices in many of the world’s great cities have pushed people further and further from their place of work.

Therefore, in many cases, this makes a car a prerequisite for stable employment.

The poverty trap of subprime auto lending does not, however, end at purchase. Payment plans for such loans are usually highly restrictive, with repossessions often happening days after missed payments.

In the event of a repossession, customers are often charged a depreciation fee. This is incurred because the dealer deter mines that the value of the car when repossessed and payments made by the buyer is less than the initial value of the car. This means that even after their vehicle is repossessed, bankrupt customers still have to make payments.

Dealers have effectively found a way to make money regardless of whether payments are made, making the astronomically high rates of interest impossible to justify.

Unwitting customers who lack the legal savvy to see through exploitative contracts end up burdened with overpriced cars they need but cannot afford. Many borrowers end up trapped in debt, and sometimes lose their jobs. This suggests that there is a clear flaw in consumer protection leg-

islation. Further more, given that a car is often a prerequisite for employment, the subprime car loan industry is one that is in need of urgent regulation.

If the ter m ‘sub-prime’ sounds eerily familiar, it is because of the role that certain risky loans had to play in the catastrophic events of 2008 that culminated with the failure of Lehmann Brothers, and a global recession. Prior to the crisis, there was a boom in providing housing loans

“Unwittingcustomers who lack the legal savvy to see through exploitative contracts end up burdened with overpriced cars they need but cannot afford.” to individuals who were not credit-worthy i.e. sub-prime mortgages. These mortgages were then sold to Wall Street who repackaged them into different investment products to be sold to pension funds and investment banks. It was this process, called ‘securitisation’ that fatally under mined global financial stability. When the borrowers (who were given loans they couldn’t afford) defaulted on their debt, mortgage companies followed suit.

Suddenly, trillions of dollars worth of investments became worthless, and the macroeconomy was plunged into a state of chaos.

Fast forward 8 years and the economy has mostly recov-

ered. This is why many analysts are worried about the rise of what is known as sub-prime auto loan based collateralised debt obligations (which are investment products based on a pool of sub-prime car loans).

These are financial derivatives, the technical ter m for car loans that have been sold to Wall Street, bundled together with thousands of similar loans, and sold to high-value investors. In 2008, this process was happening with home loans and today it is happening with car loans. According to JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, it is a $27 billion market where “someone is going to get hurt”. The similarity to the financial crisis is uncanny. Back then, investors were wrongly betting that the size of the housing market would continue to grow in value, and today they are doing the same with car loans.

Of course, given the huge difference in the amount of money involved in car loans versus home loans, it is unlikely that sub-prime auto lending could impact the global economy as in 2008. However, for poor consumers who are saddled with debt, pension funds who invest in seemingly safe assets, and car companies who depend on lending to stimulate demand, there will be serious repercussions. Wall Street and the financial world often operate with little regard for the human cost of failed loans (their job is to worry about return on investment), and it is time the government stepped in to legislate on what is currently a moderately dangerous market.

Credit: www.pexels.com

Britain and The EU: A Fog of Uncertainty Theresa May must face a daunting set of challenges following Brexit Connor Mew Undergraduate student B R E X I T, A R T I C L E 5 0 , The Single Market, Trading Blocs, Immigration, Special Status; this is just a handful of some of the political buzzwords associated with Britain’s departure from the EU. We have been left wondering when Theresa May will really pull the trigger that is Article 50, what the immediate effects will be and most of all, when we can actually start to know what Brexit has done to us. The reality is that none of this will become clear in a short pace of time; it has become fairly evident that even our leaders in the Cabinet don’t have objective facts or knowledge on what will come out of the EU negotiations and talks with global leaders. We are now left asking ourselves what the UK will truly be like outside of the EU bloc and most importantly, how will we be governed as a country?

There has been much emphasis placed on the EU Single Market during recent debates. We are indeed justified in placing the focus on this. After all, the Single Market has been a powerful trading bloc that has

benefited the UK enormously.

