The Beaver - #906 by The Beaver

The Beaver Making Sense of LSE Since 1949

Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

beaveronline.co.uk

- Issue 906

Tuesday 12 November 2019

SU Push for LSE Drug Policy Reform The Union will be advocating for a harm reduction approach, aiming to provide drug testing kits and additional drug misuse support.

Morgan Fairless Executive Editor

SESU officials and elected representatives are gearing up to start a campaign to change LSE and LSESU drug policy, switching from what they deem to be a punitive approach to a harm reduction one. The policy change will first be precluded by a fact-finding mission in which the LSESU plans to host a school wide consultation and polling to discover the relationship LSE students have with drugs. The Union will be seeking to get a clear picture of student drug use through a survey, to be launched in late November. After that, conver-

sations are due to start with LSE, in which the union is seeking to argue for a reform of LSE policy. Union officials have told The Beaver they seek to provide students with drug testing kits and make available more support for those who wish to be more informed about drug use or wish to tackle misuse. LSE’s current “Student drugs and alcohol policy” dates from 2002, and details that students may face disciplinary action for possession or supply or illegal drugs, as well as “unacceptable behaviour arising from excessive consumption of alcohol”. Disciplinary action may range from formal warnings to expulsion. FOIA data reviewed by The Beaver details that no students have been formally

expelled from the university following drug or alcohol incidents. However, these numbers do not represent disciplinary actions taken by LSE residences upon discovery of drug use. An NUS report on drug use and policy at Universities released last year found that more than half of students at UK universities have used, or regularly use drugs, with cannabis being the most common drug among regular drug users. The report goes on to detail that “67% of people who have used drugs have used MDMA (…) 86% of respondents were most likely to take drugs at their place of residence (…) 64% said they feel safe when they have taken drugs.”

The NUS argues that the report also highlighted student interest in seeing institutions “adopt a less punitive approach to student drug use” and that punitive approaches may act as a barrier to students seeking support around drug use. In a comment piece in this issue launching the policy reform, Activities and Development Officer Jack Boyd called for “substance purity test kits and a dedicated addiction counsellor on campus, creat[ing] a safe space for students to talk about their drug use, and rewrit[ing] LSE’s 17 year old drug policy in to something that supports students, not punishes them.”

Tensions Mount After LSE Black Bloc Day LSE Chinese Community split over Hong Kong

Inside Today Features

Election Talk

The Beaver sat down with the Tory, Labour and Lib Dems heads at LSE

Comment

Inside the School of Brexit-bashing LSE has an anti-brexit bias, Michael Shapland argues

Meher Pandey

News Staff Writer

etween 1:55 and 2:05 on Thursday, October 31st, the LSE Students Alliance for Hong Kong began and ended their demonstration of solidarity with student protestors in Hong Kong who they said have faced “an unprecedented amount of oppression” at the hands of the Chinese government. Over 70 students participated in what the alliance called a ‘photo op.’ Dressed in all black and wearing face-obscuring masks, the students stood on the stairs outside the New Academic Building for a group picture. They held up five fingers for the five demands of the Hong Kong protests, which include an independent inquiry into police conduct and brutality, amnesty for arrested protestors, and a restart to the halted electoral reforms in Hong Kong. Theresa*, a member of the alliance, said, “It is not about how short our demonstration was, it’s about the impact we will have.”

News

LSE 7th in Social Sciences

“What’s the point of going to LSE if you don’t brag about it”

HONG KONG

Continued Page 3

DON’T FORGET TO FLIP OVER FOR

FLIPSIDE

REVIEW: Netflix v. BBC

SOCIAL:

BSc Financial Astrology?

The Beaver

Tuesday 12 November 2019 | The Beaver www.beaveronline.co.uk

Established 1949 | Issue 906 | Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

Meet the team Executive Editor Morgan Fairless editor@beaveronline.co.uk Managing Editor Isabella Pojuner managing@beaveronline.co.uk Flipside Editor Christina Ivey flipside@beaveronline.co.uk Design Editor Colette Fogarty Editorial Assistants Ross Lloyd Jamie Boucher Illustrators Rebekah Paredes-Larson Raphaelle Carmarcat Emma Duper Amelia Jabry Sebastian Mullen News Editors Laura Zampini Jeffrey Wang Elena Christaki-Hedrick news@beaveronline.co.uk Comment Editors Lucy Knight

Fuck People Who Stand in the Library Stairs Morgan has an axe to grind...

Morgan Fairless Executive editor

eading week came and went, and I am none the smarter. I was supposed to catch up, do readings for my dissertation, write masters applications, and a bit more. I managed to do about half of that, and the rest was a mixture of grovelling and watching Homeland (I know, I’m late to the trend, and it’s a mind-numbingly terrible show). In an attempt to become smarter by osmosis – something I suspect lots of procrastinators do – I went to the library and picked up some books that looked like they could vaguely salvage my formatives. I am a bit of a library nubile, having successfully avoided it as much as possible for my past two years at this university. However, it was there that I finally found the worst people at LSE: stair-standers. Ah, stair-standers. Chatting away in the middle of the loopdiloop staircase, oblivious of the sad fucks behind them who just want to get through to the next floor. I can think of no one worse. It takes less than 10 seconds to get to the next floor and chat there. Your conver-

sation is not that important that it requires a still stop causing a human traffic jam. It reeks of self-importance. I realise this is an LSE Love post disguised as an editorial. So I’ll move on. The paper this week is full of great content, as I hope you have become accustomed to. We are still improving, and there is still a long way to go to get The Beaver to where it wants to be. I will be long gone from uni when that happens, I suspect. But every editorial board has been or is contributing enormous effort each year towards that goal. On the 20th of this month we shall be hosting a Media Law training in coordination with LSESU. This will mark our third training session in MT, showing our commitment towards training our reporters and editors, and the wider community of interested parties. Hope to see you there.

Samuel M. Caveen Michael Shapland comment@beaveronline.co.uk

On Conflict - In this Issue and Outside

Features Editors Emmanuel Molding Nielsen Marianne Hii Colin Vanelli Annabelle Jarrett features@beaveronline.co.uk

Isabella Pojuner

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

Collective Chair Andreas Redd collective@beaveronline.co.uk Collective members have contributed content three or more times for The Beaver. Room 2.02 Saw Swee Hock Student Centre LSE Students’ Union London WC2A 2AE 020 7955 6705

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.

