The Beaver Making Sense of LSE Since 1949
Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union
-
beaveronline.co.uk
- Issue 909
-
Tuesday 28 January 2020
As Most Challenging Term Begins, LSE Expands Mental Health Resources LSE in the process of hiring four new members of staff, two counsellors and two mental health advisors
Morgan Fairless Executive Editor
L
SE has committed a further £1 million towards Mental Health provisions by hiring four new full time members of staff - two new counsellors and two mental health advisors. Freedom of Mind LSE and LSESU Community and Wellbeing Officer David Gordon, have both successfully lobbied the university to increase funding. This coincides with the time of year when demand for mental health services is highest, suggesting January exams and assessment pressures have increased mental health needs in students. Data reviewed by The Beaver shows a 44% increase in drop-ins and 65% increase in the overall number of students seeking assistance. An LSE spokesperson addressed the spike in demand in a statement to The Beaver: “Demand for counselling is always greatest during Lent term, coinciding with the peak period for assessment and the run up to summer exams.” Additionally, the university has acknowledged that “There is an increase in first aid interventions around exam period”, adding that these are “primarily for anxietyrelated issues.” Although hiring is still ongoing, this new investment would mean a large increase in the number of full time employees dedicated to mental wellbeing at the university. The Beaver’s research suggests that the number of Full Time Equivalent counselors and mental health advisors has been slightly increasing by 1% each year since 2014/15. After hiring, LSE will have 6.7 FTE counselors and 5.4 FTE Mental Health Advisors. In 2018/19, the numbers were 4.7 and 5.4 respectively. An LSE spokesperson said to The Beaver: “Supporting student and staff mental health and wellbeing is a key priority for the School and a significant part of LSE’s work going
forward,” adding that “The hiring of two new counsellors and two new mental health advisors is a big part of this commitment.” LSESU Community and Welfare Officer David Gordon led the effort on the Union side on these changes. He told The Beaver: “We are delighted that LSE has taken a much needed step to reduce waiting times in the counselling service and to increase the number of mental health advisors on campus. This has come after intense lobbying from SU officers and staff to hold LSE to account in its treatment of student mental health. We also recognise the work from a number of LSE staff members to increase the funding and resourcing of the counselling service, and thank them for their dedication to student mental health and wellbeing. Establishing that efforts should not stop there, he added: “That said, we recognise that this marks a first step toward an excellent mental health and wellbeing culture at LSE, and look forward to working with students and the LSE to improve the student experience further.” The University has also partnered with the charity Mind to pilot the Mentally Healthy Universities programme. The programme runs sessions tailored to undergraduate students, aiming to equip students with tools to manage their mental health through university. Students can book spaces in these sessions online. LSE at the Oscars (right): “The Edge of Democracy”, produced and directed
Inside Today Features
In Conversation with NY FED President John C. Williams
12 Comment
Academic Jargon Alienates. Is it Necessary?
6 News
LSE Renews £20,000 Sustainability Projects Fund Applications Open
by two recent LSE MSc alumni Joanna Natasegara and Petra Costa,
has
been nominated for the Oscars in the Best
Documentary
investigate the
category.
recent history
They of
Brazilian democracy, narrrowing in on Dilma Rouseff’s impeachement and the imprisonment of Lula Da Silva. (Page 4)
DON’T FORGET TO FLIP OVER FOR
FLIPSIDE
4
The Beaver
2
Tuesday 28 January 2020 | The Beaver www.beaveronline.co.uk
Established 1949 | Issue 909 | Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union
Meet the team Executive Editor Morgan Fairless editor@beaveronline.co.uk Managing Editor Jamie Boucher managing@beaveronline.co.uk Flipside Editor Christina Ivey flipside@beaveronline.co.uk Beaver Editor Lucy Knight beaver@beaveronline.co.uk Multimedia Editor Yasmina O’Sullivan Design Editor Colette Fogarty Editorial Assistants Ross Lloyd Illustrators Rebekah Paredes-Larson Raphaelle Carmarcat Emma Duper Amelia Jabry Sebastian Mullen News Editors Laura Zampini Jeffrey Wang news@beaveronline.co.uk Comment Editors Grace Chapman Gustav Hagild Michael Shapland comment@beaveronline.co.uk Features Editors Marianne Hii Colin Vanelli Annabelle Jarrett features@beaveronline.co.uk Part B Editor Maya Kokerov partb@beaveronline.co.uk Review Editors Amber Iglesia Zehra Jafree partb@beaveronline.co.uk Sport Editors Seth Rice Gabby Sing sport@beaveronline.co.uk Social Editor Analía Ferreyra Sherry union@beaveronline.co.uk 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 Room 2.02 Saw Swee Hock Student Centre LSE Students’ Union London WC2A 2AE 020 7955 6705
Destroy the Damn Glass Barriers in the Lucy Knight NAB Beaver Editor
S
tarting out by saying “it’s a new year and a new decade” is so predictable, right? It seems like a good place to start an editorial, but where can I go from there? Instead, I want to dedicate my first editorial calling out something on campus that needs to be cancelled immediately. I had forgotten about them over the holidays, but they really have no place in such a respected institution as LSE. Of course, I’m talking about those goddamn obnoxious glass barriers in the NAB. Entering the NAB was easy enough: you scanned your ID, ogled at the unnecessary and unexplained Big Red Ball™, and went wherever you needed to go. But then, it’s time. You try to leave but you stand face to face with what I can only describe as a death trap waiting to slice you in two and turn you into mincemeat. You enter the queue of students waiting to dance with the devil at the hands of cold, unfeeling glass. They made it through, perhaps the NAB is feeling merciful. After all, pressing that friendly-seeming green button usually works. Usually. Spamming the button sometimes works, sometimes doesn’t - you
always forget to collect your data. What does fate have in store? You steel yourself with a deep breath, prepare your final words, and pray to whatever deity that you will leave the NAB in as many pieces as you entered it. My word count is ending, but my hatred for those fucking glass barriers in the NAB is ceaseless. Anyway, get your glass of milk ready, because this week’s Beaver is a spicy one, as always. Make sure you’re following us on social media to stay updated with the goings on at LSE, and come to our Intro to Podcasting event this Thursday (30th January) at 5 in the Media Centre. We have comfy sofas. And no glass barriers.
The Beaver Could Do Better. Make It Jamie Boucher Happen Managing Editor
T
he Beaver has a problem, and I don’t mean its name. In a university of some 11,000 students, we struggle to move 1000 copies of the paper once a fortnight. We reach 9% of the student body. More students have probably had meaningful interactions with Minouche Shafik than handle our broadsheet. Online we fare a little better, with maybe 1500 articles read over a two week period. These data are borne out anecdotally, with friends offering such ringing endorsements as, ‘I should really read the Beaver,’ or ‘Oh that’s right, we have a school paper.’ It’s a hardly surprising situation for a school where departments stop recording lectures, desperate to lure students into classrooms. Performing societies count a crowd of 100 as a good night, sports teams are cheered on only by whichever squad isn’t playing, and more people voted for Jo Swinson than read the school paper. Maybe that’s just LSE. Students aim to make it in and out of the university with the surgical precision and minimum boots-onthe-ground time of a squad of Navy SEALs. We spend our time on our work and with small, manageable groups of friends, iso-
lated cliques huddling around small campfires in the vast, cold tundra of the university. It’d be great to see the campus come together, to see people consider this school their tribe, a part of their identity that is meaningful in contexts other than their CV. It sounds like cheesy, corny, let’s-sing-kumbaya bullshit, but I think apathy has been hip for longer than is healthy. Perhaps our low readership is a symptom of campus culture, maybe it’s on the folks that make the paper, probably it’s a bit of both. We’ll work on what we can. We’ll try to bring you, cherished 9%, the best content we can, as often as we can, in every new-fangled way the hip-ass zoomer kids want. But, just like the organizer for an orgy, we don’t want to do it alone. So please, really, let us know what you think. Write for us, pitch to us, bitch at us. If you know how this paper could be better, let us know; if we don’t speak to you, please speak to us. Shoot me an email, hit me up on facebook, flag me down on the street, or knock on the door to Saw Swee 2.02. Maybe at 20% readership we’ll finally become the Dam Bulletin like I’ve been saying we should for years.
Wuhan Needs Help Jeffrey Wang News Editor
The Chinese New Year has come and gone, but the spirit of family and good cheer was lacking from Wuhan. The coronavirus has already infected thousands and has led to a quarantine that has affected some 40 million people. This quarantine, although effective at stopping the spread of the virus, has led to a series of shortages in the Wuhan area. The medical workers who are valiantly fighting the disease is reporting a shortage of medical consumables, face masks and test kits. While the government is doing its best to deal with this calamity, I would like to send out a call to the LSE community for donations to help the doctors and people of Wuhan. LSE is an international school, boasting an international student base. Among us are students from Wuhan, whose family is facing unbearable hardship. If we can do anything to relieve that hardship, we should try our best. I know it is a difficult thing, asking university students for donations. We all have our own economic hardships, tuition and living in one of the most expensive cities in the world, chief among them. However, if everyone at LSE donated £1, then we will have collected £9000 if everyone donated £5, then we will have collected £45,000. If everyone plays a little part, then surely we can accomplish a great thing. Is there anything greater than helping our fellow students and the world?
Beaver Vacancies - It’s never too late to join our team Editorial Assistant - Help the Executive team manage editorial operations by copyediting pieces before they are published. News Staff Writers - The News Team is expanding! We are also looking for Beat reporters for the following topics: Union Democracy, The Directorate, LSE Events, LSE Staff, Graduate Students, LSE and the Climate, Mental Health at University, LSESU and Society Events. Message us on FB or email us at editor@beaveronline.co.uk
News
News Editors Laura Zampini Jeffrey Wang
Email us: news@beaveronline.co.uk
LSESU CDS to Host China Development Forum Annual forum aims to bridge East-West divide
Jeffrey Wang News Editor
T
he China Development Forum, the flagship event of the China Development Society, the largest SU affiliated society for Chinese students, will be hosted on 8 February 2020. The Forum is held annually and can attract up to 400 participants. It seeks to bridge East-West differences and promote a broader understanding of China through dialogue and discussion. The event will feature over 15 distinguished speakers from all walks of life, including UN representatives, CEOs, judges, and academics from both China and the West. Of particular note is Dr Marielza Oliveira, UNESCO Representative to East Asia, and Professor Kerry Brown, former First Secretary of the British mission to China. This year, the CDF will focus on the uncertainty of China’s rise and interactions with the West, and will feature four panels on topics such as Western responses to China’s Rise, EU-China
environmental policy, the development of the Chinese legal system, and the place of Chinese culture in fashion in a globalized society. The panels will discuss issues such as the West's response to China’s recent success despite China not having aligned itself with Western socio-economic values. Particularly, the pannel will discuss the Hong Kong question and the Sino-American trade war. It will also focus on the rising climate emergency and the paradox that China represents in responding to the situation: while China burns about half the coal used each year, it’s also the leading market for solar panels, wind turbines, and electric vehicles. Then it will discuss the progress and challenges of the Chinese legal system, with input from Ms Chi Yin, a former judge at the Intermediate Court of the greater Chengdu Municipality, and Ms
Katherine Wilhelm, Director at the Beijing office of Yale Law School’s China Law Centre, and will examine the key question of whether the rule of law is at odds with the objectives of the Chinese Communist Party. Finally, it will discuss the challenges of preserving traditional Chinese fashion given the increasingly internationalized nature of fashion and the rise in popularity of brands like Gucci and Armani. Rufei Wang, Vice-President of CDS and Director of CDF, told The Beaver, “The CDF has speakers and audience from all around the world, and represents a vast range of opinions and thoughts. This year we decided to deviate from just focusing on economics because we want the audience to see that China is taking a leading role in policy and culture. We wanted a broad range of panels, so there is something for everyone,
no matter if they are an economics, history, anthropology, or law student.” When asked about the speakers, Tina Pei, Director of Speaker Management, said “I am very proud of my entire team for the hard work they put in, inviting such a diverse cast of speakers, I really think that the CDF offers an opportunity for everyone to learn something new about China. Finally, when asked whether the event was focused only on Chinese international students, Rufei responded, “The purpose of CDF and CDS is to promote dialogue. We go to LSE, which is one of the most diverse and international schools in the world, so our aim is to have everyone involved and learning about China, that is the only way to foster growth and development and face the challenges of our time.”
Rhea Malviya Staff Writer
O
n Saturday, 18 January, The Student Publication Association, the largest student media association in the UK and Ireland, awarded The Beaver Best Development of 2019 and executive editor Morgan Fairless Best Student Journalist of the year. "[The Beaver is 70 years old] and it's gone through good moments and bad moments," said Fairless. "I think over the past three years we worked quite a bit to improve the quality of the paper, and winning Best Development especially makes it so that we are being recognised for improvements, which is nice especially for such an old paper to be able to improve beyond what we once were. For my win, I think it's nice for the paper as well to have
editors who are decent journalists." Fairless nominated himself for the award on a whim, "I was having a very bad day, and I just decided that I needed a win in my life," he said. "I'm not sure how strong the competition was," he said. "I think I'm a decent journalist. I'm not sure if I am the best student journalist in London. I'm pretty sure there are student journalists here at The Beaver that are better than me." Christina Ivey, Flipside editor and Beaver staff member under Fairless for two years, recounted enjoying working for him, who she said is
of commitment to telling important stories on campus; it's become kind of a meme that Morgan always writes the stories that end up on the front cover, but it's because he's the one that always gets the scoop." For Fairless, being a 'decent student journalist' means honing in on school issues rather than becoming tangential in coverage. "I've written quite a few pieces that I'm quite proud of, especially the one on available support for male victims of sexual harassment," he said. "I think my argument for why I was a good journalist and why I'd expect
winning Best Develop“ ment especially makes
it so that we are being recognised for improvements, which is nice especially for such an old paper to be able to improve beyond what we once were.
not only a skilled student journalist (despite his denial) but also a humble and humorous boss. "It's been great working with him," she said. "He's an excellent boss, always really helpful and supportive and also knows how to take a joke and make a joke of himself, which I think makes everyone more comfortable around the office. He just has a lot
to win was that as a good student journalist, I only write about student things. I don't sway very far away from SU politics and LSE policies, and I think that's what student journalists should do." The SPA's recognition of The Beaver for its sustained improvements validates the team's efforts to not only improve its organizational
The News Team Thomas Chau Deputy Editor
Raphaelle Camarcat Staff Writer
Meher Pandey Staff Writer
Florit Shoihet Staff Writer
Rhea Malviya Staff Writer
Angbeen Abbas Staff Writer
Kevin Morris Staff Writer Scan for CDF website
The Beaver Wins Big at Student Publication Association's London Regional Conference The Beaver takes home Best Development for 2019
3
management but also expand its command of media spaces. Podcasts in particular have been a recent development that appears to be garnering traction and excitement, according to Ivey. "I really look forward to that because podcasts are already so popular and I think that's a really nice archive of different activities that happen on campus with the actual people involved in those activities," she said. "It's a lot more personal, I think, than just having the paper sometimes." Ivey also lauded the creation of Flipside, the magazine at the back of the newspaper, in the last two years that she has been involved. "[Past Beaver executives] did a lot of working forging the Flipside brand so the fact that we've managed to create that pretty much out of nothing was ... a really big push and I think now we're starting to see the beginning of Flipside as its own mature brand within The Beaver," she said. Nonetheless, according to Fairless, the work will never stop. "Since my first year, there was quite a lot of stress and force in trying to make the paper better… and I'd like to think it continues to the end."
Pictured: Marianne Hill (Features), Christina Ivey (Flipside), Morgan Fairless (Executive), and Jeffrey Wang (News) with memebers of The Orbital and Strand Magazine.