The issue here is the following: will the aim of securing a tighter hold on immigration levels conflict with our continued participation within the Single Market? The aim of having a status which guarantees access to the trading bloc means ministerial negotiations will have to sell such a status to the EU in a very persuasive light; on the one hand, it will placate many of the remain voters who feared leaving the EU trading bloc, on the other hand, it may frustrate many leave voters whose decision was based on taking back full control of our borders so as to curb immigration levels.

An essential element of the EU Single Market is the free movement of labour and people within the bloc. At surface level, this would seem to be antithetical to the ideas underlying the Leave campaigns. However, the hope inside the House of Commons is that we can still benefit from having access to the market, whilst gaining greater control of immigration levels by negotiating a special status for the country. Unfortunately, it is very hard to say how likely we will be able to secure this sort of deal with the EU, especially since

Theresa May has adamantly repeated that ‘Brexit means Brexit’ (although just how much practical significance this has is unclear).

Throughout the narrative, we have also heard talks of policy models such as Canada or Australia as being potential

‘What we should be striving for is a structure that combines access to a large single market with strong grips on immigration levels’ paradigms for the UK to implement. However, the fact that the history and politics of these countries are so different could mean it may be very hard to move towards such a framework, despite commonwealth ties. As previously mentioned, what we should be striving for is a structure that combines access to a large single market with strong grips on immigration levels.

Unfortunately, such structures

are few and far between. Prime Minister Theresa May and the Cabinet may be very hard pushed to implement the perfect model they are aiming to achieve; we cannot guarantee that the EU will respond with open arms to our Single Market needs and wants.

Future predictions aside, what must be attained now is a clear, realistic plan for keeping Britain’s access to the Single Market open. If this goal seems unattainable to some in the context of halting immigration, perhaps it is high time we accept the benefits of the free movement of people and understand that immigration is a necessary corollary of Single Market access and is not a reason for us to panic.

On the contrary, immigration is an essential element of a thriving economy and we must not allow Brexit to negatively change how immigrants are received into the United Kingdom. So, what is May’s job in the context of current and future negotiations over our relationship with the EU? In essence, ensure that we continue to be a nation which attracts, not repels, skilled immigrants and one that still has access to the very advantageous Single Market that is the EU bloc.

Spain : A year without a Government New elections are looming in the face of a bitterly divided political scene Eponine Howarth Undergraduate student

in Spanish newspaper El País on September 11th 2016 in an article entitled ‘Una amplia mayoría de españoles rechaza que haya nuevas

‘Politicians are unable to find common ground despite a strong demand for multipartism’ elecciones’ (‘A large majority of Spaniards reject the idea of new elections’), 71% of the Spanish population indeed resent the prospect of holding new elections.

People feel that there is a deadlock because politicians are unable to find common ground despite a strong demand for multipartism.

The Economist blames the Socialist leader Pedro Sánchez, because ‘his 85 deputies hold the balance of power’. The weekly magazine believes Pedro Sá nchez could be optimist about a third election, as some former PP officials will be facing trial for corruption in the months to come.

However, polls on Metroscopia rather seem to indicate that a third round of elections would favour

the PP above all and hold a record of non-participation. Sánchez, on his side, continues to accuse the PP of corruption and blames Rajoy for the austerity policies he has undertaken. The exPrime Minister, Felipe González, suggested changing the candidates if third elections were actually to be held.

In the meanwhile, Spain has definitely distanced itself from the traditional bipartisanship that had characterised the transition to democracy in the post-Franco years. The rise of alternative parties such as Podemos (‘We Can’), established in 2014 after the recession and Ciudadanos, firmly opposing Catalan nationalism, have both profoundly changed Spanish politics. Although the country is slowly recovering from the economic crisis, the unemployment rate still remains very high (around 20%, and close to 45% for youth unemployment).

Disagreements about forming a coalition will essentially continue to revolve around the ways of orchestrating the economic recovery of the country and the burning question of Catalonian independence.