Bella has an axe to grind (?)

Managing Editor

As the great Marina Diamandis has espoused, there are only two root causes of all emotions: love and fear. Conflict between individuals, groups, political parties, nations... comes from fear. We fight to win, because losing would hurt our ego, hurt the wellbeing of others, or present such injustice that we see a side to humanity we cannot face. Conflict is fear of the other, or what the other might do to you. Conflict is also natural. We fight between friends, our siblings or family, between peers in a classroom or colleagues. So how do we live with

it? How do we try to balance living the life we all deserve (I see this as achieving justice) with the struggle and inconvenience of fighting for it? This struggle, the inconvenient hard work we put into trying to change the views of others, is exhausting, even if it can be very interesting and rewarding. But we just can’t cope with too much conflict. This issue of The Beaver is filled with conflicts: whether it’s the highly symbolic triad of political parties at LSE discussing the upcoming election and beyond; the Hong Kong conundrum; or the above-detailed encounter Morgan had on the Library stairs. We all have to acknowledge that we desire justice: in an infinite number of ways, tied to our own complex histories and the visions we have of our future. I hate to be

cheesy (though when am I not?) but if we ask others, and most importantly ourselves - what drives you? What would make the world right, and why? - we are taken down the inevitable path of empathy. We incorporate, according to our own perspectives and conceptions of the just, the root of their perceived injustices into our worldview, our narrative. Conflict, though arising from fear, can be a conduit to love - if you ask why. If it’s a means to the end of justice. Maybe bear these questions in mind as you peruse the thoughts of our incredible contributors. “All the people living in, living in the world today We’re united by our love, we’re united by our pain”

Media Law Training with David Banks

Join us for our third training session, brought in collaboration with LSESU by a n u fa ils U A eta re re d o pl o ex r m l il fo w FB am r te ou e o th t t, Go h ig o. e n Zo h t to n r i oing e at g

David Banks is an experienced journalist and Media Law Consultant 20 Nov 2pm to 5pm Sumeet Valrani Lecture Theatre

News

Tuesday 12 November 2019 | The Beaver News Editors Laura Zampini Elena Christaki-Hedrick Jeffrey Wang

Email us: news@beaveronline.co.uk

Tensions Mount on Black Bloc Day at LSE (continued from front page) They plan to use the photo for their online campaigns and share it with local UK and Hong Kong media. The primary reasons for keeping the demonstration this short were safety and accessibility: “It was only 10 minutes and in between classes because this is a student campus. We wanted to make sure there was a lower cost of engagement for students who want to do something but do not want to commit to an hourlong session. Also, if it had been that long — a lot could go wrong.” Theresa said they expected counter-protests as there has been violent backlash at other universities in the UK and around the world. Protestors at Sheffield University allegedly had a beer bottle thrown at them. “I was nervous in the lead up to it. There was a group of mainland students looking, and there was a non-student reporter interviewing students who were visibly not from Hong Kong.” A masked Chinese man in black filmed the entire event, including speeches given by unmasked organisers. The Alliance said, “He was not from our campaign group and we do not know what the footage is for.” A day before the demonstration,

the Chinese Students and Scholars Association chapter at LSE released a statement on WeChat accusing the event of “violating school policies.” They had emailed the Director’s office and received a response from Minouche’s executive assistant saying, “This is not an event officially organised by LSE.” They have since amended their statement as Black Bloc Day was supported by the SU Campaigns Fund and officially endorsed by LSESU. The Alliance said in a press release that the majority of the SU student executive voted in favour of supporting their campaign. CSSA is the official organisation of students studying outside of the People’s Republic of China and provides social services and support to its members. CSSAs in the US, Australia and New Zealand were accused of participating in Beijing’s “United Front” work by the USChina Economic and Security Review Commission in a 2018 report. CSSAs have been shown, in investigations carried out by the New York Times, Forbes, and others, to coordinate with the government in the intimidation and surveillance of Chinese student activists abroad. The LSESU chapter was suspended

last year for violating SU bylaws and using a non-SU bank account. They now operate outside of the SU’s jurisdiction. CSSA said they would not be organising any rallies to counter Black Bloc Day, although according to them, the Alliance’s event “severely impacts the wellbeing of Chinese students at LSE.” Their statement asked that “everyone act respectfully, as is expected of people from an ancient and cultured nation.” “We will strictly abide, as our bottom line, the principles of one country, two systems, a high degree of autonomy, Hong Kong People ruling Hong Kong national policy,” CSSA clarified in their statement. “As overseas Chinese students, we are by right patriotic. However, we must remember to demonstrate the high level of civility expected of Chinese people and to turn the other cheek to violence, not to respond to insults or jeers but with logic and sound arguments.” Theresa responded to this statement saying: “It kind of paints a picture of who we are and what we do in a slightly unfair way. Nobody was doing anything violent. However, the message for peace is also there.” After the demonstration, the Black

Bloc Day posters outside the Saw Swee Hock building were covered by handmade posters saying, “Hong Kong is part of China!!” The campaign responded with memes on Facebook that evening: “We know.” They said the protests are not about separatism and that such responses misconstrue the demands of the Hong Kong protestors. LSE student Calvin Fang defended the poster in a Facebook comment, saying it isn’t accusing the campaign of being separatists: “It is a reminder. A reminder that we are all one and that there shouldn’t be any hate.” Victoria*, student and member of the Alliance responded: “It is a sentence used to dismiss us, to intimidate us, to shame us, to silence us.” All posters on that wall of the SU have since been taken down. “This event is the first of a series of activities that will be organised on campus,” said the Alliance. The LSE Students Alliance for Hong Kong’s campaign name is provisional. *Theresa and Victoria have chosen to withhold their last names for safety reasons.

The News Team Thomas Chau Deputy Editor

Raphaelle Camarcat Staff Writer

Meher Pandey Staff Writer

Florit Shoihet Staff Writer

Thahmina Begum Thaniya Staff Writer

Benjamin Crozier Staff Writer

Nora Lorenz Staff Writer

Angbeen Abbas Staff Writer

Kevin Morris Staff Writer

Grace Chapman Staff Writer

Noreen Premji Staff Writer

Join the News Team!