Thahmina Begum Staff Writer
Join the News Team! Join our News Team as a staff writer and help us report and investigate LSE news. For more information, visit beaveronline.co.uk/vacancies
Send us any tips to: news@beaveronline.co.uk
“
4
News
Tuesday 28 January 2020 | The Beaver
LSE RAG Launches Event Week RAG Week to promote LSESU Societies' original fundraising initiatives
Thahmina Begum Staff Writer
L
SE's Raising and Giving (RAG) society are planning their annual RAG Week from 10 to 14 February. It's a week full of charitable and volunteering events, including a Doctors Without Borders (MSF) Exhibition, a vintage clothes sale for charity, a speaker event with the head of fundraising for MSF, a cocktail and wine evening, The Big Charity Match, Ice Dip for Charity, AU Date Night, and much more. The society's overall concept for this year is "RAG a la carte” and RAG Week is the “main course” in their menu. Through this initiative, RAG hopes to raise money for their local, national, and international charities with creative events and challenges. One of the differences in the project this year is the scheduling of AU Date night, which falls in Week 5, instead of during RAG Week. This year, the society is also encouragi ng other SU societies to plan and run their own initiatives, in a bid to rally more support from their members. RAG's president, second-year International Social and Public Policy with Politics student Victoria Throen Longhi, hopes this project will motivate other societies in the SU to fundraise for charities that are meaningful to them. "A good example of this is LSE SU Gaming Society," Longhi says, "fundraising for a foundation dedicated to allowing physically disabled gamers the opportunity to experience the inclusion and entertainment of video games." She went on: "The thing is; many societies have a fundraising idea. RAG Week should be a nudge to execute this idea. We have reached out to societies flagging RAG Week to them and also launched a fundraising certificate in collaboration with our
Activities and Development Officer, Jack Boyd, in the hope of creating momentum around fundraising on campus." When asked about its long-term goals, RAG revealed that they aspire to create a culture within LSE where societies challenge themselves to come up with original fundraising initiatives and ask, "What kind of charity would be meaningful to support?" They believe this would make students realise their potential to raise funds for causes that are important to them. RAG also hopes that this will serve as an opportunity for people to reflect on the charity sector, asking questions such as, "Why is there a need for charity? Does the need for a charity sector signal the healthy flourishing, or failure of a society? Why do individuals need to step up? What makes one charity effective and one harming?" "I hope that societies gain from this initiative a bonding experience over fundraising" said Longhi, "and that they raise some funds for causes they care about." RAG has 17 people on their committee this year, ranging from first years to master students, and has around 800 members. When asked about societies that have supported it during the academic year, RAG expressed its gratitude to "LSE SU Gaming, Netball, Bacchus, Cocktail, International Development, and Amnesty Society along with the LSE Athletics Union and Rowing Club." "We also extend thanks to the LSE Running society; they are taking on a 24hour relay," they added.
Scan for RAG Facebook page
LSE Sustainable Projects Fund to Award £20,000 for Green Projects Money from 10p surcharge on single-use plastic to fund renewable projects
Laura Zampini News Editor
O
n 17 January LSE announced its 2020 Sustainable Projects Fund, which will award £20,000 for student and staff projects that enhance sustainability at the school's campus. The fund is run by the LSESU Sustainable Futures Society and receives its money from the 10p ‘tax’ on bottled water sold by LSE Catering. Funds are awarded to specific projects by a central committee consisting of Sustainable Futures Society student members, academics, Sustainability Staff, and Senior members of LSE's Estates Division. LSE Media Relations told The Beaver that the committee "are keen to ensure future applicants don’t feel constrained by the amounts asked for by previous projects and that each project is considered on a caseby-case basis." Last year's winning projects include: LS-Sea, Marine Society initiatives, LSE Keep Cups, and Sensor taps at Passfield Hall. LS-Sea funds were awarded to Harriet Freeman, an MSc International Political Economy student, who launched the project last year. LS-Sea's focus is changing behaviours on what is flushed down toilets across campus and student residences. A great part of the project concentrates on raising awareness that a large proportion of wet wipes, sanitary products and contact lenses contain high proportions of plastics which can ultimately pollute oceans and beaches. Freeman told The Beaver that the project "would be nothing without the fund,” and was awarded £3,000, which paid for almost all of the initiative's expenses. On a more critical note, Freeman said that once the Fund was granted, LSE should have been more clear about who she had to contact in order to get the project
Illustration by Colette Fogarty
legitimised. She affirmed that there was no support given to her in this sense. Freeman added that "despite having brought this up with multiple people multiple times," LSE cleaners still have been clearing away the project's campaign posters and stickers in bathrooms. When flagging the positives of having received the Fund last year she said, "I have worked with some figures from LSE Sustainability team who are awesome." The Marine Society was also awarded part of the fund for its proposed initiatives. These included a research sailing expedition with Sail Britain to run an arts/science project investigating plastic pollution along the British Coastline. The society also produced blogs, collected samples off the coastline, and ran an Expedition Exhibition in the Saw Swee Hock made of plastic materials found during their journeys. The third group to receive funding
in 2019 was LSE's Central Catering team for their Keep Cups project. This enabled the continued discount of reusable ‘Keep cups’ helping to reduce the number of single use cups sold on campus. Second-year students Ser Jin Tan and Yi Wei Chong were pledged £5000 to investigate options for upgraded taps at Passfield Hall to save water. This project is currently being overseen by LSE Estates Division as Tan and Chong have not been directly involved with the project after receiving the fund last year. "Admittedly, my friend and I underestimated how busy we would be in our second year, and we haven't been able to devote much time to this project," Tan told The Beaver. Once new taps are installed at Passfield Hall, water usage will be monitored to determine impacts, behaviour changes, and potential options to save water across LSE Residences.
LSE Alumni Nominated for Academy Award Laura Zampini News Editor
O
n 13 January The Edge of Democracy, a film directed and produced by two LSE alumni, was nominated Best Documentary at the 92nd Academy Awards. Director Petra Costa did her masters in Psychological & Behavioural Science at LSE in 2008, and Producer Joanna Natasegara graduated with a masters in Human Rights in 2005. LSE congratulated the two Alumni in a tweet, posted on 14 January, with the hashtag #OscarNoms. The Netflix documentary looks at recent political developments in Brazil, the director's home country, focusing particularly on the impeachment process of former president Dilma Rousseff, and reflected on the political polarization and growth of far-right movements in Brazil. Costa situated herself as both a character and narrator in the film,
and interviews her own mother, a left-wing militant during the country's dictatorship and supporter of the Brazilian Workers Party. In an interview with CBS News, Costa said that, because her parents fought against Brazil's military regime, she grew up believing that democracy was a given. As she started to realize this did not hold, she decided to "make a film about that neurosis," Costa told CBS News. Producer Natasegara, agreed: "We all assumed we all knew what we meant by the idea of democracy, and yet now everybody is questioning that concept." According to Costa, the documentary's title 'The Edge of Democracy' reveals a "process of erosion of the rule of law" and a conflict between different democratic institutions, as well as "constitutional hardballing," a term used to describe the abuse of the constitution to destroy political opponents. Costa went on: "As artists we have a responsibility in the face of fascism, in the rise of hate and
intolerance, to try to heal and address what is happening. We can no longer shut our eyes to the state of emergency that we live in right now […] because we all need democracy to survive." In the same interview, producer Natasegara highlighted that all five films indicated in the Best Documentary category are either directed or co-directed by women. She complimented Costa, stating that the director has "taken the personal and political and put it into the screen," and added that these five films allow viewers "to see these political worlds through the female gaze." Critically acclaimed abroad, the documentary divides the Brazilian public between praise for a wellconstructed vision of the present political atmosphere in Brazil and accusations of insufficient criticism towards the Workers Party and its involvement in historic corruption scandals.
www.beaveronline.co.uk | @beaveronline
Email us: news@beaveronline.co.uk
LSE IR Department Hosts 2020 Great Development Dialogue LSE professors debate the merits of land redistribution and universal basic income
LSE Student to Journey to Antarctica Fabian Nilsson will travel to the Antarctic in support of conservation efforts
Christina Ivey
Angbeen Abbas
Flipside Editor
Staff Writer
F
T
he Great Development Dialogue, sponsored by the Department of International Development, was held last Friday, 24 January, at the Hong Kong Theatre in Clement House. The dialogue, held annually, seeks to explore pressing issues in the field of development through a cross-disciplinary approach. This year, speakers discussed the political economy of land, covering broader issues on how economics, anthropology, and political science are important to an understanding of development. The speakers for this event included Professor Deborah James (Department of Anthropology), Professor David Graeber (Department of Anthropology), Professor Maitreesh Ghatak (Department of Economics), Dr. Gharad Bryan (Department of Economics), and Professor Kathryn Hochstetler (Department of International Development). The chair was Jean-Paul Faguet, Professor of the Political Economy of Development and Programme Co-Director in the Development Management Department. The panel covered key issues such as the importance of land for development and universal basic income. Dr Ghatak and Dr Bryan discussed issues that concern the land market, including inadequacies in property rights systems and the ways in which land continues to be important for those in the developing world as both a source of employment and an asset in countries where social welfare systems are weak. Dr James and Dr Graeber discussed how the idea of land is linked to sovereignty, with Dr James citing her work on South Africa. This was followed by a debate
5
regarding universal basic income (UBI), and the extent to which it can work alongside other welfare systems. Dr Graeber, mentioning his book, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory, argued for a radical vision of UBI that would allow people to contribute to society meaningfully, without needing to work in jobs that do not hold any meaning for those who work in them. Dr Ghatak challenged this point, arguing that a production surplus is necessary to establish UBI
and that it should be viewed as a complement to and not a solution for other welfare reforms. The dialogue concluded with questions from the audience on issues such as reproductive labour and care, whether universal basic income should exist alongside the welfare system, and the dynamic between countries of the global North and global South in terms of development and aid.
RULE BREAKER RISK TAKER DEAL MAKER BE THE DIFFERENCE
irst-year Environment and Development student Fabian Nilsson was chosen for a 12day expedition to the Antarctic, set to take place in November of this year. The expedition will be led by Robert Swan OBE, a famous British Polar Explorer and the first man to walk unaided to the North and South Poles. It is being organised under Swan's 2041 Foundation which he founded "after witnessing climate change first hand on his expeditions," according to Nilsson. Delegates from large institutions such as NASA, Accenture, JP Morgan, Cisco, Coca-Cola, and KPMG have been sent on the expedition in previous years. This year, it will feature 80 other participants from across the globe. Nilsson is the youngest European to be selected for the expedition and the only Norwegian. Nilsson described the goal of the expedition: "to engage and inspire the next generation of sustainable leaders to tackle climate change and protect the Antarctic." Crucially, he said, "Antarctica is currently protected from any exploitation by the Antarctic treaty. However, this treaty is under review in 2041 and the 2041 Foundation’s purpose to strive to protect Antarctica by inspiring youth, policy, and action to protect the Antarctic from exploitation and climate change and make sure by 2041 it is not going to be exploited for its resources." Nilsson's own inspiration for going on the expedition comes from a deep desire for people to understand the threat to Antarctica. He wants "to add some reality to climate change, make it feel [closer] to home. Because it’s too easy to
disconnect from." After his return, Nilsson plans to put on a series of lectures and workshops and write articles to share what he learned and how people can make a difference in tackling climate change. Nilsson also told The Beaver that he looks forward to exploring the landscapes of Antarctica, sailing past huge icebergs and observing the unique wildlife while gaining an understanding of the fragile ecosystem. At some point in the twelveday journey, he hopes to dive into freezing Antarctic waters in swim shorts, which Nilsson described as "the polar plunge." Nilsson had originally been studying Accounting and Finance at LSE, but he "became restless and down because [his] degree was so different to what [his] passions were." He then decided to re-enter first year as an Environment and Development student with the ultimate goal of creating a carbon capture business. He plans to fund his journey through a combination of crowdfunding and corporate sponsors.
Comment 6
Comment Editors Grace Chapman Gustav Hagild Michael Shapland
Tuesday 28 January 2020
Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk
Do We Still Need Academic Jargon?
Ty Joplin
so many radical and important ideas are first cultivated, all the more difficult by mandating people to learn a new language as well? Are we to assume the vast majority of people who do not speak Academia cannot use these ideas either? Is our ivory tower so important that it justifies sealing potentially emancipatory ideas inside a vault of cryptic language, never to be accessed by the people who may be able to use those ideas to better their lives and the lives of people around them? LSE’s motto is a case in point: Rerum cognoscere causas, Latin for “to understand the causes of things.” It’s a relatively straightforward motto reflecting the liberal ideals of its founders in 1895. But it prods the query that, once asked, reveals the whole game of academic knowledge: Why is it in Latin?
Comment Contributor
I
nside enclaved campuses, students and professors perform a daily ritual in tribute to the gods of Academia. Students speak in tongues in the hopes of acquiring higher knowledge and wisdom, labouring over books, picking apart seemingly nonsensical sentences only to repeat them faithfully later. The Great Banshee of Academia screams its proclamations from the depths, and we, as its loyal subjects, apply ourselves to deciphering and preaching them, rather than exorcising the demon altogether. We embrace the solitude attached to being part of a privileged class of people who speak the academic language. This is a common practice that has well-known but little-discussed ethical consequences. Reliance on jargon, impenetrable phrases from dead languages, and the wholesale invention of new terms that explain already-labeled phenomena: all of these contribute to academia’s self-segregation from the general public, yet we continue to practice them in earnest as if they were neutral and apolitical. They are not.
“We continue to practice them in earnest as if they were neutral and apolitical. They are not.
“
At worst, the practice serves as a kind of subtle policing, where only those deeply immersed in the highminded language of academia can engage with its ideas, even if those same ideas are aimed at improving the lives of those who dwell outside
Illustration by Gabriela Krol
its gilded gates. Defenders of impenetrable language may retort by saying, “Well, we must use specialised language to reflect the specialised information we are dealing with, and to make sure we are being careful with our words in dissecting nuanced issues! We are simply using the language required to engage.” This may be true to some extent, but it does not justify the romanticizing of complicated jargon as a good in itself, which often obscures information that otherwise could be digested by a greater number of people. Using such language as it is needed is entirely different than relying on it as the primary means to
discuss topics that may not require it. Do we really need to keep the phrase ‘sui generis’ alive, when most of the time it could be replaced with ‘unique’ or ‘one of a kind’? Do some sentences genuinely need to be 150 words long to make sense, or is this the result of a moment of overenthusiasm where there were no considerations to its accessibility? Often, we write complicated phrases like “dichotomous ontological development,” without giving a second thought that perhaps it is exactly these types of phrases which turn people away from listening to ideas that we think are important. It’s a harsh truth, but many of us
use this jargon as a first rather than a last resort because it’s accepted as the language of academia. It pushes the notion that we are truly in a laboratory of ideas inventing new knowledge, it justifies the exorbitant costs of higher education as a consolation prize, and we get to be exceptional. Of course, the flipside of appearing exceptional is that, by its nature, most will be left out of the debates and dialogues we find so much joy in being a part of. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that education in general is becoming more expensive and that journals and periodicals lurk behind paywalls. Need we make the entrance into academic debates, where
Above: Professors should simplify their language to strengthen their message.
Above: 'Rerum Cognicere Causas' - but should the causes of things be made easier to understand?
Have Sex, Not Babies Comment Editor
I
come from an incredibly conservative and traditional village in the middle of the English countryside, where the local aristocrats go fox hunting, the local primary school has a thatched roof and the Lady of the estate lost an 18-ct gold necklace in the local Morrisons (it’s called Somerleyton, look it up). So, naturally, as a 20 year old woman, I am often asked when I’m going to settle down, get married and have children. Indeed, I have thought about this, and whether I want it for my future: women think of little else, if I am to believe the words of the farmer who lives next door. My answer is usually along the lines of “maybe, I
“ The most significant
pledge we can make to save the planet is to limit the number of children we bear.