The Pocket Philosopher Unearthing our intuitions to improve rational debate.

Edmund Smith Undergraduate Student MUCH OF OUR ORDINARY technical thinking functions by easy appeal to intuitions. By this I simply mean that we often reason inside a network of unspoken assumptions as to what words mean, how concepts relate to one another, how we frame or contextualise various concepts, and which ‘brute facts’ we may rely upon. What unites these disparate kinds of intuition is that we are not typically aware of them. We may realise that we have them, and we may make our interlocutors aware of their own intuitions, but in general we assume them. We presuppose them when we make arguments and when we write papers, and most certainly when we engage in impromptu debates.

Of course, this works well just until we encounter other people whose intuitions differ from ours.

If we disagree at the level of our hidden intuitions, then we run the risk of fruitless conversations and debates.

I believe that arguments between new atheists and religious believers often serve as examples of this failure. Often, the disagreement is caused by a simple failure to say what is meant by words like ‘God’ and ‘salvation’.

But the disagreement can also be made irresolvable by assuming that the conversation is one about the truth of a certain body of claims, or by assuming that truth is a kind of link between the sentence and the world. I have a very simple plea not just for conversations about religion, but for all of our communal thinking, and it is this: we need to make a concerted effort to unearth our intuitions. When we all know what our intuitions are, we can talk about them. At the very least, we will know where and why we disagree.

Photo Credit: www.businessinsider.com

THE POLITICAL DEADLOCK in Spain continues as parties are unable to agree on the formation of any coalition after a general election in December 2015 and one in June 2016. After the most recent elections in June, the Conservative Party (PP - Partido Popular) failed to reach a majority, again.

The Partido Popular, however, managed to increase its proportion of votes from 29% to 33% (123 to 137 seats). Yet, it still remained short of the 176 seats needed in a congress of 350 deputies to govern the country. The truth is that the vote did not change much from last December. The Socialist Party (PSOE - Partido Socialista Obrero Español) managed to finish second, although its score decreased from 90 to 85 seats.

The ‘far-left’ party, Podemos, raised its vote count securing 71 seats (compared to 69 seats in the first elections). It was a deception for Pablo Iglesias’ party, as it had allied itself with the United Left (IU - Izquierda Unida) in this second round, hoping to overtake the Socialist party as the leading

party of the left. Seats also fell for Ciudadanos, the new centre party (from 40 to 32 seats).

In January, Mariano Rajoy, leader of the PP, had failed to build a coalition with Ciudadanos or the PSOE. Pedro Sánchez, leader of the PSOE, refuses a to form a coalition with the PP as long as Mariano Rajoy, the former Prime Minister, remains the leader of the right. Before the second elections, Sánchez had also failed to build a coalition with any of the other parties. Pablo Iglesias, leader of Podemos, would not ally himself to the Socialist party unless given a referendum in Catalonia. But, the PSOE will simply not have it, as many of its supporters back a united Spain. It also failed to build a coalition with Ciudadanos.

After these new elections in June, the stalemate continues. The PP, which again came first in the second elections, is still struggling to build any kind of coalition.

Spain has found itself without a government since December 20th 2015. Two general elections have gone by and a third round of elections seems likely at the moment because of the nature and extent of the political fragmentation that besets the country. According to Metroscopia results, published

Features | 13

Interested in writing for Features?

Email us at: features@ thebeaveronline.co.uk

14 | Tuesday 27 September 2016

Understanding Mental Health The poorest pay the price for the under resourcing of mental health care.

John Milnes-Smith & Stephanie Putsch LSE Undergraduates

The City

Section Editor: Alex Gray Deputy Editors: ‘ I H A D M Y M E N TA L Henry Mitchell breakdown in October. It is now March.