Study on London Underground Reveals Health Crisis New study of particulates in the tube has bad news for londoners

Isabella Pojuner Managing Editor

he tube is convenient, ubiquitous, and generally beloved by Londoners - 4.8 million use it per day. But as studies released in the last few weeks have shown, it has a darker side: attributable to the particulates concentrated there, and harmful to the human body. Last week, the Financial Times published an investigation into air quality in the Underground, preceded by a King’s College study which found that on deeper underground lines, these particulates were on average 18 times higher than that above ground. King’s College student Bryn-

mor Saunders researched the issue as part of his undergraduate dissertation, motivated by his asthma, his need to travel on the Central Line and the lack of publicly accessible data on Underground pollution. Particulates (PM2.5) consist of a range of minute aerosol matter, organic compounds (such as hair from commuters) and metals. Particulates are often the result of combustion processes, and produce ‘hazy’ or visibly polluted air. They are roughly 3% the size of a human hair, and are able to penetrate into the lungs and bloodstream. In London alone, more than 9,000 premature deaths each year are caused by long-term exposure to air pollution. The King's College study and FT investigation are the only two of their kind to navigate the entire Underground network in search of pollution levels. Academics were in

disbelief at Saunders' data, which indicated pollution in the tube was almost 20 times higher than street pollution. The Beaver spoke to Dr Thomas Smith, a co-author of the King’s College study and Assistant Professor in the LSE Geography Department. He said the problem with existing tube lines is that new ventilation, particle filters and air conditioning are difficult to retrofit because tube tunnels are too small. The new Elizabeth line, he predicts, will have better provisions for this, improving air quality. Londoners can attempt to minimise exposure by either taking shallower lines (Hammersmith, District or Circle) or the Overground, rather than deeper lines (Central, Victoria and Northern). Dr Smith told The Beaver that surgical masks, those most commonly seen among Lon-

doners, “are useless for protecting against all forms of air pollution.” However, Londoners can invest in “masks with replaceable particle filters” which can offer some protection against PM2.5 - though he warns “that the excess lung and heat stress associated with wearing the masks may offset the benefits of the avoided pollution.” WHO recommendations and EU limits don’t directly apply to the Underground because, Dr Smith says, “it is assumed that people do not spend long underground”. But like many LSE commuters, he spends an hour on the Central line per weekday, “almost certainly putting me over the EU 24-hour limits”. Those who work on the Underground face chronic exposure to high levels, and TfL depends on around 1000 cleaners who work at night to remove dirt in the polluted tunnels.

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

News

Tuesday 12 November 2019 | The Beaver

Chilean Students Grapple with Crisis Political protests in Chile affecting students a long way from home

Florit Shoihet Staff Writer

“I

am constantly fearing for my family in Chile,” said Sofia Brinck, Chilean journalist and MSc Global Media and Communications student. As the country enters its fourth week of unrest, Chilean students at LSE find themselves in a difficult situation – far away from their loved ones, awash with harsh reports from their homeland, concerned but limited in their ability to act politically. At the same time, the LSESU Chile Society grapples with the decision of whether or not to take a political stance. Over the last few weeks, Chile has experienced a burst of demonstrations and violence as masses of Chileans have marched in the street to protest over socio-economic issues. The government declared a state of emergency, more than 7,000 protesters were arrested, and at least 20 people died, according to Reuters. Brinck told The Beaver that regardless of political stance, its is very hard for Chilean students to be here in London, as she explained that they all live in "Chilean time," constantly following the developments in their country and alert at the times of the major protests. "I don’t know what my country will be when I am back,” she added. She went on to say that she is constantly fearing especially for those who she knows are 'in the streets,'

her sister and ex-coworkers. "The most shocking is the violence, the violations of human rights - it’s the violence of the state in an institutional way,” she emphasised, and pointed out cases of sexual harassment and loss of eyesight by protestors injured by rubber bullets. The worst unrest since the end of Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship in 1990, which also affected the LSE Chile Society, which has never been characterised as a political society. Some members demanded that the society become more active and decisive in terms of political positioning. The society has decided to remain neutral in order to remain inclusive to all its members. However, the Society addressed the issue by organising a discussion with Tim Newborn, LSE Professor of Criminology and Social Policy, about urban and social conflict. Cristian Stewart, Chile Society President, explained that it was hard for the group to know how to respond at first and that they decided to cancel several events on other academic issues. In an assembly held by the society to better define its nature, Stewart said that "We [the Chilean Society] defined that our main seal will be academic, but there we will moments to discuss as a society how and when to do certain political actions, depending on the situation." "There is a huge political diversity within the members. Even though adopting this nature is a political act, we think that this is the decision that better represents all our members. We want to do many things, but always knowing that the Chilean crisis will guide the discussion,”

he added. Stewart described mixed political stances amongst Chilean students, underpinned by a general feeling of anguish. “The prevailing confusion in Chile also came to LSE students," he told The Beaver, "there are as many political positions as people, but for all of us it is very hard looking at what is happening from this far.” Some students, such as Brinck, have been actively participating in demonstrations at the Chilean Embassy and other central locations in London. Others are planning to write dissertations and articles about Chile, with the hope to have an impact on their homeland from LSE. Brinck mentioned her own experiences as an undergraduate to highlight that historically, students in Chile have played an important role by leading political activism in the past two decades. “In 2011 I was in university and we were 6 months on strikes,” she said. The recent protests in Chile were sparked by a rise in transport fees which led some students to jump above the gates at tube stations. Brinck told The Beaver that after three days police were positioned inside the stations. "The only answer we got from the government has been violence and state of emergency and then the military on the streets that reminds us automatically of the dictatorship," she said. Despite the fear, Brinck showed some hope in the midst of the crisis, “It has to burst – but then something good will be coming.” Courtesy of LSESU Chile Society

Illustration by Raphaelle Camarcat

LSE Celebrates Times Higher Education Ranking LSE ranks highly on the Times Higher Education university rankings