“
Grace Chapman
suppose…I’m a bit young... ” Because the notion of the whole nuclear family thing has a number of glaring problems that Karen at the post office might have a few issues with. Firstly, I’m pansexual (‘sharpen your pitchforks’). Secondly, marriage is kind of an archaic patriarchal institution (‘light your torches’). And thirdly, babies are really bad for the environment (‘holy hell, burn her at the stake,
she’s a witch’). It is the last point that needs to be addressed now, when climate marches are weekly and change should have happened yesterday. We have enough people in the world, and overpopulation is part of the reason why global heating has occurred in the first place. In the last 100 years, the global population has nearly quadrupled from around 2 billion in 1928, and as of January 2020 we are hanging around the 7.8 billion mark. Because of this, we have consumed more natural resources in the last 50 years that the whole of humanity before us, which unsurprisingly has lead to major resource depletions. Although going vegan and flying less will massively decrease our environmental impact, the most significant pledge we can make to save the planet is to limit
the number of children we bear. Before I go on, I should say: I am evangelically pro-choice. If you want children, fine. It is your uterus and you can do whatever you wish with it. But, like with any massive decisions we have to face in our lives, we should all consider what consequences our choices will have. The Environmental Research Letters estimates conservatively, that having one fewer child than planned could reduce carbon emissions for each couple of parents by 58 tonnes for each year of their life. With the population increasing exponentially, this means a greater demand on food, which PLOS ONE, shows could result in an 80% rise in food demand by 2100. This is going to hit Africa the worst, particularly Sub-Saharan
regions where population growth is the most rapid. As Sir David Attenborough put it, "All our environmental problems become easier to solve with fewer people, and harder - and ultimately impossible - to solve with ever more people.” This is a message that has not gone unrecognised by many, with many high profile people such as Miley Cyrus and racing driver Leilani Münter pledging to be child-free until the climate crisis stabilises. The answer to overpopulation, despite what some may say, is not to cull the old people. The answer to many is that we must change who we call family. I have long argued that the most effective way to combat climate change is to break down the walls built up in communities, and focus on change at a local level: if you know and
www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline care about your neighbours, you will change your own behaviour to help them. We can find the emotional fulfillment of having multiple children by fostering stronger community ties instead.
if the country itself has an ageing population, such as Japan or Italy, the answer should be to open borders and loosen migration policies rather than simply encouraging rampant procreation.
Many of the critiques of this are directed at the construction of the white nuclear family that has come to be known as a social norm in the West, and how this is pushed on other cultures that may have more communitarian traditions, such as that among native american tribes. Whilst legally, the nuclear family falls neatly into the little boxes of state structural bureaucracy, conformity only amounts to a mode of control and the further perpetuation of toxic ‘norms’. Furthermore, arguments that procreation is a human biological need is contestable at best. Even if we do feel a survival instinct to pass on our genes, surely for the sake of preventing further climate change, limiting the number of children we have is a relatively easy fix. Indeed,
Of course, we must consider that to choose whether we have one, five or no children is a form of Western privilege. Whilst in the UK we have access to contraception for free on the NHS, many other countries are not so lucky. This only highlights why bringing contraception and further education across the world is a matter of human rights, not only to help individuals but also for the sake of the planet. Furthermore, it is people in the West who have the biggest carbon footprints, so perhaps it is up to us who have the ability to choose to do so for the betterment of all. The effects of global heating in the UK are often invisible. We cannot see our sea levels rising and we,
Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk luckily, are not plagued by famine, drought or natural disasters worsened by climate change. It is not the correlation between our small scale actions and large scale events that is the issue: it’s the culmination of those small scale decisions. It is the same of many high profile issues within this conversation: we know we need to limit X, Y and Z but the question is how to do that and how to convince people it is the right decision for the planet. What the UN intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tells us is that we now have ten years to limit the ‘catastrophe of Climate Change’. Therefore, the conversation needs to be expanded into every facet of our lives. We not only need to reconsider why we have been bred to believe that we must have children, but also why the nuclear family structure has become a norm in the first place. Yes, legally it can make sense to get married, and we often consider two parents a healthy means by which to raise
a child. But in the UK, these norms are reinforced by centuries of white heteronormative structures underpinned by Christian notions of morality. We must, now more than ever, question our notions of ‘normal’ relationships, with our neighbours, sexual partner(s) and our means of reproduction. Despite what we are told, to have children is not an inevitable step in the saga of our lives, and much needs to be done to deconstruct why we feel it should be. Having lots of children, whilst great if you want to start a family choir, is not what is best for the planet. Having sex is great, so yes keep doing it - I am in no way advocating a return to the celibacy of Puritan England - but instead it is the number of children we have that we need to limit. So if the time ever comes - in two years, ten years or longer - when you start thinking about adding another human being onto this messy and complicated planet, maybe think again.
7
Comment Writers Christiana Ajai-Thomas Deputy Editor
Oliver Harrison Staff Writer
Sagal Mohamed Staff Writer
Jesser Horowitz Staff Writer
Scruton's LSE: Losing a Genius, Losing a Friend Max Marlow Hayek Society President
Last week, the world lost one of the most well-read, creative, and impassioned people to ever grace the earth. He wrote plays, books aplenty and contributed more to the intellectual discourse amongst average people than most academics could ever dream. The death of Sir Roger Scruton may please some – certainly, he held views that were heterodox to the current liberal discourse and that make you wince. However, when you explore his work, you find a contemplative treasure trove that changes the way you view the world. The greatest conservative thinker of our age - a title that may make you recoil in horror, but listen openly dear reader. Whether LSE students, staff or faculty, here’s what I think you can retrieve from the work of a friend to us all. LSE’s three pubs lend a certain credence to the view of our university as a social campus. We can be a campus of drinkers: Sir Roger gave us a great deal to think about. His book ‘I Drink, Therefore, I Am’ (2009) explores the connection we share with wine. The soil it is grown in, infused with the history, passion, and company in which we quaff, all contribute to a culture which is, though not good for the hangover, certainly good for the soul. LSE is a university for thinkers. Sir Roger’s intellectual works on Kant, Spinoza, Zizek and Wittgenstein (to name but a few) should be the basic text books of many students. Not only was he regarded as an expert, lecturing at our fellow scion of the University of London (Birkbeck), but he allowed his knowledge the flow through his other work. His thought, like his philosophical exercise, was like LSE: truly international. LSE is chocabloc with photographers and Instagrammers. There seem to be more cameras on campus than people. LSE is proud of its architecture, and rightly so. Sir Roger’s academic specialism in aesthetics landed him as chairman of a Government commission. The beautifully written ‘The Aesthetics of Architecture’ (1979), ‘The Aesthetic Understanding’ (1983), and ‘Beauty’ (2009) explain why objects look and feel so good. You will find yourself, upon reading, encapsulated in a new understand-
ing of your environment, in Holborn and Kingsway. Taking photos of the NAB will never feel the same again. LSE has a strong religious community. Although myself a member, I think my humanist peers should find time to reflect on what we mean by sacredness and divinity. In Sir Roger’s ‘The Soul of the World’ (2014), he reflects on how we see reflections of human nature in everything, how sacredness is felt and why we should value it. Of any book in this long list, it is this one I would plead with you to read the most. Environmentalism at LSE is incredibly strong. I often find myself sparring with Isabella Pojuner and Colin Vanelli, both of whom conducted fearsome and tireless research in their battle for greater environmentalism. I often find my-
self on the other side of the divide when it comes to global warming, but we are united in our fight for environmentalism. Sir Roger’s ‘Green Philosophy’ (2012) fleshes out a conservative approach to environmentalism, through a love of home, individual actions and the market. To my socialist and green peers, this book may not change your mind on solutions to climate change, but it will certainly build coalitions with those of us on the right who wish to help in your battle. Students from the country can often feel at odds with the LSE’s metropolitan culture. Sir Roger’s introspections into the countryside can swiftly move you from the dirty streets and constant pollution to the serenity of the countryside. In ‘On Hunting’ (1998), Sir Roger convincingly defends hunting in
the countryside, and explains why we are so closely drawn to the horse as our bestial best friend. Without a doubt, this book makes one feel at ease with their concrete trappings here in London, knowing that liberation lies just beyond the M25. Students from Eastern and Central Europe are numerous at the LSE. Our academics and students share in LSE’s rich connection with this area of Europe. The namesake of the LSE Hayek Society was accompanied by fellow Austro-Hungarian Karl Popper at LSE. During the period of tyranny beyond the Iron Curtain, the freedom of our potential students was curtailed by the heinous crimes of communism. Sir Roger smuggled books into Prague and taught at their Underground University. He was a hero to the resistance there, presented
with a plethora of merits and medals by their current governments in thanksgiving. Sir Roger’s semi-autobiographical fiction, ‘Notes from the Underground’ (2014) recounts this terror and how true action, something that inspires many students here at LSE, can change the world for the better. Sir Roger Scruton died after a painful year of cancer and the New Statesman intentionally smearing him after an interview. But his work will continue. His death was a lachrymose affair for me, and I wanted to honour him in a way which would share his beautiful work. I’m a free-market Libertarian: we were at odds over economics, the nation-state, social values and a manner of other subjects, but he changed my thought and life for the better. He will do the same to you.
8 Comment
Tuesday 28 January 2020 | The Beaver
Iraq's Right to Be Left Alone
News Editor Jeffrey Wang argues that now that the Iraqi people have spoken, America must respect their wish - and leave them alone. Jeffrey Wang News Editor
I
Gustav Hagild
dangle delicately on the line between illegality and otherwise. At this point, we must respond to the American apologists who might attempt to defend the seemingly illegal occupation of Iraq. Some will argue that America has a duty to ‘finish the job’ in Iraq and will claim that the American military presence is to safeguard the democratic rights of the Iraqi people. What hogwash, what perfidy, what hypocrisy, and what sanctimony; how dare they claim that they are there to safeguard the democratic rights of the Iraqi people! The democratic and sovereign representatives of Iraq and the Iraqi people have demanded the immediate withdrawal of American forces. Other apologists may argue that American troops are required to keep the peace in the region, to ensure that terrorism does not fester. These apologists should read a modern history of the Middle East. Was it not the meddling of the Western powers through the SykesPicot agreement that began this debacle in the first place? Was it not American support for the Mujahideen, the origin of the modern
Jihadi extremists? Finally, was it not the Coalition's overthrow of Saddam Hussein that has sent Iraq on this downward spiral?
“The root causes
of Iraq's woes is not regional instabilities; the root causes are the interventionist and neo-colonial forces of the Western powers
The root causes of Iraq's woes is not regional instabilities; the root causes are the interventionist and neo-colonial forces of the Western powers. With all that said, should the Iraqi people request that America or any other nation support it in its war against radical-
Dawn of a Decade: New Year, Same You
Comment Editor
2
ferent from responses to Israel or India’s occupation of Kashmir or Palestine. Why? It is because unlike Israel or India, the Iraqi people, through their democratically elected representatives in parliament, requested an American military presence in Iraq. With this singular action, military involvement by the United States becomes legal and like any other bilateral agreement between states. Let’s return to Trump's statement: "We have a very extraordinarily expensive air base that's there." Taken in good faith, this constitutes something akin to a school-yard bully beating up another student and demanding that they pay to be left alone. Taken in poor faith, this indicates America’s willingness to violate Iraqi sovereignty and ignore the will of the Iraqi people. Recently, Trump's actions and pronouncements make the latter look far more plausible. As he declared: "There's been no decision whatsoever to leave Iraq", and then moved nearly 4000 more soldiers into the Middle East, including Iraq. Without the blessing of the Iraqi people, both these acts
“
n the hectic days since the treacherous and illegal assassination of Iranian leader Qassem Soleimani by American military-political institutions, it is easy to become distracted by the media circus of American threats to demolish Iranian cultural sites, or Iranian vows of vengeance. Something less often discussed is the issue of Iraqi sovereignty. Both the initial assassination and the following Iranian retaliation happened not on Iranian or American soil, but on sovereign Iraqi territory. The importance of this fact is heightened by American President Donald Trump's bombastic remarks in regards to Iraqi sovereignty, particularly: "We have a very extraordinarily expensive air base that's there. It cost billions of dollars to build. Long before my time, We're not leaving unless they pay us back for it." This was in response to the unanimous passing of a draft resolution by the Iraqi parliament, the sovereign and democratically elected representatives of the Iraqi people, for America to respect the national integrity of Iraq and to withdraw all its military forces from Iraqi soil. This does not seem an outrageous demand given that the legal basis for the American occupation is tenuous at best and non-existent at worst. Indeed, former UN SecretaryGeneral pointed this out when speaking on the invasion and occupation of Iraq: “I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and the UN Charter’s point of view, [the war] was illegal”. This opinion from the UN, the supreme arbiter of international laws proves that the American occupation of Iraq holds zero legitimacy and is no better than the Indian or Israeli occupation of Kashmir or Palestine. Indeed, America’s current actions constitute no less than a war of aggression, an act that has been outlawed since the Nuremberg trials. However, the international response to America's occupation of Iraq has been markedly dif-
ism and fundamentalism, it would indeed be legitimate for America to intervene. But given that the Iraqi people have made their position clear, that American forces are no longer welcome, the issue of terrorism in Iraq becomes a sovereign issue of the Iraqi state, and that America has no place to meddle. The international historical responses to American forces have been non-existent because of the legitimacy granted by the Iraqi people. Today that legitimacy is gone, and America can no longer be allowed to get away with its illegal occupation. If America is genuinely devoted to international laws, norms and principles of sovereignty, then it must respect the wishes of Iraqi people and withdraw its forces from the country. If it is to the contrary, and they expose themselves as aggressors and foreign occupiers, then we must not allow America to get away with its duplicity. We cannot allow them to posture and proclaim that they are a free and law-abiding nation while they trample upon the liberties and legal prerogatives of the Iraqi people. Iraq is an independent sovereign state, and the international community has a solemn duty to prevent it from being reduced to a state of quasi-colonialism by American imperialism. I myself am uncertain on how we may respond. Can one boycott a juggernaut, when it hasn’t even worked against a small state like Israel? Will letters of protest do any good against the thick-faced and shameless America bureaucracy, since it certainly hasn’t worked in countless previous American interventions? I do not know. What I do know is that our present freedoms exist because we have learned to largely work cooperatively as an international community following the crucibles of two World Wars and the Cold War that plagues the twentieth century. If we allow Iraq to be bullied out of its national sovereignty, we are encouraging tyrants everywhere to occupy another Palestine, Kashmir and Iraq. If so, then how long before Britain becomes Airstrip one?
019 is over, and lo and behold, 2020 is upon us. I am not going to lie; it was a weird one for me. It was not a great year, and you won’t find those ridiculously long stories documenting every-goddamn-day of a fantastic year on my Instagram (ahem, @ gustavhagild). It wasn’t an annus horribilis either. I got a BA, started my MSc here at LSE, and escaped one horrible flatmate. I got a new tiny flat, which I only locked my-
self out of twice, and a big pepper mill for Christmas. I broke up with my boyfriend who I thought was the one, cut down smoking in July, only to increase it again in September. My dog died, RIP. Some will say I flew too much, I don’t think I flew enough. A secret admirer sent me flowers and champagne. I found out the secret admirer was a friend, who might like being turned down?! I cooked a whole chicken all by myself. The articles I wrote got a lot of reads. I began liking my aunt, and discovered a weird smell in my apartment that I still haven’t found the source of. Not
@beaveronline
correlated. All in all, a mixed, regular year. Good grades, not amazing grades, and fun times, as well as sad times. My skin has been good and bad. But this year, I am not making unrealistic resolutions for 2020. I am not running more than I already I do. I am not quitting smoking and I am not planning on working any less. Some goals will be a given – as I am sure they will for you – like finding a job after graduating, or perhaps moving flat (seriously, what is that smell?). But let 2020 be the year where you cut yourself some slack. Stop the self-flagellation, and give yourself a chance
www.beaveronline.co.uk
to rest a bit, or go for a walk or don’t. So what you still haven’t picked up tennis, or learnt to play the guitar? If you really wanted to, you probably would have done it already. Something else was more important: like your studies, your friends, Netflix, whatever – and I say, put your energy there. Instead of looking for change, perhaps allow yourself to continue what you are doing, but focusing on doing that well. Rest in your routine. Then maybe, along the way, you will realise you have done more than you set out to do. With the New Year comes a new term, new courses, exams,
deadlines and so on. But with it also comes a new year of falling in love, dancing (maybe in Paris? Please, someone take me to Paris), studying, eating pasta over the sink, laughing, and going for a prelibrary-on-a-Sunday walk. Instead of further burdening yourself with silly, and quite frankly, pretentious New Year’s resolutions – that we both know you won’t keep – I think you should take this time to reflect briefly on whether you are happy or not, then forget that nonsense, and do as you like. But do it well, and enjoy it. Happy New Year!
www.facebook.com/thebeaveronline/
www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline
Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk
Silence is Not Democracy
9
In response to the article “For 2020, LSE Must Help Get Brexit Done” published online, Josie Dumbrell argues that silencing anti-Brexit sentiment is not the way forward. We have reprinted the original article below.