With LSE counselling services, I have had just four counselling sessions in five months. It seems almost irrelevant that [LSE counselling services] cap the counselling contact at six sessions as it is a challenge to even book six appointments across a whole academic year…’

With one in four people in the UK suffering from mental health problems each year, mental health is an issue with widespread consequences.This student’s complaint to the LSE Student Counselling Services at the beginning of this year provides just one small insight into a great but all too often silent crisis that is present not only on our campus, but throughout society as a whole. Understanding Inequality is a student led forum at LSE which aims to expand discussion and awareness of inequality, and has led workshops specifically on mental health. It has also used the mental health crisis to highlight a number of deep rooted inequalities, showing that those who are most vulnerable and disenfranchised are often those who are the most likely to suffer mental health problems.

Increasingly in the public eye, the true scale of the mental health crisis is shocking. According to the World Health Organisation, nearly a quarter of all the years of life lost due to ill-health, disability or early death are due to mental disorders, putting it above both cancer and cardiovascular illness. The economic costs also prove staggering;

according to the Mental Health Independent Task Force, dealing with mental health issues has economic and social costs of around £105 billion – that’s more than the entire annual expenditure for the NHS. Indeed, one need not look beyond LSE to see the extent of this crisis. The student quoted at the beginning of the article later argues that: “The environment of this university has a tendency to foster mental health issues. The university environment is one that is demanding, competitive, and involves extended periods of studying without contact time.” This criticism falls against the backdrop of a recent study from the NSPCC which shows the scale of mental health issues among young people, with 80,000 suffering from severe depression, and a growing number experiencing suicidal tendencies.

As well as being a major issue in and of itself, mental health has both highlighted and further compounded inequality in our society.

The Centre for Social Justice has argued that “poor mental health is both a cause and effect of social breakdown”, with the same patterns that lead to instances of poverty also further contributing to poor mental health. For example, often coming from socially unstable backgrounds, the percentage of homeless suffering from mental health problems stands at 45%, double that of the population as a whole. For this affected 45%, their mental health issues are then further exacerbated by harsh living conditions and, at times, issues of addiction.

Moreover, mental health issues serve to highlight racial di-

vides. Black and minority ethnic (BME) groups are three times more likely to suffer from psychosis, yet are 40% more likely than white people to be turned away by mental health services when seeking help. Furthermore, members of the BME community are up to 60% more likely to be admitted to hospital only after a criminal justice referral, meaning their mental health issues are only picked up after contact with law enforcement agencies. The discrimination BME communities face, partnered with the stigma many associate with mental health services, is such that the Centre for Social Justice argues there is a “high level of fear associated with mental health treatment” among these groups.

Yet despite the scale of the mental health crisis responses from universities, local authorities, and the national government have so far proven wanting. This is in part due to social stigma, lack of understanding, and poorly informed public conversation around the issue. At the LSE, there have been complaints from students about the counselling services regarding long waiting times, insufficient contact time and a poor quality of service.

These complaints have exposed the major discrepancies in what students expect in terms of pastoral care and what the university has so far been able to provide.

Outside the university, with its system of pastoral care, the gap between what is needed in terms of mental health support and what is provided by public services is even larger. In February of this year, the NHS Mental Health Taskforce reported that an extra £1 billion is

needed is needed by 2020/21 to provide the care needed by those suffering from mental health problems.

However, the mental health crisis cannot be solved by funding alone. The Centre for Social Justice argues that a large part of the solution comes in tackling the social causes of mental health issues; unemployment, lack of opportunities, discrimination and family breakdown. It seems that, in the same way that social inequality perpetuates the extent of mental health issues, a big step in dealing with mental health problems would involve the creation of a more equal, inclusive and fair society.

The mental health crisis is sadly just one challenge among many that we face in both university and society at large. Inequality comes in a multitude of forms, and it is not without sufficient awareness, discussion and understanding of such issues that we can hope to effectively tackle them. With an understanding of the need to further investigate such issue, ‘Understanding Inequality’ aims to address the inequality and discrimination experienced by many at all levels of society. We hope to provide a platform where people can share and discuss a multitude of social issues.

These sessions work as a means to empower us in tackling the various injustices we face, whether at a global level or right here on our doorstep.