Laura Zampini News Editor

n Wednesday 6th November 2019, LSE announced its results in the Times Higher Education 2020 ranking. Times Higher Education has been providing performance data on researchled institutions since 2004 and is known as one of the world's most influential university rankings. The school's post on Facebook and Twitter read, "we’ve ranked 7th in the world in the Social Sciences category, 6th in Business & Economics, and 8th in Law in the 2020 #THEunirankings." On the same post LSE encouraged members of the community to give themselves "a big pat on the back," and several students and alumni responded, voicing their pride in the university. "What's the point of going to LSE if you don't brag about it," wrote Júlia Számely, an MSc Applied Social Data Science student who shared the post. "I'm proud to be a student at the LSE. At such dynamic times, both on campus and around the world, we are heading for the top where we deserve to be!" Max Marlow, a

second-year BSc Government and History student, told The Beaver. In the three categories mentioned in the post, Social Sciences, Business and Economics and Law, LSE is the only university in London featured among the top 10 institutions. In the Social Sciences category, LSE maintained its position from the 2019 ranking, the highest it has had since 2011, while in Law it fell from the 7th to the 8th position when compared to the previous year, losing 1 percentage point in its overall score for this subject discipline. Business and Economics showed a more positive result: LSE rose two positions in ranking from 2019 to 2020 in this category. Globally and across all subject disciplines, the school is 27th according to the Times Higher Education ranking. It fell from being number 26 in the previous year, following a trend of slight decreases which started in 2017. The result follows a series of high rankings achieved by LSE in 2019. Earlier this year, the university ranked fourth in the Tilburg University Top 100 Worldwide Economics Schools Research Ranking, behind Harvard University, The University of Chicago and Stanford University. In March 2019, QS World University Rankings by Subject placed LSE second in the world in social science and management subjects for the seventh consecutive year.

Students Celebrate Diwali, the Festival of Lights LSE students continue Diwali traditions

Kevin Morris Staff Writer

indus all over the world celebrated the festival of Diwali this past weekend, commemorating the triumph of good over evil and the victory of light over darkness with the lighting of diyas -the holiday’s signature lamp. Other Dharmic faiths marked the occasion as well. Sikhs celebrated freedom with the holiday of Bandi Chhor Divas, which marks the release of the 17th century Sikh Guru Hargobind Ji from the Gwalior Fort in India. The Hindu community at LSE celebrated with events on campus and some students traveled to spend the holiday with friends and family in other parts of the UK. Diya Sojitra, President of the LSESU Hindu Society and thirdyear Mathematics and Economics student, told The Beaver that the Society commemorated Diwali

this year with an event that included Mithai sweets and other Indian dishes. Citing the spirit of thankfulness that is central to Diwali, Sojitra led the Hindu Society in providing these traditional meals to students who couldn’t go home to celebrate this year, including international students from India. Sojira said that while “Diwali is a huge occasion in London and there is an enormous level of observance with food and decorations and many people going to temples,” she felt fortunate to be able to go home to Manchester to celebrate with her home temple and family. She added, “[to] me personally, I love that Diwali is a chance to see family. Everyone switches off their phones and laptops, and we sit around the dinner table and reflect on what we have in our life. We thank the goddess of wealth, Lakshmi, for looking after our family, and it is very humbling to reflect on that. It is really the one time of the year in which everyone’s home is super clean and lit up, and everything smells of candles and amazing food.” Sojira explained that light is at the core of Diwali, with the very name

stemming from the Sanskrit word dipa, which means light and illumination. Sojira noted that recognition of Diwali and the Hindu community at LSE is an ongoing challenge. She said, “It can be hard, and I think that the SU could continue to help us in better ways. We really appreciate it when people attend the events we put on, as we put a lot of effort into planning [them]. This is why we really love it when people come and participate. It is really cool to see everyone’s interpretations of Diwali.” Sojira stressed that the Hindu Society’s Diwali celebrations and other events enthusiastically welcome students of all faiths and none. “Hinduism is really more of a lifestyle than an exclusionary religion. A few weeks ago, we had a Navratri event which was attended by all sorts of people. Many were involved, not just Hindus. When we hold our events, it’s never exclusively just for students who are Hindu, but it’s always a spirit of the more, the merrier.”

Illustration by Raphaelle Camarcat

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @beaveronline

Email us: news@beaveronline.co.uk

Victim Support Motion Underway Further support sought for victims of sexual assault

Ben Crozier Staff Writer

ext month students will file a motion titled “Should the LSE change and improve its sexual harassment and abuse support provision?” The motion aims to expand the current support network which it describes as “completely inadequate and for men, nearly non-existent”. LSE currently has a number of Safe Contacts: staff members who have received sexual violence training and offer support to those who have experienced sexual misconduct or assault. There are currently seven Safe Contacts, only one of which is male. The university website explains: “At present, we are only able to offer

this service to students who identify as female.” The motion hopes to improve communication between the university and students who have suffered from sexual assault by increasing the number of Safe Contacts, simplifying the reporting process and employing a full-time sexual assault counsellor. It will be officially filed at the LSE Union General Meeting on 21 November. It currently has the support of numerous sports, arts and academics societies including Drama, Women in Politics, Boxing, Lacrosse and both mens' and womens' Rugby. The motion was tabled by Laura Goddard, a third-year International Relations student. She told The Beaver, “going through an incident of sexual assault can and does affect every single aspect of a student’s life."

“This is an isolating and terrifying experience and LSE should be doing everything in its power to acknowledge and support those who go through it," Goddard added. She went on to explain that the reality, however, is that support is "misguided and underfunded at best and dangerously inadequate at worst." "Students are asked to prove incidents in extenuating circumstances forms, offered no prioritised counselling, and many have found no follow-up after reporting." Goddard highlighted the main reasons for the motion, "Forcing the university to wake up, invest more, and start proactively ensuring the safety and support of everyone within it.” The UGM will take place on 21 November at 5pm, and voting is open from 7pm onwards. illustration by Sebastian Muller

LSE Climate Emergency Petition Gains Support Staff and students urge LSE to take action on climate change