Guest Contributor
T
It’s only been 2020 for about 30 seconds, and the discourse surrounding Brexit from both sides is already giving me a headache. The article below “For 2020, LSE Must Help Get Brexit Done” rings in the New Year with the rather smug declaration that Remain-voting academics “must join the fray or risk irrelevancy”, pronouncing all opposition dead in the face of the reality of Brexit. Opinions on Brexit itself aside, this kind of rhetoric reflects a sinister attitude towards politics more broadly amongst a growing number of Brexit’s supporters. The perspective that Remain voters academics or otherwise - must sit down, shut up and support Brexit is a potentially dangerous one. Since the 2016 referendum, the Brexit vote has often been held up as indicative of the power of democracy, with continuing resistance to it shunned as being ‘undemocratic’. Since the will of
the people decided that Britain will leave the EU, any opposition to that decision has often been branded as ‘anti-democracy’. However, that isn’t how democracy works. The Brexit vote was either democratic, or it was irreversible and impossible to protest – it cannot, by definition, be both. Protests against political decisions are just as expressive of democracy as the votes in their favour. An insistence on support for Brexit is, in this vein, an attack on the very democratic values that Britain prides itself in. As British people, we enjoy a freedom to disagree with the state in a way that many countries don’t. A critical cornerstone of the liberty that, in theory, makes this country so ‘great’ is our ability to tell the government “no”, whether through voting, protest, or simply refusing to comply with what the government tells you (a certain Rage Against the Machine song comes to mind here). Disagreeing with the state – and by extension Brexit – is not, as some would have you believe, demonstrative of a lack of patriot-
ism. Patriotism encompasses the love of one’s country’s culture, its artistic and scientific output, its natural landscape, its people. Both Leave and Remain voters voted for what they thought to be best for their country – in other words, out of patriotism. Patriotism is not, and should never be, about a blind faith in state structures, laws and politicians. An insistence on uncritical acceptance of the state is at best delusional and, in the wrong hands, proto-authoritarian. We are lucky to be a country that celebrates freedom of thought, conscience and opinion; yet a growing number of particularly hard-line Brexiteers seek to police that. And for what purpose? Why should Remain voters not be allowed to openly criticise Brexit – or, even more worryingly, be told that they ‘must' support it? The original article states that young people should not ‘criticise something that will serve to define their future’, but is the centrality of Brexit to our futures not impetus enough to encourage the freedom to criticise as well as support it? This is not an issue of party-
politics, but of democracy.
“This is not an
issue of partypolitics, but of democracy.
“
Josie Dumbrell
Whilst much of popular discourse on Brexit has reduced it down to a matter of the Guardianreading liberal elite vs. the racist and uneducated, opinions on Brexit come from all areas of the political spectrum. Many “old-style” Tories voted Remain and many radical left-wingers voted Leave – I may have voted differently had I had faith in the government to deliver Brexit successfully. Regardless of your opinion
on Brexit, however – whether you think it’s the best thing to have happened to Britain in the past 50 years, the coming of the apocalypse, or something in-between – you should be able to recognise and support the right of people to criticise and resist it, and acknowledge the danger of insisting on unthinking support. Yes, Brexit is happening. The will of the people has decreed it, the government have promised to do it, “Brexit means Brexit”, I could go on. But resistance to it, or specifically (at least in my case) to the way that the current Conservative government are handling it, is a right that we should continue to defend as we move forward into a Britain removed from the EU. If you love Britain, and believe in its “greatness”, then encouraging the right of the people to disagree with how it is run – and by extension supporting its very foundations of democracy and liberty-for-all – should be something that you wholeheartedly endorse. After all, isn’t disagreement with how the state is run the reason that Brexit happened in the first place?
For 2020, LSE Must Help Get Brexit Done Michael Shapland Comment Editor
W
hat are you doing to help get Brexit done? With victory comes vindication. December 12th’s election saw a resounding landslide win for Boris Johnson’s Conservatives and a definitive answer to the question: will Brexit ever get done? This result has not come as welcome news for many UK citizens; among them a vast proportion of LSE’s left-wingers and Remainers. In ‘The London School of Brexit Bashing,’ I documented the extent to which the LSE’s academic rhetoric is directed against Brexit. But one resounding fact is clear: Brexit will happen on January the 31st. However, in light of Johnson’s victory, one must now extend an olive branch to the anti-Brexit movement. What must occur now is a paradigm shift for the LSE’s left-wing intelligentsia. Instead of acting like dormant saboteurs of Brexit, the LSE’s liberal elite must join the fray or risk irrelevancy. What does it mean to help get Brexit done? As a start, this entails outright support for Brexit. Brexit will define a future Britain; it’s trade relations, culture and identity. To continue peddling rhetoric that so clearly contradicts the beliefs that underpin exiting the European Union is to create the same division and hostility that brought Brexit about in the first place. This spate of anti-Brexit dismay has already become clear in recent response articles on LSE’s Brexit Blog, such as Raluca Bejan’s “Austerity is to blame for the result of the general election, but so is nationalism”. As each successive article is posted to LSE’s Brexit blog, the implicit assumption that
LSE seeks to paint alongside Brexit is clear: Brexit is something to judge through the frame of negativity and hostility. Indeed, as one delves deeper into such posts, further interesting mechanisms concerning the December election result can be detected: patronising the working class, the implicit treatment of all Brexiteers as racist, and sweeping statements such as “the electorate decided that inequality and poverty are secondary to the Brexit saga”. However, to Britain’s benefit, such posts are becoming increasingly irrelevant as the truth emerges: Remain no longer exists. Of course, Brexit Britain will likely see a new rise in ‘Rejoiners’, but they will also, like the ideology
they seek to promote, fade into obscurity. This directs one to the Brexit Blog and what it can do to help the cause. Very simply, it should at least balance out its anti-Brexit articles with ones that promote Brexit and British interests. Already with the replacement of ex-speaker John Bercow with Sir Lindsay Hoyle, we are seeing the benefits impartiality and fairness can bring both to the political process and to the formation of ideas across parties. The LSE blog, as an arbiter of what posts are selected, should follow suit. The same goes for the LSE ‘s UK anti-Brexit student body. Instead of seeking to criticize something that will serve to define their future, they should instead aid a cause which could boost the UK
economy by as much as £135 billion per year. In the climax of many stories, a protagonist is forced to come to terms with a lie that has determined their identity, and thus face the truth during a process of catharsis. Anti-Brexiters should do the same. Like quitting a bad habit, joining the Brexit movement will take time, focus, and energy. If one fails to become a Brexiteerthey should at least not seek to derail it at every turn. Of course, most students at the LSE have far less power than such prominent figures as anti-Brexit QCs Gina Miller or Jolyon Maugham. Even so, it is the cumulative effect of continuous self-righteous comments and delusional statements in the vein of Jeremy Corbyn’s ‘we won the
argument’ Guardian post that will further knock the UK ship off its present course. Every sneer and negative comment adds to the vast multivariate collection of elements that decides all things from the UK’s economic future, to the ruling party’s confidence in its own policies. This should even be done out of self-interest for the antiBrexit movement. It is clear from December 12th that the UK confirmed the result of the Brexit referendum. Seeking to vent one’s fury at the establishment through acts such as the December 13th ‘Boris is not my PM’ protests will do nothing to promote ‘Rejoin’. The final benefit of joining Brexit also comes from Bejan’s unfortunate article. Here I must agree with Bejan: “nationalism” did help cause Brexit. A love of Britain, and what it represents to the world, fuelled both the referendum and the December 12th election results. By voting for Brexit in both, we have taken pride in our culture, our fantastic educational and political institutions, and our tolerant and accepting society. Too often in our media-saturated world are we tricked into believing that Brexit represents some hard-right dystopia. To be a Remainer is often to confirm one’s virtue to the masses. However, the most moral and caring thing we can do now, across the political spectrum, is to join a movement which has already demonstrated that it has the potential to change millions of lives for the better. Brexit is brilliant. For 2020, we must not sneer at its progress, but enhance its success.
10
Features
Tuesday 28 January 2020 | The Beaver
Features Editors Annabelle Jarrett Colin Vanelli Marianne Hii
Met Police: £700k Spent on Student Climate Strikes
Colin Vanelli
Features Editor
L
ondon’s Metropolitan Police spent £670,052 policing the youth climate strikes this year, according to data obtained by The Beaver in a Freedom of Information request. The Beaver sought information on police spending during the major youth climate strikes which occurred in March, May, September, and November. The force spent £317,761.67 for the September 20th strike, which was joined by a number of other non-student groups in solidarity,
and is believed to be the largest coordinated climate action in British history. £101,822 was spent the 15 March demonstration, £144,237 on 24 May, and £106,232 on 20 November. The figures include “opportunity costs, overtime, fleet, and catering” costs. In total, the force spent just under £120,000 paying out overtime surrounding the demonstrations. The figures are substantially less than the £37m spent by the Met on Extinction Rebellion protests this year, which paralyzed much of central London in April. After youth protestors occupied bridges and a number of roads around West-
minster in March, police instituted strict controls over the student demonstrations. Strike organizer Student Climate Action noted that during the September strikes, “students were prevented from marching to the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy to stand in solidarity with workers on strike.”
number of ways to improve our social services and help us transition to a sustainable future, but instead they were used to suppress and harass young people fighting to take back their futures.”
This article originally appeared online on 16 December.
In a comment to The Beaver, Student Climate Action said that it “deplores the excessive state expenditure on policing at the recent climate strikes. The hundreds of thousands of pounds spent on policing for the September strike alone could have been used in any
The Labour Candidate Race
The race for the new Labour leader is heating up, how are the candidates differentiating themselves?
Heba Khalid
Features Staff Writer
A
fter the Labour Party faced its worst electoral defeat in 84 years on the 12th of December, Jeremy Corbyn finally conceded to calls for his resignation. It is no secret that ideological warfare has been entrenched within the Labour Party for the last few years. Jeremy Corbyn’s unpopularity is thought to be one of the primary reasons why Labour lost so catastrophically, so with the leadership position now up for grabs, all eyes are on the new prospects. Leadership races are conducted under a ‘one member, one vote’ system whereby members and registered supporters rank candidates in order of preference. Voting is thought to open on the 21st of February and close on the 2nd of April, with results being announced to the public around two days later. The technicalities of the alternative voting system are complex, and some Unions are still deciding which candidates they are going to support. But, as things currently stand, we do have a clear idea of who the final four to be cast in February’s ballot are going to be. MP for Holborn and shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, has been in the limelight for some time now. He received the most nominations out of all other hopefuls, and subsequently breezed through the initial nomination rounds. His background as a human rights law-
Left to right: Keir Starmer, Lisa Nandy, Emily Thornberry, Rebecca Long-Bailey
yer and director of public prosecutions has curated his view for more ‘moral socialism’ within politics. As Corbyn’s former right-handman in all things Brexit-related, he believes that the party needs to ‘broadly retain the radical of the Corbyn era’. His list of pro-bono cases as a barrister is impressive, although critics have already begun to pick holes in his previous work within the Crown Prosecution Service and general closeness with the establishment. Others suggest that he is merely a replica of Corbyn. Admittedly, this is only a bad thing if you’re still an avid supporter of New Labour. Speaking of – Lisa Nandy, another hopeful, really kicked off her leadership campaign by attacking Blair’s New Labour ideology for ‘perpetuating the consensus that Thatcher built’. Although a supporter of Corbyn, Nandy has mostly advocated for greater institutional change within the party. She is especially emphatic about the ‘disconnect in the hierarchy of the Labour Party’. Nandy’s position as the MP for Wigan, which voted Leave, places her close to
areas which ‘feel neglected … and are turning away from the red rose party’. Her chances of winning, however, are questioned by sceptics, who feel her narrative for grand institutional change within the Labour Party may be rejected by the Labour establishment as a whole. Rebecca Long-Bailey, MP for Salford and Eccles, has been climbing the ranks since announcing her bid for leadership, and especially since getting the second largest trade union in the country, Unite, on her side as well as Momentum. But she too has been criticised for representing ‘continuity Corbyn’ by promising to push forward the ‘socialist agenda of the party’. Although this kind of criticism has similarly followed Starmer, he happens to be distinguished from Long-Bailey by his ‘soft-left approach’, which has attracted centrists, and is apparently unparalleled with Rebecca Long-Bailey’s ‘far-left’ agenda. Long-Bailey has fought against ‘continuity Corbyn’ commentary by proposing big changes to Labour HQ and the way in which it
campaigns in general elections but, in the same breath, has defended the policies and manifesto of the 2019 election which saw the party meet its demise by the hands of the electorate. The fourth candidate and shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry, has spent much of her campaign criticising Starmer and Long-Bailey for operating like ‘machine politicians’. Although she is yet to garner any big-name affiliations, the MP for Islington South and Finsbury has declared herself to be more radical than Jeremy Corbyn in her aspirations for the party – though she doesn't out reject outright Corbyn’s manifesto as ‘wrong’ in any sense. However, her stance as a strong-Remainer has often found her under attack for ‘sneering’ at Brexit voters. There are also some honourable mentions that have since dropped out of the race. Jess Phillips and Clive Lewis were both openly critical of Corbyn. In 2017, Lewis stepped down from the shadow cabinet altogether, and has attacked Corbyn’s complacency with Brexit policy. Jess Phillips, an
even more outspoken critic of Corbyn, has taken issue with the party’s failure to tackle anti-Semitism and sexual harassment allegations. She advocated for greater honesty in politics, but ultimately failed to garner enough support to see her progress through the final stages of the contest. Some say the loss of Lewis and Phillips is a defeat in itself, as the remaining prospects tread on the same lines as their predecessor, and are unlikely to tell Labour members ‘what they need to hear’, or invoke any real change. This candidate race is not only important because it foresees a replacement for Corbyn, but because it also aligns with a deputy leadership election, and resignations of other key figures such as John McDonnell – an ideological upheaval may be on the cards. Or, not, considering most candidates do not directly oppose Corbyn or any of his policies. Nor do they propose the kind of disruption enacted by Blair in the 90s (not that this is a recipe for Labour success, by any means). Should we strive for more of the same? Or should we root for ideological change within the Labour party to rebuild the coveted red-wall that was bulldozed on the night of the election? Based on the pitches of the current hopefuls, the objective is not to uproot Corbyn’s ideals, but to re-package them, and potentially soften them in order to alleviate the rampant factionalism within the party. Watch this space.
Joe Rogan and Endorsement Politics Joe Rogan's informal endorsement of Bernie Sanders has led to some controversy.
Hayden Flanery
Deputy Features Editor
J
oe Rogan’s endorsement of Bernie Sanders this past week spurred controversy in every
corner of the Democratic field. During an interview on Tuesday with New York Times Opinion Editor Bari Weiss on his show, The Joe Rogan Experience, Rogan stated, “I think I’ll probably vote for Bernie… I believe in him, I like him.”