If you would like to get involved, you can find us on Facebook at ‘LSE Understanding Inequality Group’. Workshops will begin in week 2. We’ll also be doing campaigns across campus this year, with our first, “What does Inequality Mean to You?” running in the Week 2 on the 1st Floor of the Saw Swee Hock Building.

LSE Counselling services are located on the 5th floor of Kingsway.

For more information, visit their page on the LSE website.

For any more general support you might need you can contact the LSE Peer Support programme at tlc.peer. support@lse.ac.uk, or you can get in contact through halls of residence.

Picture Credit: Flickr Kim Larrison

The CiTy seCTion publishes a range of arTiCles on businesses, eConomiCs and poliTiCs. if you would like To see your name in prinT sign up To The beaver on lsesu.Com To reCeive our weekly emails, or email CiTy@Thebeaveronline.Co.uk

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

DOWNLOAD ‘THE BEAVER LSE‘ APP ON THE APPLE STORE!

16

Britain at the Rio Olympics!

Sport

Section Editor: Vacant

Credit: www.sportinglife.com

Bethan Munt LSE Women’s Rugby

I’M SURE LIKE ME YOU couldn’t keep the smile off your face while watching Britain in the Olympics this Summer. Britain had their best games yet, coming second in the league table only behind America, winning a total of 67 medals. British athletes reached the podium in 19 out of 31 sports, finishing with at least one gold in 15 sports. The success did not stop however, as Britain surpassed all expectations in the Paralympics by winning 147 medals, and an amazing 12% of all gold medals to be won. This year, a record £355 million was spent by UK Sport, preparing athletes for the Olympics and Paralympic games. This increase in money spent on sport can be seen to be reaping the rewards. With the success witnessed this summer, there is no doubt that investing in British sport is truly important to maintain Britain’s success in being one of the world’s

greatest sporting nations.

So I hope after this summer of sporting prowess, you too are now feeling inspired to get active. LSE has over 40 different sports societies to join, so there is definitely something for everyone. The LSE sporting community is over 3,000 strong, and there is support for all abilities looking to take part. Whether you are a beginner wanting to try something new or have been practising your sport for years, you will definitely find a place within the AU. I joined LSE in 2014 and was eagerly awaiting the start of Fresher’s Week. I knew I wanted to join a sport but wasn’t sure which one. At the Fresher’s Fair, the LSE Women’s Rugby stall caught my eye, I attended their Give It A Go session and have never looked back. This year, I am also looking to join the LSE Dance society. Joining a sports society at LSE has completely transfor med my university experience. I have for med new friendships, learnt new skills (I had never picked

up a rugby ball before the Give It A Go session) and have had the opportunity to play in a team where we have all grown and developed into accomplished players.

However, we mustn’t forget the all-important Athletic Union (AU) socials which take place on Wednesday evenings.

We have an amazing AU Exec who have many exciting things planned for these evenings; from AU Welcome Week to Halloween to Fight Night, these Wednesday nights are second to none. All the AU societies meet up in the Venue and then collectively we trek to Zoo Bar for an evening of merriness.

The AU can definitely be called a family, where everyone is supported and encouraged.

As UK Sport invests in their athletes, the AU invests in you, thus enabling clubs to provide talented coaches, good training grounds and equipment. If you are in any doubt about joining a sport at LSE, then just jump in-head first as there will always be a place for you.

So you might ask how do I get involved, well if you missed

fresher’s fair, all the sports societies have a page on the LSE Student’s Union website where membership can be bought.

Most societies also hold a Give it a Go session which provides a taster of that particular sport. The dates of these can all be found on the website.

So let’s be inspired by Britain’s sporting prowess in Rio this summer and join one of LSE’s sports teams. By joining a sport team, you will automatically join our AU family.

I hope you enjoy being part of a community which has added so much to my University life, as I hope it will yours.

Send your Club updates, Match Reports, sports commentary and articles to sports@ thebeaveronline. co.uk