Grace Chapman Staff Writer

petition requesting that LSE declare a climate emergency, and to pledge itself to significant actions towards climate justice has circled the university over the last few weeks. Organised by the Climate Emergency Collective, the petition has exceeded its 250 signature target and held its first town hall on Wednesday, 30th October open to all at LSE. The Climate Emergency Collective is a group of LSE staff members, academics, and students demanding that LSE acknowledge the climate crisis and take action. A few LSE members originally founded the Climate Emergency Collective over the summer, but it has since been transformed into a larger scale grassroots movement involving a greater diversity of members of the LSE community. With the beginning of the academic year, the Collective became a more student-led organisation, with particularly committed students at the heart of strategy now that term has begun. The Collective told The Beaver that within the first week of the petition, the group was already extremely close to reaching the 250 signatures necessary to call an Emergency Union Meeting within the LSESU. “We are demanding three major actions that would start LSE on a path towards climate justice. First, to adopt a carbon net-zero target by 2030. Second, to divest from all forms of fossil fuels and armaments. Third, for democratic and transparent inclusion in LSE’s climate decision-making process.” The petition began after the Collective sent a letter to the LSE Directorate regarding the climate emergency. The response was deemed unsatisfactory by the group due to its conservative approach to climate change awareness, adaptation and mitigation. A second letter has been released, but the group has said that they are no longer limiting their lobbying to letters to

the Directorate. Instead, they will “likely be taking more direct action to put pressure on the university to act on our concerns” as well as tackling strategy for each area of their demands, from climate education to climate justice. The town hall was designed to allow the Collective to receive feedback from the LSE community and plan further actions to pressure the school into addressing the climate emergency. First, there was an introduction to the history of the Collective and what their message is. Next, the group laid out its main aims and policies, particularly focused on operational emissions. The speakers also elaborated on the Collective’s inclusion of armaments in their demand for divestment, stating that this is a social justice issue closely linked to environmental damage and carbon emissions. Second, came a presentation from a PhD student working on environmentally inclusive investment strategies, focused on LSE’s strategies and how the university currently invests in fossil fuels. Lastly, the speakers went into further detail regarding their third aim: increased transparency from LSE on their climate policies and how such policies are drafted. The Q&A section of the town hall gave the Collective a chance to explain how other members of the LSE community could get involved and what measures are being taken by the group to democratise the issue. The Collective voiced its hopes to have more group discussions on LSE’s climate policies in the future. Isabella Pojuner, who has been a member of the LSE Climate Emergency Collective since its founding, and of Student Climate Action, said that she and the group were “heartened to see so much enthusiasm - all of us uniting across the LSE community to act in the face of our climate and ecological emergency. From negotiating divestment and supply chain emissions to climate education and travel advisors, we join in our demand for greater transparency and inclusivity in LSE environment governance. In our number we hold creativity and insight - and the motivation to challenge LSE’s current path. We will not falter in our ambition for the school, the students and greater society.”

Fundraising for F. A. Hayek Memorial Near LSE Begins Adam Smith Institute starts planning for memorial to LSE Nobel Prize winner

Angbeen Abbas Staff Writer

he Adam Smith Institute (ASI), a think tank and lobbying group that advocates for free market and classical liberal policies, is fundraising to put up a memorial for the economist and Nobel Prize winner Friedrich Hayek near the LSE campus. ASI is working with LSE and Camden Council to place the memorial on the corner of Lincoln’s Inn Field. The ASI will be funding the memorial through private donations. Architect Tony Dyson of Donal Insall Associates will be working on the memorial with ASI. Donal Insall Associates has worked on

other monuments, including statues of Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi. F. A. Hayek was a leading figure of the Austrian School of Economics and received the Nobel Prize in Economics with Gunnar Myrdal in 1974. He was known for his defense of free-market capitalism and free trade policies, as well as his criticism of socialism. He joined the faculty at LSE in 1931 and taught on campus until 1950, going on to teach at the University of Chicago and the University of Freiburg. The Beaver reached out to Dr. Eamonn Butler, co-founder and Director of the ASI, who commented, “It is past time that London had a memorial to this extraordinary man. Fleeing Nazi Germany, Hayek made London and LSE his home. Hayek was a champion of freedom, an antifascist, and globalist. His work on free markets and a free society have helped transform the world for the better.”

Dr Butler added, “Hayek traced the idea of spontaneous order from Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ to the present day. He also made groundbreaking contributions on trade cycle theory and policy, competition in currency, and even human psychology. A physical memorial would not only honour him directly but encourage more people to learn about his legacy.” LSE student societies are also beginning fundraising for the memorial. Max Marlow, President of the Hayek Society at LSE stated, “The Hayek Society will be helping to fundraise and campaign to have this statue put up. We also hope to work with the Austrian Society to honour his legacy and keep his memory alive on campus, just as it is in every economy and textbook all over the world.”

Comment

Tuesday 12 November 2019 |The Beaver Comment Editors Samuel Caveen Lucy Knight Michael Shapland

Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk

The London School of Brexit-bashing

Comment Writers

Michael Shapland Comment Editor

Christiana Ajai-Thomas

The writing on the LSE Blog demonstrates how far the loathing of the referendum has extended.

Staff Writer

Sagal Mohamed Staff Writer

Jesser Horowitz Staff Writer

Jacob van de Beeten Staff Writer

the lengths one can take to rationalize a loss. With this article I have merely touched upon the tip of the iceberg that is LSE's Brexit-bias. Other noteworthy articles include 'No Deal would destroy Britain’s international reputation', 'Johnson has defined Brexit. Now it is for the opposition parties to defeat it' and ‘Politicians don’t care about what I have to say’: listening to the children of EU mi-