While not an endorsement in the strictest sense, the remarks are likely to be influential. Rogan’s podcast is top-rated, receiving millions of listens and views per episode. He boasts 5.7 million followers on Twitter, and is known for courting controversial figures and
engaging in discussions that skirt conventional views. Presidential hopefuls Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang, and Bernie Sanders have previously appeared on the podcast. Joe Rogan has confirmed that contenders Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and
Joe Biden have reached out to the show with requests to appear, but were declined. This comes after a string of endorsements from major progressive lawmakers for Senator Sanders, notably from leading women and minority members in Con-
gress. These endorsements include freshman lawmaker Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, co-chairs of the Progressive Caucus Reps. Pramila Jayapal and Mark Pocan, Rep. Ro Khanna, and Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib (with Ocasio Cortez, three of four members of “The Squad”). Two days after Rogan’s interview, Bernie Sanders’ official Twitter account retweeted a clip of the exchange. The endorsement has been met with intense criticism from some liberals and those on the left. Rogan, known for his hours-long, sometimes inebriated, experimental interviews with a variety of notable celebrities, intellectuals, and pseudo-intellectuals, has a spotted history of remarks that some have characterized as bigoted towards African Americans and the trans* community. In one clip, Rogan describes walking into a movie theatre in a black neighborhood to watch Planet of the Apes, saying, “We walk in Planet of the Apes.” He later follows, “Planet of the Apes didn’t take place in Africa. That was a racist thing for me to say.” His commentary continues, “No wonder why black people are angry and they feel disenfranchised… they’re completely removed from the mainstream cultural experience…. Everyone’s white in the movie except the bad guy. The bad guy is a black guy, and I thought it was so strange.” In another, he criticizes a transgender MMA fighter who
previously had not disclosed her former biological status, and compared her to “an actual woman” who defeated her. Throughout, he expresses conflicting views on her status as a woman. Twitter has since exploded with criticism of Sanders’ promotion of the clip. Alphonso David, President of the prominent LGBTQ+ rights advocacy organization the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), joined in the condemnation with the following statement: “Bernie Sanders has run a campaign unabashedly supportive of the rights of LGBTQ people.... The Sanders campaign must reconsider this endorsement and the decision to publicize the views of someone who has consistently attacked and dehumanized marginalized people.” HRC has faced its own criticism in the past over its relationship with the trans* community, including their support of a non-inclusive version of the Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA) bill in 2008. Critics also note HRC’s lack of diversity on staff, and several questionable endorsements of conservative and offensive candidates over more progressive (and sometimes queer) opponents. They also received criticism for endorsing Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary in 2016, despite Bernie Sanders winning a perfect 100 on their own scorecard, compared to Clinton’s 89. Then-President Chad Griffin had previously worked under President Bill Clinton during his time in the White House.
Campaign spokesperson Briahna Joy Gray finally addressed the controversy in a statement via email, writing: “Sharing a big tent requires including those who do not share every one of our beliefs, while always making clear that we will never compromise our values. The truth is that by standing together in solidarity, we share the values of love and respect that will move us in the direction of a more humane, more equal world.” Sanders has demonstrated a willingness to speak to audiences outside of the traditional Democratic base in the past, appearing on Fox News for a town hall last year. Supporters argue that this approach is not only ethical but strategically necessary, to reach out to voters who may have voted for Trump or stayed at home in 2016. Sanders often appeals to this potential coalition of those disengaged with electoral politics. Joe Rogan represents one type of disaffected (often male) voter whose views are often quite progressive but who feel no loyalty to traditional parties. The development of this story interestingly comes after a debate on the Democratic field about the concept of ‘purity tests.’ In the December 19 Democratic Party debate, Elizabeth Warren attacked Pete Buttigieg for accepting donations from billionaires and hosting private events for Wall Street hedge fund financiers and Silicon Valley moguls at events like the now-infamous wine cave fundraiser. Buttigieg defended himself, say-
“
Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk
Should candidates accept donations and endorsements of those less ideologically pure than they are?
“
www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline
ing “I am literally the only person on this stage who is not a millionaire or a billionaire. . . . This is the problem with issuing purity tests you cannot yourself pass…. We need the support from everybody who is committed to helping us defeat Donald Trump.” He followed up with a comment saying, “I will welcome the support of people of varying, different backgrounds and varying means to fund this campaign, just as I'm looking to draw in the votes of everyone we can get to vote in this campaign.” Should candidates accept donations and endorsements of those less ideologically pure than they are? If this requires progressives rejecting donations from billionaires, there is at least a clear line to draw (as Bernie Sanders’ campaign attests). However, the further we extend the metrics, the more difficult it becomes. Rogan’s full comments shed some light on the situation: “Look, you could dig up dirt on every single human being that’s ever existed if you catch them in their worst moment and you magnify those moments and you cut out
11
everything else and you only display those worst moments. That said, you can’t find very many with Bernie. He’s been insanely consistent his entire life.” In hundreds or thousands of hours of interviews, Joe Rogan has expressed some complicated and at times offensive views, whether seriously or in jest. He also has expressed sentiments of compassion and universality. This messiness resonates with millions of people – and he has chosen to endorse a candidate for having qualities he lacks. Should Sanders turn every imperfect supporter away? Should the Democratic Party give up on a wide swathe of the electorate, who occasionally express views that do not align with their platform, and instead solely pursue the perfect voter? In the 2016 race, Hillary Clinton’s comments referring to a large number of potential voters “baskets of deplorables" were turned into merchandise for the Trump campaign; it is impossible to say if this cost her the election, but it is difficult to imagine that it helped. Sen. Sanders has taken a gamble in accepting Rogan’s endorsement. As we head into the jury of the election booth this primary season, we will see soon enough if it pays off. The latest polls out of Iowa suggest that he may have nothing to worry about.
Change Makers is Here to Stay
The Beaver reports on 2018/2019 Change Makers project findings and recommendations.
Morgan Fairless Executive Editor
L
ast year, LSE and LSESU piloted the first iteration of the Change Makers programme. Inspired by a similar programme at UCL, where she worked previously, new Pro-Director for Education Professor Dilly Fung brought the project to LSE, partnering with the LSESU to make available funding and support for students wishing to get involved in LSE-related research. In an interview with LSE Blogs, LSESU Education officer Martha Ojo called the programme “a community-building exercise," arguing that “it will fundamentally transform how we as a community view our relationship to one another and in turn how we produce knowledge.” Last year, 24 projects were funded, involving 54 students from 16 departments – the budget for the project was £50,000. In its second year – and with a budget bump to £65,000 – there are 28 projects underway from students studying a broad array of subjects, ranging from effective mental health campaigns, to the experiences of belonging for commuting masters’ students. Some findings from 2018/19 Do I Fit in? Experiences of firstgeneration students at LSE By: Maria Gafforio, Zoi Adrianopoulou, Marie-Isabel Theuwis A qualitative study on the experiences of first-generation students at the university. Through interviews and a focus group, researchers found that “first-generation students perceive a gap between their ‘home environment’ and their ‘school environment’”, and “feel like it is hard to communicate their
[university] experience to people from home”. Recommendations: For all First-Generation Students: ∙Promote asking for help ∙Re-work the “Best of the Best” narrative ∙Create a “First-Generation Students” society ∙Assign an LSE Careers consultant for FGS ∙Provide more scholarships based on students’ financial situation For undergraduates only: ∙Carry out LSE LIFE sessions for expressing ideas. ∙Employ more programs like the Alison Wetherfield Programme. Is the Further Introduction of Summative Class Participation a Good Means of Improving Student Engagement and Satisfaction with LSE Classes? By: Rory Gillis, Damian Virchow The researchers focused on three courses in the Philosophy and Accounting department, studying the impact of summative class participation on students. They found that though there is a potential for stress issues to arise, summative class participation “can be beneficial”. The researchers recommend that “the further introduction of summative class participation should be seriously considered as a means of improving students’ sense of community whilst studying at the school. That said, we do not believe that the policy should be uniformly implemented, but rather that it should be considered on a department by department basis.” The findings ended with the clarification that “more precise microlevel panel data needs to be collected on course and student levels.” Why is feedback not effective? By: Ningyuan Jia, Yijiang Wang,
Yuhan Liu In a survey of 243 students in the Accounting and Finance departments, the researchers found that 83% of respondents perceived feedback to not be useful for their future careers; 70% felt that they did not receive feedback in a timely manner; 87% felt that comments received were “too general” without enough “constructive advice”. Inclusion Plans for disabled LSE students: what's really happening? By: Alison Beck, Amanda Nenzén Narrowing into Inclusion Plans – documents and practices designed to help students with disabilities – the researchers conducted interviews to investigate the realities of receiving and actioning an IP. They observed that students found: ∙Lack of awareness that the DWS exists
∙Getting an Inclusion Plan (IP) takes time and effort ∙Frequently, the IP adjustments simply don’t happen ∙Students are having to ‘manage’ the implementation of their IP ∙Some staff are less empathetic or understanding Professional staff found: ∙The process is manual and tedious Staff found: ∙Challenges of suggesting to a student that they might benefit from an IP ∙IPs add to the sense of email overload ∙IPs are too generic –it takes extra work to understand the ‘real story’ and what would actually help the student ∙Some adjustments are unclear, unhelpful, or at odds with their teaching style or best practice
∙Some teachers feel hesitant or unsure, especially regarding mental health. Their recommendations range from increasing student awareness of IPs and the Disability and Wellbeing Service, providing “a space in each IP for students to (optionally) write something about themselves and their needs, in their own words”, and improving monitoring by adding a question to Teaching Quality Assurance and Review Office surveys regarding the implementation of disabled students’ inclusion plans.
Photo: LSE Change Makers website
12 Features
Tuesday 28 January 2020 | The Beaver
Culture Change in the Finance World
LSE hosts a panel discussing the role of behavioral sciences in improving culture in the finance industry.
Marianne Hii Features Editor
O
n the 14th January 2020, LSE hosted the panel Working Together: an interdisciplinary approach to organisational culture. The panel consisted of Dame Susan Rice (BSB Chair), John C. Williams (President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York), a range of academics from LSE (Grace Lordan, Martin Oehmke, Tom Reader, and Edmund Schuster) and Celia Moore from Imperial. President Williams set the tone of the panel as one of optimism and genuine determination in changing the culture of the financial services industry. He highlighted the progress firms in the banking and finance industry are making in taking culture increasingly seriously over time. In both good times and bad, it was made clear that culture was a crucial motivation of the norms and behaviors in any organisation. Despite the understanding and developing of healthy cultures being a learning process, Williams noted positive starting points such as using the Banking Standards Board (BSB) survey of organiza tional culture at the moment to track where you culturally are at this moment, in order to progress forward. Williams spoke about his role in managing and leading two large organisations, and his own experience with changing company culture in the financial sector. Considering the risky, unethical, and criminal scandals that have dogged the financial industry for a long time, tackling a tainted culture is a
main priority of both Williams and the Federal Reserve. He recognised the ethical dilemmas junior bankers especially faced in everyday work environments, wherein euphemisms such as “make a judgement call” – implying the junior may be a troublemaker if he or she diverges from the status quo- can obscure unethical or risky behavior. Williams also emphasised the importance of bringing together diverse groups of individuals, including leaders in the financial industry and academics from various disciplines, to find holistic solutions to this problem. Indeed, the speakers on the day presented a range of diverse viewpoints from their respective fields of expertise. For his own part, Williams has shifted the culture of the Federal Reserve to one that focuses mainly on compliance to one focused on values, placing a premium on individuals making the right decisions themselves. It is clear that accountability is an essential part in strengthening organisational cultures, and principle-based decision making is a strong starting point instead of merely referring to an employee handbook for guidance. Additionally, speakers like LSE’s Dr. Grace Lordan, Associate Professor of Behavioral Science, spoke on the relevance of behavioral sciences, drawing a distinction between fast thinking, often used by high frequency traders, and slow thinking, requiring a long-term, deliberate process. Companies should keep in mind the culture and environment fostered, since in terms of crisis or in a negative, stressful environment, fast thinking may lead to rushed results. However, good corporate
Photo: Federal Reserve Bank of New York
cultures don’t necessarily lead to good outcomes- it is important to also allow customers and clients financial agency through nudges, commitment devices, and clearer information as opposed to informational overload. On the other hand, Edmund Schuster, LSE Associate Professor of Law, spoke about corporate lawyers ignoring insights from behavioral sciences. Corporate lawyers tend to encourage more risk, going in the opposite direction of financial regulation which has mandated a default of lower risk taking. Celia Moore, Professor of Organisational Behavior, spoke about the human nature of culture, in contrast to companies’ usual focus on policies. Though culture change is slow, it is possible to start at the individual level when people stop conforming to the status quo, even
when wrong. Small interventions, such as training “guardians” who encourage people to speak up, can create wider change by instilling a sense of optimism and safety about expressing your own views. LSE Professor of Finance Martin Oehmke discussed the legacy of financial crises; despite regulation changes, behavioral biases and science are not really incorporated in regulation today. Deciding what to maximise as the regulator may require difficult paternalistic decisions, which result in a focus on incentives. Thus it is important to understand organisational culture to solve the root of the problem. LSE’s Dr. Tom Reader, Associate Professor in the Department of Psychological and Behavioral Sciences, talked about the culture in organisations with industrial accidents. Similar to how culture can be a good indication of safety
in industrial accidents, culture can be used in finance to determine how much an organisation values productivity over safety, normalization over rule breaking, and the likelihood of a bad practice endemic. When risk taking is normalized, it is likely organisation won’t take culture surveys or participate in research. Overall, the panel constituted an engaging, meaningful discussion on the driving forces and the process of organisational change in the financial services industry. Importantly, we heard from a wide range of diverse disciplines – economics, finance, behavioral psychology and sciences, law – with an audience from all backgrounds in attendance. Interdisciplinary collaboration is indeed a promising start to solving such a complex issue.
In Conversation with the New York Federal Reserve Bank President On 14 January 2020, New York Fed President John Williams discussed his recent panel at LSE. Marianne Hii Features Editor
B
eaver: What brings you to LSE today? Williams: I did my MSc here 30 years ago so I always look forward to coming back and visiting. I have enormously fond memories in my years studying here, so being able to connect with the university again is one goal. The other is that we have this event organized with the banking standards board around culture in the banking system which has been a high priority for me and the Federal Reserve of New York the last couple of years. We are having this event to talk about bringing other fields of science into the conversation around culture and the financial services sector. How do economists view issues related to culture in the financial services industry? I think economists – and I’m an economist so I speak for myself and the profession – often think of things relatively narrowly. They think about incentives (to take and manage risk), pay structure, or management standards around activities, and I think those are
very important and obviously play a role in the culture of an organization. However, we do know that from behavioral sciences it’s not just about money, and as an economist I’m not sure if i'm supposed to say that. Culture depends on a lot of things that matter to people. It’s really something that affects all of the decisions we make in organizations, not just around risk taking but in terms of diversity and inclusion, giving the best ideas, and willingness to challenge each other. I think economists tend to focus mostly on financial incentives, but there are a lot of other aspects that affect behavior and norms.
that relate more to how our brains work and the social aspect of work that maybe we don’t even notice we are doing. Unconscious bias is one example. Another is how we frame questions or issues changes how you think about them, like the words we use in describing decision making or risk. We have issues of misconduct, and the conversation instead of it being about right, wrong, or consistency with organizational values, can use language like, “You aren’t a team player.” We are human beings, and are influenced heavily in our behaviors and norms by what is around us and the expectation put on us.
When economists learn from experts in other fields, how do they relate to each other? We had a conference in New York last summer, and we brought in people from the behavioral sciences. First of all, I had a really positive response from the audience; we learnt a lot from talking to people that perhaps we haven’t talked to as much in the past. In terms of connecting dots, it’s understanding that although financial incentives and rational decision making are important, there are other aspects of decision making
What role do you think organizational psychology plays in building that long term corporate culture? People can often take the culture of an organization for granted. I can use my own example of moving between organisations, and people saying things like, “That’s not how we do things here,” or “This is the way we do things, and we have a longstanding culture of x, y, z.” It’s the people working together who shape the culture. The leadership of the organization and all the people in the organization are creating a culture everyday they work. In-
stead of thinking about culture as this is the way it’s been, it is incumbent on leaders of the organization and everyone in the organization to shape that and create a culture they want. You can choose to have a certain culture, but can’t not choose to have a culture – it’s going to be there. By not taking into account behavior sciences that’s a decision already on what kind of culture you have. You have to think about how this affects things: how you communicate expectations, how you talk about various things, how you approach things. A good example of this is diversity and inclusion, where you realize how you behave in any situation affects how the culture is like. A lot of people think of culture as you have a risk culture, diversity and inclusion culture, but I think all of these is one culture that can manifest itself in these different dimensions We often talk about having a risk culture around financial risk, and we have policies around that. Actually, the culture you create everyday on everything you do spills back into this risk culture, and how you approach diversity and inclusion. A leader can’t say I want you to follow x, y, z in terms of risk, but then everything else they
do shows they have exactly the opposite view on this. You have to be consistent in messaging, thoughtful of how you frame issues, and basically walk the talk. We learn from outside experts that the style of approaching each issue one way and solving that like a tactical problem doesn’t really work; it's about an organic, holistic culture. About inclusion, an organization often says we need to find candidates that fit into the culture, and my view is you got to change that conversation to we need to create a culture where people feel they can fit in being themselves, so we fit the people, not people fitting into us. Obviously, we have integrity, but I feel this is about understanding the psychology of consistent messaging. How do large organizations nowadays become more diverse and inclusive, and how do we measure the progress the industry is making? Firstly, I think inclusion is really an important aspect. You are not going to get where you want to be on diversity if people come into the organization, from the moment of interviewing or applying, say, “it doesn’t look like a place I’m going to be comfortable or be able to
Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk
www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline succeed.” The necessary condition is people being able to be themselves. We learn from the other fields how people cover their true identity when coming to the workplace – the vast majority do this. You want to lower those barriers so people can be themselves in the workplace. Creating an environment where people feel like and are able to do the best work in an inclusive way is the foundation. In terms of programmes, we have a lot in terms of recruiting and mentoring programmes but also in terms of outreach to other colleges and job fairs; having more people from minority backgrounds and being very proactive on the diversity side. We have summer internship programs where we are very focused on bringing more diverse candidates. A lot of people understandably, and I am one of those people, want to be given opportunities to grow in your jobs. We know we are on the diversity pipeline. One area where we struggle is a lot of people say, “I know we have gotten to this place, and I know this organization wants greater diversity, but don’t feel like I can achieve my career goals in the way I want to,” and look for other jobs. We have to foster that environment for everybody where they feel like they are being given those opportunities. Progress is a big issue, because the expectation of everybody, not just younger people, is that we are more transparent. The New York Federal Reserve has taken greater steps, and other organisations are too, in putting out the data and statistics, not even when they are where we want them to be, because we want to say, “This is where we are, these are our objectives, and this is what we are doing,” to be honest with ourselves. The financial services industry has been falling short on diversity despite a lot of efforts, and part of addressing that is being honest about where we are and where we need to progress. As someone who has been leading one of the largest organisations within the Federal Reserve System, how has your approach to organisational culture evolved? Well, again, I am an economist. We are a very professional organisation in the Federal Reserve – a lot of lawyers, bank supervision people, analysts, a lot of smart, hardworking, dedicated people – but tend to work very analytically. People like to have rules and policies to cover every situation: here is the travel policy, dress code, etc.” Coming into the FED, that was the way things kind of were. You got a policy handbook about everything – a foot deep, a third of a meter deep, 800 kg – but I want everything written down, I want to be clear about everything. One of the things we know about culture, is that it’s really about values and principles. There are policies – integrity, honesty are absolute – but when you deal with the real world, you can’t write down policies that cover every situation. You can’t tell people how to make good ethical decisions by writing down "don’t make unethical decisions"; that’s not going to work. We have to go back to the starting point; what are the foundations of norms and behaviors underlying culture? Sure, you need to know a policy for how to get reimbursed for business trips, but when it comes to most decisions we make about how to best achieve our work, we want people to use their best judgement. Obviously, talk to management, have conversations being open and honest about issues. It’s about moving away from the idea there is a rulebook
that tells us how to behave, to one that says we have strong values and principles, and we are a very mission-driven organisation: let’s apply those to every situation we can. Then, where I’m not sure what I'm supposed to do, have conversations about that. That’s a huge cultural change in the FED. My experience is when you write down a big policy handbook people also start saying, “That’s allowed, that’s not allowed,” and stop owning their own decisions and having accountability, so I think that’s been a big progression. When we were in San Francisco, we had this huge employee policy handbook. I had never seen it, and all my colleagues complained about it. It had all these policies about dress codes which were decades old and had been adjusted, but everyone says it’s so hard to understand all these policies. At the end of this multi-year process of culture change, the view was we don’t need this huge book. We just need a few basic values, principles, and policies around specific situations like travel and vacations. We had this event where we symbolically shredded the employee handbook. It was more of a statement of we came a long way, and we don’t need to be looking at page 382, paragraph 7, on note 3 to get what is the right thing to do. This is the journey I think we're always going to be on. It’s about accountability, owning decisions, and working together to think these things through instead of hoping someone else will answer this question. The world is always changing, the issues we deal with always change, and the idea you’re going to write down and know the right answer to everything is changing. 50 years ago, everyone in banking wore business attire everyday. No one does that anymore, no one needs to do that anymore. The problem is that people worry: if it doesn’t say wear business attire, how do I know what am I supposed to wear? I say use your judgement. If we use bad judgement, which we had, a manager can say that’s probably not the best decision. It’s a little scary for people, they don’t want to get in trouble, to do the wrong thing. They say, “I want to do the right thing, tell me what to do.” But you’re smart, capable. Once people get over that, it’s I don’t need to put on an uncomfortable business outfit when really what I’m doing is sitting on the computer screen all day. Where do you think incentive on motivation is coming for leaders in the finance industry to actually start change? It’s carrot and sticks. One is clearly the scandals around LIBOR and foreign exchange over the past decade and longer, those clearly have a big reputational and financial cost to companies and individuals there. Coming from an organisational science side, there’s a realization that strong resilient cultures create strong resilient organisations. So there’s actually almost a double bottom line argument here that is not only you’re going to be ethical and consistent with values, which people want organisations to be, but also that organisations make better decisions in long run, manage risks better in long run, and importantly, attract top-notch talent and keep them. It’s the same as diversity and inclusion. A lot of business arguments are that we know people want to work in organisations that are ethical and have values and principles that they hold themselves. Similarly, we know having diverse people and diverse backgrounds helps us make better decisions, the science is clear
13
Photo: Federal Reserve Bank of New York
on this. People want that; if I’m running an organisation, I want to make sure we attract the best talent. If people look at an organisation, and it doesn’t look like it has good values or is not inclusive, we are losing out on the business side. A positive is more resilient, stronger, successful organisations attracting and retaining best talent, and avoiding the really bad outcomes. Do you think firms are using corporate culture when differentiating themselves when recruiting new talent, or do u think new graduates really pay attention? Looking at issues like climate change and social issues, clearly people say that I want to work for an organisation where their mission or goal is one I share and value. When you have culture it's just not about financial risk taking. People see, is this an organisation where I can do my best work, I feel I am valued, my voice is heard, I feel the decisions are made in a way consistent with the organisation’s missions? I think people care about that. A lot of people say it’s millennials’ thing. It’s not a younger people thing, but it’s an everybody thing. I think the advantage is younger people are speaking up about it, and I feel we all want the same kind of things now. It’s just now maybe more in people’s attention. Organisations are doing this, I think they are. You hear a lot of financial services talk about this. I think there’s a long way to go, and of course you see this same set of issues in the tech industry and in others where bad or rotten cultures had big negative effects on companies, and where stronger cultures help them in the longer term. How do we deal with employees wanting to express issues but feeling pressured to not speak up? We talk about having a speak up culture, where people have the space to feel comfortable expressing views that are contrary to conventional wisdom or what the boss thinks. We work hard at that and we have training programs but the root cause is culture. If you walk in to work in the morning, and you think, I know my boss doesn’t want to hear my views when I disagree, then all of our efforts to say let’s have a speak up culture and have big screens saying everyone wants to hear your views is not going to work. People are going to say, “I know you say that, but my boss makes it clear that’s not what they want.” Culture is not just having a program, hotline, or video training but getting into the entire manage-
ment structure of the organization – supervisors, managers – they need to understand they need to have an approach open to different views, and that your career benefits when you bring out different views. We know that’s true; the more views and perspectives we get the better decisions about work we are going to do. If people come in and say, “I know my boss doesn’t agree with this, but we should at least be aware of the issue and have this discussion,” this helps us be stronger, and everyone benefits. But it is complicated sometimes, when people say they don’t agree with decision making, and express that, and then they say we heard you but we are still doing this decision. The people say why wasn’t I heard?, and the response is; 'You were heard but we have to make decisions'. But this is getting that healthy process where people feel like you’re supposed to express their own views, even if that’s not what other people think, that’s your job. This is where we're supposed to get: that’s the culture. It’s about not am I allowed, am I listened to. The tone at the top matters, being consistent, but it has to be throughout the organisation. If you experience everyday "just do your job, I don’t want to hear your views", then you are never going to speak up unless something is really bad. What is the NY fed doing about corporate culture issues in financial services? This initiative started at the bank before I joined, so one of the bank’s higher priorities in terms of engaging with the banking industry, specifically banking culture, my understanding is that it really grew out of the huge failures of culture around misconduct and misbehavior, and really saying the banking and financial system really needs to address these issues because it occurs so many times. We have been doing a number of things. One, we have this conference where we bring together experts around the world each year, from the financial services industry, from the banks, from the academic experts, who bring in how do we think about this, how does this happen, from the regulatory committee, not just federal reserve, from other governments that are working on these issues, and share perspectives, try and move conversations to what can be done, understand deeper roots of some of these issues, and think about what can be done. In addition to that, we started supporting various programs to help education talk about issues of
culture. Graduate programmes in schools talk about these issues. We have got examples of case studies of how we deal with these kinds of ethical or culture issues, so it’s trying to work with the higher educational community on these issues. And importantly, we do what we do best, which is try to push top leadership on this, and also use this convening power: we get people together that normally are working on their own. Banks work on this in their own way; regulators think about this in their own way. We move the conversation away from the narrow way it has been approached, towards a broader approach to culture, as beyond just misconduct but to the broader culture in the industry. What advice might you have for students considering a career in economics and finance? My advice today is to figure out ways to learn more about these issues. You’re in school, take courses, or somehow in other ways find out about this. You go to LSE, and you learn all these statistical methods and economics models, so we are tooled up on professional skills we need to do our job. My advice to people is think about it the same way, be tooled up on some of the other issues, especially on the behavioral sciences. So that is part of my toolkit, so when I get into the workplace, I can think about things differently than how I did. For a lot of us, we learnt it along the way, or learnt it late along the way. It would have been great to be more prepared mentally and intellectually. It also pays dividends for your staff. In my own experience, some of the lessons I have learnt they have struck with me the strongest are when you think about how you behave, how you act everyday, what are the things I say – not the organization – but how do I react to situations. For me, as CEO, everyone sees this and takes a signal from it, you know that, but then it’s thinking about it harder, taking it to the next step The first step is realizing everyone watching you, and the second step is thinking these are opportunities, teachable moments. How you react is not just something scary. It is actually a good thing, if you can take some of these ideas and put them into practice. That’s what leadership does, and that’s what we should be doing too. It’s a very powerful thing when you personally understand it, and of course when everyone is doing it, it moves the culture much more quickly.
FLIPSIDE VOL. 25
JAN 28 FREE
SOCIAL: LSE could go bankrupt ‘any day now’
REVIEW: 200 years of Anne Bronte
PART B: Venice ‘La Serenissima’
SPORT: Is Tuns shit?
EMMET
MUNG
E
mmet Mung isn’t our usual pick for Flipside. He’s embedded in a segment of campus that hardly recognises our paper: when I first contacted him about doing this interview he had absolutely no idea who I was or what I did. I had no idea how to interpret his behaviour at first, which left me feeling a bit unsettled; I initially had no idea if I was making him uncomfortable or not, but he more than readily told me when this was the case. By the end, I managed to get more than a few laughs out of him. Still, it’s not often an LSE student has an entire meme subculture around them. For the still uninitiated, I’m talking about Emmet Mung Memes for Investment Banking Teens. Emmet is quick to dispel the lingering association between himself and investment banking. He explored it in his first year but was disappointed to discover that securing an internship was far more mundane than he had imagined. “I don’t like studying businesses insofar I prefer markets.” He also thought the day-to-day involved a lot of tedious work – facetime, pitching, and the like. Additionally, he didn’t like the fact that investment banking didn’t involve any sort of risk-taking. He feels like “everyone does it because they don’t have a clear plan of what they want in the future.” He appreciates that hedge fund work makes him feel like he has “skin in the game”. Despite this, he obviously tried hard enough for people to make a whole meme page about him. Emmet is now in his third year of Government and Economics, and is the president of LSESU Hedge Fund Soci-
ety. He was made president by former incumbent and fellow Carr-Saunders resident Jake Fernandez. Back in Carr-Saunders, Emmet was mostly known for playing the saxophone, a fact has been corroborated by several former residents of Carr-Saunders. He actually spent his first year as the treasurer of LSESU Music Society, although he admittedly doesn’t remember it very much. It all feels very far away to him now, as he doesn’t play nearly as much as he used to. His time has become occupied with other things. Under Emmet’s leadership, the managing body of the Hedge Fund Society has grown from 10 to 60 people; the society itself has over 200 members. It’s managed to host guests like Crispin Odey, one of the City’s most prominent hedge fund managers, and Carles Pol, the Executive Director at Goldman Sachs Merchant Banking. He credits their ability to pull such high-profile guests to the pure determination of the committee. Committee members send out hundreds of emails every week to the personal assistants of big names in the City, highlighting the society’s prestige on campus in the hopes that they will get a few responses. The strategy works beautifully, and the allure of such big names has attracted attention from the general public as well. Emmet describes businessmen and financial journalists queuing up to enter packed lecture theatres. Emmet credits his fascination with markets to his uncle, Simon Ogus. He tells to me that roughly half of his family is Ashkenazi Jewish, but is reluctant to
give more details because it’s complicated. He describes his uncle, a leading macroeconomic analyst, inducting him into the Lion Rock Institute, Hong Kong’s leading free-market think tank. Markets led him to study Government and Economics. He had originally planned to study history and archaeology at Oxford, but decided against taking up his place because he ultimately felt like they were things he could study himself. The rigour of political science and economics appealed more strongly to his analytical mind, and there was always a feeling that history was a bit too artsy for his liking. He liked knowing that there was an element of predictability in economics and political science, but also knew he didn’t want to be an academic: again, there was no “skin in the game”. He felt there was no punishment for getting things wrong, a thread which also came up in his avoidance of investment banking. Unlike many of his compatriots, he doesn’t pretend to be apolitical. He readily identifies as economically conservative. He admits, however, that he hasn’t given the social spectrum as much thought. He’s controversially described himself as being in the pro-Beijing camp of the Hong Kong protests, though he admits to violence on both sides. He grew up in Hong Kong and was actually tear-gassed last summer, but he thinks the protestors have made demands which are too economically left and disrupt the rule-of-law. In any case, he’s planning to stay in the UK and “hopefully join one of Europe’s largest macro hedge funds.”
interview: Christina Ivey photography: Angie Abdalla
a duo of memes from Emmet’s eponymous meme page
EMMET
MUNG
SOCIAL the basic boundaries of being bipolar
CW: parts of this article allude heavily to self-harm and suicide, specifically in the last paragraph of “the lows - depression and dysthymia” Over the summer, I was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and, like any person with a new diagnosis, I googled the shit out of my illness. What I found were countless well-meaning but sterile posts about supporting loved ones with bipolar disorder, info pages for common mood stabilisers, and psychiatric journal articles. There was a very real lack of information from a first-person perspective on what it feels like to live with bipolar disorder on a day-to-day basis, aside from Reddit threads. I felt, as a writer, that I needed to fill that gap and provide structured yet personal contemplations on bipolar disorder. That being said, there is no one bipolar disorder, but several: Bipolar I, Bipolar II, and cyclothymia. I have Bipolar II, which I like to think makes me 2hot2handle. All the bipolar disorders share a pattern of extreme mood swings involving euphoric highs and despondent lows. Of course, these mood swings are take place without the use of substances, but many people with bipolar disorder struggle with substance abuse. I know I mentioned three different bipolar disorders, but seeing as I only have one I can only talk about one, right? These moods are described mostly from my own experience and for this to work I need you to pretend you’re bipolar. the highs - mania and hypomania Hypomania feels scarily AMAZING. It feels as if you can achieve anything, take on the whole fucking world and win. You love your body and you love yourself. And you’re sort of living on a prayer; you don’t need food or sleep because you still have all this E N E R G Y. It is also ugly. It can transcend into mania, which is more intense with the added bonus of psychotic hallucinations! These hallucinations will usually spring from your wildest dreams — religious people think they’re the messiah, a writer thinks they have the manuscript for the next Great American Novel, a banker has a midlife crisis and — oh wait, that last one’s normal but you get the gist. Mania
only happens in Bipolar I, so I dodged a bullet there. Hypomania also gives you compulsive sexual urges, leading to hypersexual hookups that leave you feeling gross, grim, slimy, and grimy. It’s bad sex with people you don’t even like, the coital equivalent of eating someone else’s cold, soggy, borderline putrid pizza for breakfast. Hypomanic episodes are as enticing as they are disorienting; thoughts fly around and you cannot speak fast enough to keep up with them. It’s like having a thousand fireworks go off at once and trying to count each individual spark. It’s incredibly hard to slow down and terribly easy to get mad at people who try to help. When you’re hypomanic you invariably piss a lot of people off, especially friends and family. the lows - depression and dysthymia I’ve had dysthymia, a milder form of depression for pretty much my whole life, but the depression that comes with bipolar disorder knocked that outta the ballpark. That’s what’s overlooked about Bipolar II — we may not have full-blown mania but we have longer, more intense bouts of depression than people with Bipolar I. All that was once golden with hypomania is now leaves and dust. You’re left struggling with broken self-image and debilitating self-doubt. Sometimes, they even throw in some body dysmorphia for that extra oomph. Those friends you have? They hate you for all the stupid shit you did while hypomanic. The world is black and white. Oh god, you’re about to cry again. You hate that. You haven’t showered in three days. Sleep is a bosom friend. Sleep is like practising for death. Your bed, it calls to you. But don’t fall asleep just yet, your Deliveroo order is here. Yes, that’s the seventh time this week but you haven’t had the range to cook for yourself, or sobriety, or the willpower to be around a room full of hot objects and sharp objects. You’re gross, you’re weak, you’re every bad name in the book. It’s like that, over and over again.