Such dressed-up, “intellectualised mud-

Illustration by Gabriela Krol

This slip marks an otherwise stellar effort at masking a quite obvious prejudice to both Brexit and the "cashier in Tesco at Birmingham" who seems to support it. further, many more articles stuck out as powerful grasps to somehow denigrate Brexit, which, to the misfortune of the writer, come undone. Another example of an article hypothesis that if proved right, would serve as an anti-Brexit force is Thiemo Feltzer's (University of Warwick, 2019) "Are Opinion polls biased towards Leave?". The result, after a deluge of multivariate analysis: "Opinion polling is very difficult...I do not know whether my argument has substantive academic merit and academic discourse is needed." Whilst not yet discussing LSEbased opinions, their articles are classified by LSE as "represent[ing] the views of the author and not those of the Brexit blog, nor LSE." Yet I argue

that any selection of an academic's work once again is a value judgement on LSE's behalf. In selecting antiBrexit academics LSE not only reveals its true colours but also gives weight to an overwhelming tide of academiadriven intellectual groupthink that has increasingly sought to shut off any diverging viewpoint. One LSE Blog article that can no longer claim distance from the views of its author is Professor Valentino Larcinese's (LSE, 2018) “There is no such thing as 'the will of the people’ – Brexit needs the involvement of parliament”. Written before this October's increasingly toxic clashes within Westminster, Professor Larcinese's article reads as prophetic for all the wrong reasons: "[Brexit] now seems to be taken as an accomplished, inevitable outcome, which only needs to be implemented" I find the first statement to be as arrogant as it is foolish. The question posed in the EU referendum 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?' is far clearer than the shroud of ambiguity Larcinese attempts to fling over it. Throughout politics, as in life, one is forced to make clear cut choices from a multiplicity of inputs and decision-making processes. Larcinese's bottom-up approach, citing the severely flawed 'Arrow's Theorem' as indisputable

“In selecting anti-

Brexit academics LSE not only reveals its true colours but also gives weight to an overwhelming tide of academia-driven intellectual groupthink.

“

Above: LSE's Brexit Blog

Oliver Harrison

support for his argument, when taken to its natural conclusion essentially states that "everything is so complex at the micro-level that nothing really has any meaning": "Had the Remain camp won the contest we would have probably learned that there was more than one Remain option too." Had a nuclear missile struck Britain to halt the referendum, we would have probably learned that there was an infinite amount of variation involved in the missile's flight through the air. Such dressed-up, intellectualised mud-slinging against a result so clearly loathed by some of the academic and political class goes to show

slinging against a result so clearly loathed by some of the academic and political class goes to show the lengths one can take to to just to rationalize a loss.

“

The LSE is against Brexit. Whatever one's views on the issue, this is something LSE’s student body, alongside the academics and other employees of the university can all agree on. But is it biased against Brexit? Bias is defined as "cause to feel or show inclination or prejudice for or against someone or something". Within this definition, two words stand out: "prejudice" and "feel[ing]". Uncorroborated accusation, grandstanding with little factual support all fall into this category. Where best to search for this bias? The writing of academics, tied to this university and promoted via its blog seems a reasonable start. They after all, are the ones who teach us. If our role models are biased against Brexit what hope do we have? It's time to counter this nonsense, leap beyond the barrier of fake news, and delve deep into the London School of Brexit-bashing. On our subterranean journey we first encounter Sander Kunst's (University of Amsterdam, November, 2019) 'Did Less Education Cause Brexit?'. In the introduction to his article, Kunst lays out his mode of exploration: "It is an interesting proposition: could Brexit have been prevented if the population had spent a few more years in school?" The use of the word "prevent" here is interesting. To the untrained eye Kunst's hypothesis may seem to be a positive statement. Yet the word "prevent" presents a negative value judgement on the thing that is being "prevent[ed]". What Kunst's investigation objectively concerns is the connection between years of schooling and Euroscepticism, so no investigation is actually being made on Brexit's impact on Britain, just its connection to education. This slip marks an otherwise stellar effort at masking a quite obvious prejudice to both Brexit and the "cashier in Tesco at Birmingham" who seems to support it. Kunst concludes that "[m]ore research is necessary...So could Brexit have been prevented with more education? Maybe…". One can argue that the conclusion Kunst reaches shows his lack of Brexit-bias. Yet this failed search reveals a suspicious trend. Searching through the LSE blog

Deputy Editor

grants in the UK'. As a child of an EU migrant, it strikes me that this collective drive for disinformation will not only undo the pro-EU argument within the UK, but across the European mainland itself. An argument is won and lost on the basis of competing viewpoints. In 2016, Leave put forward it's viewpoints, and won. It is time for Remain, and the Brexitbashing LSE, to move on.

Below: respecting the result of the EU referendum is to respect Britian and democracy.

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline

Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk

Why Are We On the Side of the Mob?

News Editor

rabble, of predominantly young men, charge through the streets of Hong Kong. Torches blaze in the background. Petrol bombs fly through the air. Shouts of “go home” and “we don’t want you here” punctuate the

“In a university lec-

“

ture hall nearby, a mob of students have surrounded a professor and proceed to attack him with jeers, insults and fists.

sounds of destruction. In a university lecture hall nearby, a mob of students have surrounded a professor and proceed to attack him with jeers, insults and fists. In the streets, bank tellers, journalists, the elderly, anyone and everyone who oppose the mob’s ideology, are hunted down and attacked. Some

are punched, others are bound and spat upon, while others have laser pointers flashed into their eyes. The mob then publishes the identity of those they attack on the internet, with calls to perform further acts of violence upon their property and their family. This is not an uncommon sight in the 21st century. Similar mobs have appeared in Charlottesville, Hungary and Poland, symptoms of an increasingly hateful world. Media coverage of those cases has been overwhelming condemnation. In the case of Charlottesville, Hungary and Poland, the violent barbarity of the rioters was condemned, denounced and rejected. The rioters at Charlottesville were rightly condemned as Neo-Nazis, Fascists and extremists by the media and civil society, Poland’s Foreign Ministry was denounced when it attempted to claim that the far-right rallies that occurred during its national day were “a great celebration of Poles, differing in their views, but united around the common values of freedom and loyalty to an independent homeland” and Hungary’s far-right Jobbik party has justly been rejected as a legitimate political force for their hateful nativist ideology. One may wonder why I have brought up two disparate topics. The first speaks of a riot, while the second relates to the media coverage of the rising tide of fascism and far-right. The connecting thread between these topics is simple; the media has uniformly condemned Charlottesville, Hungary and Po-

@beaveronline

land while at the same time lauding and even encouraging the former in Hong Kong. I am certain many people are now standing up in indignation. What media would support such a violent, nativist and extremist organization? The answer to that is shocking: The Guardian, The BBC, The New York Times, CNN,

“What media would

support such a violent, nativist and extremist organization? The answer to that is shocking: The Guardian, The BBC, The New York Times, CNN, Fox News and almost every other mainstream media outlet.