the ol’ switcheroo
‘The other’
So the moods are intense, but what’s making it extra hard to cope is you don’t know which extreme you’re going to be in at any given time. It’s reverse Hannah Montana – you get the worst of both worlds – cancelled plans, double texting, binge drinking, chain-smoking, and panic attacks. That’s how you cope, for the most part, before getting diagnosed at least. After the diagnosis, your psychiatrist usually hopes you’ll continue counselling, put down the drink and take your meds. Not all of us do; around half of people with bipolar disorder attempt suicide and far too many of us die from it. Also, from our hedonistic lifestyles to the side effects of our medication, our risk of death from natural causes is still twice that of the general population. It’s different for everyone of course. I cycle through moods roughly every fortnight, so a couple of weeks of hypomania followed by a sharp descent into depression. This makes my bipolar rapid cycling, which means I’m one of the unlucky bastards with more than four mood episodes of (hypo)mania or depression in a year. I don’t really get that much calm downtime between moods, usually two days or so. But again: it’s different for everyone. Some people might spend the whole year depressed with only one manic episode, others have it relatively calm but slip into rapid cycling during the winter. The only way to know what a person’s bipolar fluctuations are like is to ask them.
Elizabeth Eckford on her first day of school
‘N*ggers are stupid, they gotta study real hard, don’t they?’ I wish I could ask Melba Pattillo, one of the Little Rock Nine – a group of students that desegregated the first high school in the US south, about this moment. She was in the cafeteria, reading Gandhi, when a white boy began questioning her intellect. As I transition into the real world, understanding Pattillo’s ability to stand her ground is essential in developing my ability to navigate similar situations. If I want to sleep at night, I have to understand how to be ‘the other’ which is currently under attack. This type of discrimination has been spreading like wildfire across the world in places like Brazil, the US, and the UK.
It’s not all doom – bipolar people often have real talent, even if they don’t come about it in the most sustainable ways. Think Stephen Fry, Mariah Carey and yes, Kanye. We’re chaotic but there’s beauty in this chaos.
Why is ‘the other’ created? Is it the presence of the minority giving rise to ‘the other’, or is a shift in minorities becoming majorities, such as the rise of Hispanics in the US, creating ‘the other’? I am Useful Sources: Samaritans - No judgement. No pressure. We’re compelled to figure out the economic, here for anyone who needs someone - 116 123 cultural, and social phenomenon alongMind - the mental health charity side Pattillo. I want her opinion on how Bipolar UK - supporting people affected by bipoeconomic discrimination has changed lar from her day. From what I can see, economics in her day was used as a divide between the positions whites and blacks Christina Ivey could hold, creating a divide between the economically advantaged and disadvantaged. I would need to ask for her opinion on how to move forward nowadays, where economic discrimination and surges in nationalism are about discrimination against immigrants. How can I find my way through this wildfire? The flames are already drawing near: as per my Uber driver in Washington DC upon finding out I grew up in Chile: “You’re getting deported.”
Analía Ferreyra
Tuesday 28 January editor: Analía Ferreyra
lifestyle/advice/satire Cliteracy Class 7: A Brief History of the pussy For the first Cliteracy of the decade, let’s travel back in time to the first pre-historic female squatting down awkwardly over a particularly reflective pond, craning her neck and taking a peek at this thing we now call the vagina. Sharpen your pencils skywankers, because today we’ll be tracking the troublesome history of the vajayjay, or more accurately: the vulva.
ple centuries later, Roman physician Galen added to the story concluding that female genitalia was the inversion of its male counterpart, making women the imperfect version of man. Nice. Real nice. Fast forward to 13th century Germany, where Catholics labelled the clit the ‘Devil’s treat’, because, of course, it’s the spot where Satan sucks out ungodly women’s souls. Sounds pretty nice to me, Satan can You see, we’ve been misusing ‘vagina’ suck my clit as much as His Wickedness for years. It only describes the holy hole, would like. ignoring all the best stuff down there *clit*clit*. The word’s Latin translation is Thankfully the entire world was not as ‘sword sheath’, which, let’s be honest, is a clitphobic as the West. In Egypt and Jabit sexist. My vagina is no holding place pan, goddesses would lift their skirts, for anyone’s sword, it’s the bloody main exposing pussy power to scare evil and event. Supposedly, in this visual, the pe- increase crop yield. Medieval Europe (benis is a sword, built for harm and destruc- fore all that Catholic shame) produced tion. It’s not exactly an idea we should the Sheela Na Gigs carvings, which depict promote. Vulva, on the other hand, is the a woman pulling open her vulva for all to sexiest of words. Just try saying it slowly, see. Although the meaning is not known, vuullllvvaa — your tongue slides between I’d like to believe she’s thinking ‘Oh shit, I your teeth then you graze your bottom am never going to squeeze a baby out of lip as you pronounce the last ‘vvvaa’. It al- that, not worth it.’ Ah, the wonders of the ready makes you feel naughty. The vulva female body. depicts all the hidden treasures within the labia lips: the clitoris, urethra, and This story cannot be entirely told with vagina. So remember: vulva, not just va- jokes and innuendos. Much of our curgina. rent knowledge of gynaecology has come at unforgivable costs. James Sims, Surprise surprise, western society’s un- an American physician in the 1840s and derstanding of female genitalia has a arguably the founder of gynaecology, deheavy dose of sexism and stigma at- veloped his knowledge by experimenting tached. Hippocrates kicked things off in on enslaved African American women. He 400BC when he referred to the female performed these experiments without “ρυςςγ” (as it was known to the ancient anaesthesia and performed thirty operaGreeks) as her ‘shameful parts.’ A cou- tions on one woman, beginning the tor-
ture when she was seventeen. We cannot assumed that all drugs worked the same allow this part of our history to be forgot- way on male and female subjects, so the ten. It cannot happen again. effects on female subjects were never measured. Even though we have different Although far less sadistic than in the anatomies! Different bodily functions (I 1800s, medicine has continued to have BLEED)! Must I go on! Sorry skywankers, more than its fair share of discrimination my outrage got the better of me. against women. The male assumption has so skewed medical knowledge that many In fairness, one historically bad bitch did women were surprised in 2019 when a not let medical bias get in her way. In viral picture showed them anatomy they 1924, Princess Marie Bonaparte had an had never seen before: milk ducts! I re- itch to scratch. She had enough of never member feeling shame (a different kind orgasming from measly penetration, so to the Catholics) because the picture she decided to test a hypothesis. She conshocked me. How could I not know what I ducted a study measuring the distance had beneath my own skin? between the clitoris and vagina of 243 women, and concluded that women with Only in 1994 did the US National Insti- clitorises further from their vagina find it tute of Health require clinical trials to more difficult to orgasm during penetrainclude females. If you aren’t sufficiently tion. Sadly, it did nothing to improve her blown away by that, let me emphasise it. sexual frustration. But hey, now the world Up until 1993, just 27 years ago, it was better understands this fickle flower between my legs. Perhaps my favourite, though upsettingly recent, female sexual discovery is the 1998 MRI imaging of the clitoris. This heavenly button, forever joked about by men questioning its existence or never finding it, was discovered to be a massive and complex structure, even larger than the penis. So, to you dick swingers comparing your endowments: you got nothing compared to what I’m packing. Big clit energy 2020. Sheela Na Gigs Carvings
LSE could go bankrupt ‘any day now’ The decade got off to a rough start for LSE as it emerged that the university was on the brink of bankruptcy. A spokesperson for the School told the Beaver that the crisis had been discovered ‘about ten minutes after we started back from the Christmas break’ and that ‘the money could run out any day now.’
Amid the turmoil, the SU announced that it would be launching a new line of merchandise for its shop in order to raise additional funds to support its activities. The new line of products will feature a selection of scented candles with fragrances such as ‘Wright’s Bar Breakfast’ and ‘Musty LSE100 Classroom’. Students and staff will also be able to purchase and download the LSE-themed mediation album, which offers a range of familiar sounds to help listeners ‘relax and reconnect to campus’. Early reviews for the album have been mixed, however, with one listener telling your correspondent that ‘It was just 45 minutes of construction noise.’
The main cause of the problem appears to have been the enormous cost of supplying the campus with modular office furniture, which reportedly made up 74% of operating costs in 2019. ‘We felt that installing state-of-the-art furnishings was the right way to go,’ said a representative of the estates division, ‘after all, those wiggly sofas that don’t have proper back The School also announced plans to resupport have been proven to boost pro- purpose some of its property to generate ductivity by up to 12%.’ income. According to sources, Peacock
Theatre will double up as a hotel, as it is already the perfect location for sleeping; the newly completed Centre Building will operate as an assessment centre for Morgan Stanley. All in all, the situation looks rather bleak. There is even talk that the Globe may have to be pawned if things don’t improve soon. If Minouche had only landed the job at the Bank of England, she could have slipped LSE some extra cash to keep the lights on. We attempted to reach out to students for their thoughts on the university’s money troubles, but unfortunately none were contactable as everyone is still away on skiing holidays.
C. Hewson
Pussy Galore
SPORT
BEN STOKES: GOOD BLOKE OR CHILD-HATING AGGRESSOR? Charlie Ward Accounting student
I
n the shadow of an uncharacteristic two from ten delivery, England cricketing hero Ben Stokes’ riposte of ‘f*****g four eyed c**t’ seems coarse at first hearing. Now, whilst I myself am undeniably opposed to vilifying children based genetic traits out of their control, I can’t help but align myself somewhat with the feeling that the insult wasn’t entirely undeserved. Reports of abuse by South African fans have pervaded this series, leaving the match with a rather sour tone. Calls for greater security and stewarding have been given short shrift by officials, with harassment being seen as a key component of the ‘atmosphere’. To be fair, no amount of luminously clad sentries will stop adolescents remarking on the likeness between Stokes and Ed Sheeran, though this is beside the point. Stokes’ remarkably clean record was besmirched with a demerit point and the all-rounder was fined 15% of his match fee as a result of the encounter which, whilst
having almost no impact in real terms, sends strong signals about how the ICC is willing to regulate its players. Four of these demerit points results in a full-test ban, which is exactly why Kagiso Rabada – South Africa’s star pacer – has been forcibly omitted from what remains of the Newlands contest. It is alarming that cosmetic issues unrelated to the course of play have the potential to be translated into regulatory action with such a powerful impact. This is certainly a peculiarity of cricket; I am certain that there would be almost no footballers left on the field should similar rules be imposed by FIFA. I think we can agree that Ben Stokes probably shouldn’t have objected to that child’s remark with such potency. However, the ICC must rethink how it regulates superficial issues like those seen over the course of this series if it is to realistically officiate the game.
Written a match report? Any AU news and views? Fancy a regular spot in the Sport section? Add a post at www.thebeaveronline.co.uk under the Sport category and see how your name looks in print.
Easy like a Sonntag Morgen.
YOUR STORIES FROM THE “Is Tuns shit?” WEEK [which are actually stories I wrote pretending to be someone else]*
“BUY LOW, SELL HIGH” Footballing Anthropology student now ‘gets’ economics The thought came to me after a footy match at Berrylands. The lads and I were walking to the station when I became engrossed in a conversation with an Econ chap. Alongside the game we had just played, we spoke about internships and our plans for Spring Weeks. Mine was somewhat less interesting. But as he spoke about blockchain and the changing face of finance, a realisation flashed in front of me: Buy Low, Sell High. My thinking is that if you buy less of something and sell it for more, you make money - get it?
Rugby and Football appoint homo-eroticism officers Repression ≠ Progression
For as long as football and rugger societies have existed, so too has the tendency to blur one’s sexuality in the midst of lager, chants, and, I guess, sport. The start of the new decade has brought with it a more officialised homo-erotic regime, with standards being raised whilst, as always, teetering on homosexuality without drifting into it. But this new plan, said to be rolled out in 2021, has raised the question - can’t you just be gay? The response was defined by furrowed eyebrows and broadened shoulders with a collective ‘What’s gay about kissing a mate?’ Well who knows fellas, but BeaverSport would like to say that it welcomes masculunity’s rebrand.
Student bar now deemed passable, but there is still work to do Once upon a time, the AU and the student bar were almost synonymous. As ReAUnion approaches, we are again forced to hear stories of (better) times gone by, stories of opening the Venue when Tuns was too crowded on a Wednesday, stories of pizza at the bar, stories... of fun. But as our student bar recovers from years of serving dirty pints, I ask the question - is it still shit? Well, the answer is not really. But also kind of. You see, Tuns may have DJs and clean pints with a decent selection, but try any other student bar and it will open your eyes. Menus, pool tables, table tennis, weekly karaoke. In a video which I would rather keep locked away, you can see your SportEditor at the Essex bar, belting out songs to a rather confused audience. But I was enjoying the experience. I had just chowed down a 7/10 pizza, played pool and sat down in a spacious taproom. This, I thought, is how it should be.
*we in the bizz call this ‘satire’
BeaverSport editor runs out of words to say, attacks readership Seth Rice Sport Editor
I
n a moment that has been described as ‘happening currently’, the BeaverSport Editor writing this column has literally run out of words to say. The moment occurred when he realised he simply had nothing left in the tank. Owing to a lack of submissions, he has decided to write a piece on, effectively, nothing, satirising his own pretensions and, fingers crossed, filling the last bit of this page with black squiggles. Why has this happened? We don’t know. Some say his time is up amidst calls for a new editor; others are being told for the first time that The Beaver has a Sport section. In any case, he still needs a few
more of those squiggles. Shall we chat about the big game then? You know, the one that occurred recently? Or perhaps the one that will be happening in not too long? How about that new player? Did you get into varsity? What does varsity mean? How are you finding LSE? Wait, no, I don’t care. I suppose you’d rather have a sport section filled with actual match reports from actual LSE games, ay? You’d love that wouldn’t you. You’d love ‘A Day in the life of an LSE sportsperson’ and all that bollocks. Well guess what, it ain’t gonna happen because I CAN’T BE ARSED. Go ahead, go to Morgan - I’ve been here since my second week of fresher’s, you reckon your pesky little qualms will dethrone me?
What’s that? I should reach out to people more? Oh, I’ve tried that darling. I’ve been taken aside in Zoo and promised the earth from people ‘looking to get involved in student journalism - I just really think I’d be good at it’. Where’s my Rugger column then? Where’s my piece on the Netball team’s winning run? And where, for the love of God, is I Know What You Did Last Wednesday? I am writing this to let you know that I will be staying for another year if needs be. We can do this the hard way. Or... you could write a piece for the section (anything up to 1500 words) and we can put this mess behind us.
REVIEW 1917 - Sam Mendes’ meticulous craft has no limitations This World War One drama can be summed up very simply: Lance Corporal Schofield (George MacKay) and Lance Corporal Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) are asked to deliver an important message behind enemy lines in order to prevent an attack which could take the lives of 1,600 men.
Director Sam Mendes achieves what seemed impossible: he explores the entire quest using only a single shot with no visible cuts. This continuous image puts you in the heartstopping position of the two main characters. The camera never shows a larger context, only following the two men. Much like a horror film, you’re discovering their world as they do, never knowing what lies around the corner. The editing is flawless and heightens the ‘race-againstthe-clock’ feature. From the first minute, the film moves in a linear narrative through a blasted wasteland of death, craters, and barbed wire. This feeling of immersion makes
the carnage and violence of war all the more striking.
standing moment of story telling happens off-camera.
However, it’s not just the editing that’s exemplary: the cinematography excels in every respect. The opening, a flarelit dawn sequence, is surreal and bewitching, lending new meaning to the phrase ‘war is hell’. The embedded religious imagery gives the film an Odyssean twist as it delves into the exploration of underworld and overworld. Surrealism is maintained throughout: Mendes chooses to finish the film how he started it, lending it a dream-like quality. Another compelling sequence comes when a German plane crash lands near Schofield and Thomas. MacKay’s and Blake’s powerful and emotionally endearing performances are audacious. Their youthful innocence takes over as they help a German out of the burning plane. As Schofield runs to get some water behind the audience’s backs the most pivotal moment of the film takes place. Interestingly, this out-
The enchanting yet threatening soundtrack feeds the everpresent tension that defines the narrative. One poignant sequence uses a song to unite all the characters in a semi-religious moment, producing the most moving scene of the film. The film has a multitude of cameos. Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch, Richard Madden, and Andrew Scott make the film feel like a who’s who of British acting royalty. While their scenes are short, they are all spectacularly charming. For a film that is on its face meraly a journey from A to B, the ‘one-shot’ format pays off successfully, giving Christopher Nolan and Steven Spielberg plenty to be envious of. It is no surprise for me that 1917 is an instant Oscar front runner, and I have no doubt that this film will sweep up all the technical awards next month.
200 years of Anne: in defence of the best Brontë If your first reaction to the ti-
tle was: ‘that’s probably Charlotte and Emily Brontë’s sister!’, this one’s for you. The seventeenth of January marks the two-hundredth birthday of Anne Brontë, best known for her novels Agnes Grey (1847) and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (1848). Upon reading the latter, Charlotte Brontë condemned it as ‘coarse and brutal’, leading to its effective ban for years. It is this work I will defend here. The novel begins with the arrival of a mysterious young widow, Mrs. Helen Graham, the titular tenant, at Wildfell Hall. She is an object of scrutiny and intrigue to everyone, including the initial narrator, Gilbert Markham. Whilst the narrative initially appears to be centred on the romantic relationship between the two, this thread is quickly abandoned. After leaving her previous marriage, which was marred by alcohol-
ism and adultery, Helen becomes the protagonist. The novel is composed of letters and diary entries and is fast-paced, tightly structured, and heavy on dialogue. Besides it being an unconventional (and delightful) way of structuring a novel, Brontë’s epistolary style gives a direct voice to humanise Helen, a firm dissenter against the social and legal bindings of Victorian marriage. Brontë’s story is marked by direct sincerity and compassion. There is a tendency to respond negatively to
by Amber Iglesia
by Shahana Bagchi this overly moralistic tone, in particular her protagonist’s disapproval of alcohol. This may bring to mind the repressive and pompous Women’s Te m p e r a n c e Movements of the Prohibition era. I would instead argue t h a t it embodies a strong sense of justice whilst dealing with uncomfortable subject matter. Even though Helen is defined by her
goodness, she is by no means agreeable most of the time. The Tenant of Wildfell Hall most significantly improves on the more famous novels written by her sisters in one key aspect: the portrayal of the Byronic hero. Anne Brontë’s withering takedown of this figure, machismo and all, is my favourite part about the novel. Huntingdon, Helen’s first husband, is neither romanticised (like Emily’s Heathcliff) nor defended (like Charlotte’s Rochester). This is a very long-winded way of saying that Anne Brontë is an incredibly under-rated writer worthy of more recognition. She received a lot of criticism in her time because, in her own words, she would rather ‘whisper a few wholesome truths therein than much soft nonsense’. Her novel was quietly revolutionary; you shouldn’t dismiss her.
Tuesday 28 January editors: Amber Iglesia and Zehra Jafree
Banal Bicycle Club
by Isabella Pojuner
Note to reader: Bombay Bicycle Club is one of my favourite bands. Their 2014 album So Long See You Tomorrow is probably my favourite album: It’s dreamy, nostalgic, bucolic, and lyrically perfect. When Bombay broke up I turned to the jazz-fusion work of Mr Jukes, the solo project of BBC’s lead singer, Jack Steadman, and hoped another masterpiece would one day emerge. Five years later, I was at Dundee’s Caird Hall watching them on their I Had The Blues But Shook Them Loose reboot tour. They had just released Eat, Sleep, Wake (Nothing But You) and Everything Else Has Gone Wrong. I was hopeful. The former was the soundtrack to the end of my road-trip summer with my boyfriend. The latter has hooks I remembered and well-constructed lyrics that reassured me at the beginning of first year. If these were the singles, the album would be full of varying styles of absolute bangers, songs that meant something. Then they released their last two singles, marking the beginning of the end. While Racing Stripes has a familiar dramatic slow build to existential joy and nonchalant hope, I Can Hardly Speak is
just...alright. The melodies are repetitive, the bridge painfully average, it’s saved only by the grace of a satisfying crescendo at the end. Upon the release of the complete album a week ago, there were no more surprises. Good Day is reminiscent of Noah and the Whale: a palatable soundtrack for a walk in London in your twenties. Whilst the lyrics are relatable — “I just wanna have a good day, but it’s only me that’s standing in my way” — they are nothing like the magic or nostalgia of any of their previous work. Do You Feel Loved? is nice but that’s it. It’s just nice. While their other albums feel complete, half of Everything Else Has Gone Wrong are skippable tracks that feel like nothing at all. I love Bombay a lot. I’m going to see them in a few weeks at Ally Pally, after which I will report if the album is any better live. The band has said that I Worry Bout You — a heartfelt love song — is going to have an unusual live production, so I look forward to the potential for another classic bop. The band’s first ten years together only improved their sound; I really believe they’ll get better. In the meantime, I’ve got the balance of their discography to while away the hours.
Easy Life’s Junk Food satisfies but doesn’t fill up by Sebastian Mullen
I’ve been anticipating this album for a while. I want to write about different albums from all corners of the music landscape, but, for better or worse, the Review editors have restricted me to relatively recent releases. So, although Easy Life have consistently caught my ear, I can only now review their work, after the release of Junk Food, their latest album, earlier this month. The band’s sound is hard to define. Whilst ballads such as Spiders have their place, their hits typically comprise a mixture of jazz/pop/hip-hop/indie/alternative that is a lot more exciting than I’ve made it sound. Earth, in particular, boasts very smooth production, with a lovely sample that cements Easy Life as a meme-savvy band. (it’s the kid that says: “have you ever had a dream that that you um you had you would you could you do you wa- you watched you you [sic, for all of that sentence, and so on]).
With original and clever writing, particularly on tunes like Dead Celebrities, Easy Life sound like a newer version of the Arctic Monkeys with a more upbeat/ electronic tone. Their tracks tend to thrive in that sonic niche of Sunday afternoons / getting high with friends — on life, obviously, because, as I’ve been explicitly told, The Beaver does not condone the use of drugs in any capacity. Clever writing and groovy beats only get you so far, and it’s Easy Life’s vulnerability that ultimately makes them so attractive. Like an English Rex Orange County (Rex Leicester City, am I right? Sorry), lead singer Murray Matravers adds an edge to their songs. Dead Celebrities ruminates on life in Los Angeles, touching on the role of fame in life and death. The closing track, Spiders, deals with homesickness and the detach-
ment that results from spending a long time on the road. Perhaps the only real criticism that I can levy against Easy Life is the singularity of their sound. You wouldn’t play Easy Life at the gym or at raves (the band’s name should tip you off), but that isn’t necessarily a problem. If anything it allows them to fully dominate their niche. Further tracks with other indie darlings like Arlo Parks will only continue to cement Easy Life’s influence on relaxing British music. Junk Food, despite what I’ve been writing, is actually not ridiculously amazing. It’s great, don’t get me wrong, but not every song fully captures me. The reason this review is so positive is that, from listening to their other work, I’m very optimistic about their future. So, to conclude: Junk Food is just worth checking out. Easy Life, though, is worth every Sunday afternoon.
Closed circle: Mac Miller’s posthumous album is a by Lucy Knight haunting gem
The accidental overdose of Mac Miller in September 2018 is one of the few celebrity deaths that shook me to my core. Just a month after the release of his fifth studio album, Swimming, Miller’s death felt like it came unfairly, at the peak of his career. Then along came Circles, his posthumous album. Existing as a mellow epilogue to Swimming, the album discusses themes of fame and mortality, dreaming and drowning — a cruel irony less than a year and a half after his death. As you’d expect from the album title, Miller uses cyclical motifs extensively: from the repetition of the lyrics “That’s on me, that’s on me, I know” in the aptly titled That’s On Me to the guitar loops used in Good News, Surf, and the titular track, Circles. His desire for personal
growth is also a strong theme, even though it seems like he can never break from his own circles. He makes reference to his substance abuse and sex addiction in Hand Me Downs, which also includes a touching feature from Australian rapper Baro. Mac Miller’s tremendous lyrical ability made his career, and, although Circles is an unfinished work, the lyrics still slap. Just like his innuendo-filled previous works like The Divine Feminine and Swimming, Circles is witty at times, but the tracks that stick the most are the introspective ones. These tragically postulate life after him and yet are consistently optimistic. The album’s single Good News closes with Miller’s legacy in the lyrics “There’s a whole lot more for me waiting”, whereas Woods serves as a reminder of fame and mortality: “Yeah, things like this ain’t built to last/ I might
just fade like those before me”. Even though the album is technically unfinished, its range of genres is intricate and effortless. The waltz-like dynamics of That’s On Me ground the track in a classical romanticism, while the synthesiser-heavy I Can See reinforces how incredibly intelligent a musician Mac Miller was. His sound is not as similar to modern hip-hop and mumble rap as it could first seem: he samples timeless works like Everybody’s Gotta Live by Arthur Lee (1972) and It’s a Blue World by The Four Freshmen (1955). Circles is minimal, personal, introspective, and truly heartbreaking even for those who aren’t familiar with his work. The 48-minute album is an emotive yet incredibly effective coda to a remarkable — if short-lived — career.
PART B
Tuesday 28 January
editor: Maya Kokerov
arts & culture
The Academia and The City of Sighs by Maya Kokerov Nicknamed ‘La Serenissima’ after repeatedly described as ‘serene’ by people of high importance, Venice is one of the most historically and culturally preserved European cities. The title is well-deserved, especially in winter, when there are few loitering, selfie-hungry tourists who remind you that you’re just another one of them. Foggy spells interspersed with sunshine and drizzle create a gothic ambience as you walk over bridges and squeeze your frame down claustrophobically narrow alleyways. That, combined with the frequent knells of church bells, places you in the 19th century, or whenever it was when women used to wear extravagant ballgowns and privately sin. There are plenty of travel guide listings of where to go, what to eat, and how to choose from the agoric array of art galleries on offer, from Italian Renaissance to Modernist exhibitions. A boat tour is a must to both take it all in and feel like you’re Angelina in The Tourist. The renowned Peggy Guggenheim Collective is located in the Palazzo Venier dei Leoni, where Peggy Guggenheim lived, and it’s permanent collection presents works of Cubism, Futurism, Metaphysical painting, European abstraction, avant-garde sculpture, Surrealism, and American Abstract Expressionism. The artists displayed include Picasso, Braque, and Duchamp (not to name drop or anything).
Images by Maya Kokerov.
If you have only a few days to explore and only so much time to fill your Instagram feed, The Gallerie dell’Accademia (originally called the Accademia di Belle Arti di Venezia, which was a mouthful) should be your first and most extensive stop. The museum is mainly comprised of pre 19th century Venetian artwork, but also displays famous pieces by nonVenetian artists, such as Da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man. Perfect for a rainy day.
I finally toured around San Marco, took in a bird’s eye view from the Campanile Bell Tower, and got to lean over the Bridge of Sighs with my beau, extortionately priced gondolas floating by underneath. The very next day, water began shooting out of pipes, edging into restaurant foyers, while the overflowing canals forced us to wade through sometimes knee-deep water in brightly coloured Goldon plastic boots, which were exactly ugly enough to be chic.
The Accademia was originally founded in 1750, in what was once a 12th century monastery, thus the omnipresent Catholic themes, icons, Madonnas, and biblical imagery. The ornate ceiling can only be described as grandiose and, as you glide from room to room and gaze from wall-length depictions of The Resurrection to water-coloured dancing satyrs and nymphs, you completely forget to reach for your phone.
I’m not saying you wouldn’t fall in love with Venice if you were to visit solo, but there’s a reason people save it for their honeymoon. The aesthetic and intricate detail of it all make you want to stare at basically every building, church, or canal that your eyes touch. The Venetians apparently never missed an opportunity to add a baby cherub or engraved etching to something as simple as a stone wall. Even Burger King boasts chandeliers and a mini courtyard overlooking the canal.
Stark white marble statues with a porcelain touch stare blankly in various head-less or body-less forms. Names like Veronese, Canaletto, Tintoretto, Titian, and Bellini grace the placards placed beneath. One painting is an almost exact view of The Grand Canal, even today, with only one noticeable difference — the tide is about half as high as it is right now.
Vegan un-friendly pizza parlours take you back down to Earth, while carnivalesque tourist shops brimming with Venetian masks take you back to Eyes Wide Shut. Sighs seem to echo in every walkway; every romantic cliché in the book comes alive. In Venice, art transcends the galleries and romance seems to seep languorously into every room.
Ode to the Right Winger by Ross Lloyd
“I have my final victory! The man of words, the child of Thatcher cried. Where is my wreath? My chariot of fire?” “The slings and slurs I suffered so, From wheezing academics in their ivory towers, From triggered libs who turned me down with scorn, Where is my crown of thorns?” “There is no truth so sweet, As the one that serves my purposes. Lies unmade by victories, Victories made by masses, Masses that I call my own. Where are my people? The silent majority? The angered national working class? The sullen, resentful patriot, To join me in my joy?” A victory is won, indeed, A victory that cost the world, A dreadful burden came to him, Not from telling truth to power, But from having sold his soul. But no one came to slap his back, To pat his head, to shake his hand, The man of words felt so alone, His shouts rang hollow; the world had turned him down.
What is your beloved more than another beloved? This work also appears in Clare Market Review: Maximalism The world is suddenly technicolour when for so long it’s been sepia. You revel in it. Every part of you tingles as you step outside into the street. A cacophony of cars honk as you dash across the road. You’re careless. You skip, no — float to your destination. You’ve been here for thirty minutes. But you’re so drunk. You’re just feeling everything. You’re thinking of him. He has eyes and ears and mouth you want to kiss. He’s no one particular but you want someone to bring back to bed. You’re not fussy. You’re so fucking chill actually.
Image by Christina Ivey
You flirt. A tilt of the head when you ask him to elaborate on... whatever he’s been yapping about the past two minutes. You’re not fussed. You’re so chill. You giggle.
by Christina Ivey
You both go out on the terrace for a smoke. You don’t smoke, you flirt. He gives you a cigarette and then lights it for you. It’s intimate. The smoke scratches your sore throat. You’re not taking care of yourself. You spend more time chatting than actually inhaling any of the cigarette. He finishes his way before you finish yours. All that’s left to do is kiss. Kissing, hard. It feels like a padlock clicking into place. You’re a dickhead. You’re imagining someone else. You’re imagining that you’re somewhere else. He doesn’t suspect any of it. You’re imagining someone else loving you, touching you, kissing you there. He doesn’t notice because you fuck like a champion. You drift to sleep in a drunken haze as the technicolour fades.