“

Jeffery Wong

Fox News and almost every other mainstream media outlet. The news savvy amongst you might now ask, “what riot is this?”, “why have I not heard anything about it?” This is because the media have chosen not to describe this as a violent riot or farright rally, they have instead chosen to portray the Hong Kong riots as

www.beaveronline.co.uk

“peaceful rallies” and the rioters themselves as “democratic reformers”. Indeed this false portrayal is so successful that even now, your mind must be struggling to reimagine the rioters. The young men charging through street are justified because “force is the fastest way to implement change." The mob of students who surrounded a professor and assaulted him are “merely exercising their academic freedom to thought.” The journalist, bank teller and elderly woman were "simply looking for a beating by opposing the popular will", whatever the “popular will” is supposed to be. This is hypocrisy of the highest order. Violence is either right or wrong, beating professors is either right or wrong, harassing elderly women is either right or wrong and shouting “go home” and “we don’t want you here” is either right or wrong. It is morally wrong for people to deride fascist extremism and thugs in the West while supporting extremists and rioters in the East.

At the Beaver, we are dedicated to publishing comment pieces from all perspectives. If you would like to respond to this article, register online to contribute at beaveronline. co.uk or email editor@beaveronline. co.uk

www.facebook.com/thebeaveronline/

Comment

Tuesday 12 November 2019 | The Beaver

LSE Must Be a Provider of Welfare Instead of a Last Resort

his MT has seen an unprecedented level of activism at LSE: Freedom of Mind LSE carried out lots of events related to mental health during its FoM week, and has said it will continue to advocate for further changes in mental health; in November, a UGM motion will ask the LSESU and university to improve provision for victims of sexual harassment, and we will later have a week-long campaign – Hands off LSE – which will hold further events and campaigning to lobby the university on the same subject; the SU – as reported in this issue – will lobby the university into transitioning to a harm reduction approach to drug policy. All of these proposals have a common thread: LSE students are asking the university to be more involved in the welfare of its students.

@beaveronline

the same thing I was told to do as a student mentor if my mentees were struggling. The question then is: how many of LSE services are signposting services leading to external provision, and how many are involved and properly trained providers and promoters of welfare? My educated

“Whether this wide-

spread perception is correct or not, the point is that the university is not communicating services appropriately.

“

Executive Editor

It is not enough to put out fires when they happen, students want the university to become a promoter and provider of welfare, and not a last resort for when bad things happen. The university’s provisions mostly consist of signposting: victims of sexual violence or harassment go from their academic advisor, to a safe contact, to another person, who may even tell them to go to another one (or the NHS, or police). Whilst there are some scattered programmes that promote active mental health practices – such as Wind Down Wednesday by the LSESU – there does not seem to be a coordinated university-wide attempt to help all students cope with university life (I for one would like to see the university radically change its assessment practices to reduce exam stress, for instance). I know that my academic advisor is not trained (nor should they be) to deal with my anxiety disorder, and will tell me to go to the Disability and Wellbeing Service – which is

www.beaveronline.co.uk

“It is not enough to put

out fires when they happen, students want the university to become a promoter and provider of welfare, and not a last resort.

“

Morgan Fairless

guess is that there are many more of the former than the latter. Even worse, there is a wide perception that the services in place are lacking in themselves. Many students believe that services are underfunded and not prepared to deal with extreme circumstances – I for

one know that after two sessions I gave up on therapy at LSE, knew it would take too long to go through the NHS therapy, and ended up going to my GP for help. Regardless of whether this widespread perception is correct or not, the point is that the university is not communicating services appropriately. LSE websites detailing sources of support are mostly full of external sources, which many students (especially, I suspect, international students) are not comfortable reaching to. The sites are cold, difficult to navigate, and reek of signposting. LSE should hear the message loud and clear: students wish to have an involved and coordinated welfare service, which we feel we can go to without feeling like we are walking into a Kafka-esque bureaucracy, and which focuses on prevention and promotion of healthy bodies and minds.

www.facebook.com/thebeaveronline/

Jack Boyd: Let's Change LSE's Drug Policy Jack Boyd LSESU Activities and Development Officer

ow many of you could have a constructive conversation with your parents about drug use? Some of you might be thinking “yes, yes I can, Gary and Deidre* have always been very forward thinking”. Brilliant, Gary and Deidre are doing a smashing job. I imagine a few more of you are thinking “nope, Keith and Petunia* would get a bit flustered and tell me drugs are for thugs”. They’re still doing a cracking job I’m sure, but when Keith and Petunia Jr head to university, they might not have the savvy knowledge required to keep themselves safe. This is what we’re trying to change.

“LSE's

current drug policy was written in 2002. It is a single page long, and only refers to the School's potential sanctions.

“

Introducing my Drug Policy Reform. LSE’s current drug policy was written in 2002. It is a single page long, and only refers to the School’s potential sanctions. It refers vaguely to signposting students to confidential advice, but makes no pledges for on campus provision. The Student Wellbeing Service doesn’t have any counsellors trained in addiction issues, leaving students in need of that support to go off campus. I know

personally that taking the leap to get professional help is hard enough, and then to be told to go elsewhere could put them off seeking the help they need. 52% of students nationwide have taken or currently take drugs, and LSE students are situated perfectly in the Venn diagram of risk factors for drug use; they are young, metropolitan, and enjoy going out a lot. This is why I am calling on the School to change their policy from their current punitive approach to one championing harm reduction. My aims are to get substance purity test kits and a dedicated addiction counsellor on campus, create a safe space for students to talk about their drug use, and to rewrite LSE’s 17-year old drug policy into something that supports students, not punishes them. How can we achieve these lofty aims? I’m releasing a survey on LSE students’ drug use this Thursday. Please fill it out with your experiences of drug use, so we can use all of your responses to lobby the school for change. It’s completely anonymous, your email address will not be attached to your responses, and there are ASOS vouchers up for grabs. What’s not to like? This is an important moment to change the culture and conversation surrounding drugs at LSE, make your voice heard. *Your parents may not be known by these names, mine aren’t.

52% of students nationwide have taken or currently take drugs

Features

Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk Features Editors Annabelle Jarrett Colin Vanelli Marianne Hii

LSE Struggles over China and Academic Freedom Recent Hong Kong protests and scandal over funding highlights concern over LSE academic freedom.

Meher Pandey and Raphaelle Camarcat Contributing Writers

wo days before the LSE Students Alliance for Hong Kong staged Black Bloc Day at LSE in solidarity with protests in Hong Kong, the Financial Times published an article about a pro-Beijing threat to academic freedom at the university. LSE administration was forced to “put on hold” negotiations regarding vested-interest funding for research programmes when faced with criticism from academics. The proposed China programme was backed by Mr Eric Li, a Shanghai businessman and venture capitalist who is a vocal proponent of the single-party system in China. The FT obtained university documents saying the scheme would fund research, support new undergraduate and postgraduate courses on China, and would be overseen by an advisory group of “distinguished individuals from China”. LSE Professor Chris Hughes said it was clear that no members of this advisory group would be critical of the Chinese government. He said in his letter to LSE’s administration that this “shows that the school’s existing procedures for protecting our core values and reputation are inadequate.” Theresa, surname withheld, is a member of the alliance and organiser of Black Bloc Day. She told The Beaver the FT article demonstrated

why students at LSE need to engage with their campaign. “You might think it’s just Hong Kong’s fight but it’s not. It’s everywhere.” Theresa said it was worrying how close LSE administration got to accepting funding from clearly partisan interests. She said this encroachment of academic spaces at LSE is an extension of the suppression of protests in Hong Kong – the same threat taking a different, less violent, but more insidious form. “We’re talking about the freedom to write whatever you want, research whatever you want. We take those freedoms for granted here in London. A lot of these ‘influences’ have already come knocking at our door,” she explained. This fundamental idea anchors the Hong Kong protest within a larger global framework, a fight for universal rights to freedom of speech, expression, and information – all of which are now especially relevant to the LSE student body. On 31 October 2019, over 70 students from different nationalities participated in Black Bloc Day. They stood on the stairs outside the New Academic Building, wearing all black to show protestors in Hong Kong that overseas students and the international community supported them. “We see you, we hear you, and we stand with you,” said Theresa. “Protestors in Hong Kong are facing unprecedented levels of crackdowns on their freedoms. It is deeply unjust, as students like us enjoy relative freedom at a distinguished university in London. It is uplifting to see international peers

showing solidarity with our friends at home… Protesting should be a right, not a privilege,” said the alliance. Theresa wants students at LSE, as part of an institution with significant influence in worldwide dialogue, to act as effective allies to students in Hong Kong while also addressing LSE’s own issues. The Students Alliance for Hong Kong will be campaigning to improve LSE’s procedures regarding external donations for research. Victoria, surname withheld, is also a member of the alliance and organiser of Black Bloc Day. She told The Beaver that the group were not against this funding purely because it was from mainland China – it was the room it left for oversight by pro-government actors that made it dangerous. “When you’re accepting millions to potentially self-censor and silence yourself…” she trails off. Undoubtedly the fight against self-censorship is harder when the institutions you are working within are willing to negotiate with potential surveillance agents for monetary gain. LSE has accepted questionable funds in the past: the LSE-Gaddafi affair is still fresh in students’ minds. Large sums from the Gaddafi Foundation were donated to LSE’s Global Governance research centre as the late Libyan dictator’s son finished his PhD in 2008. Former LSE director Howard Davies was forced to step down in 2011 as a result of the scandal. The FT report also revealed that similar programmes funded by

philanthropic actors from India and Israel are currently being discussed. Although information about these programmes, the actors involved, and their relationship with their countries’ governments is limited, it is important to remember that the current governments in both countries have authoritarian tendencies and are known to silence dissent. Both countries are currently facing criticism for their actions in disputed territory, in Kashmir and Palestine respectively. The LSE administration has a history of engaging financially with actors that can create an environment of self-censorship for its students and staff and it doesn’t seem willing to stop yet. There were attempts to intimidate protestors on Black Bloc Day, too. A masked Chinese man filmed the entire event, including speeches given by unmasked organisers. “We will not be succumbing to any attempts to influence our psychology and to create an environment of intimidation, self-censorship, and white terror,” said the alliance in a press release. The threat is especially real for Hong Kong students who have families in China or its territories and who may choose to return after their degrees have ended. Being identified as a vocal critic of the Chinese Communist Party can be dangerous. In her work with Amnesty International at LSE, Theresa reached out to Students for a Free Tibet in 2017, to collaborate and begin a conversation on campus regarding the Chinese occupation of Tibet. She found that most members of the now inac-

tive society were not Tibetans. Ellen Lees, former president of the LSESU chapter of Students for a Free Tibet said, “I remember when I was at LSE, there was only one Tibetan student who had reached out. She was very involved with our events and brought home-made tea and momos. But she said that she would be nervous about anything more public than that. I know students outside of LSE who were involved in all sorts of things [with Students for a Free Tibet], but specifically chose not to participate in the march outside the Chinese embassy that we do. Because there’s cameras there and they take photos of the protestors... [Surveillance] is definitely a tactic they use.” “There are many students and academics here who do not have to go back to China who can and will stand up for us when we can’t,” said Theresa. She is not too worried about the success of the movement. The Students Alliance for Hong Kong has the LSESU’s support, both financially and otherwise. The SU Campaigns Fund fronts campaign costs and the majority of the SU student executive voted in favour of officially endorsing the movement. The alliance is currently drafting an open letter to LSE’s director Minouche Shafik in regards to academic freedom.

Towards a Healthy Relationship with Death The Mexican holiday Day of the Dead encourages new perspectives on life and death.

Teresa Aguayo

LSESU Mexican Society President

hroughout centuries of human history, death has been celebrated and acknowledged across different cultures, regions, and religions. From the Chinese Tomb Sweeping Day in April to the Hindu Pitru Paksha ritual honouring ancestors and the Balinese holiday Galungan, in which the ancestral spirits return to the Earth, death is a rich cultural experience across the world. However, in the West, death is often a sad and sombre experience, something we’d prefer not to think about at all. Just think about the long-lasting popularity of zombie and ghost movies to get an idea of the Western cultural legacy of death and the dead. Beyond the increasing popularity of the skull painted face “costume” internationally, Dia de Muertos (Day of the Dead) is an often misunderstood and neglected celebration of life.

The annual Mexican celebration held from 28 October to 3 November is a vibrant way to remember those no longer with us, with rich lessons that can be learnt across different cultures. This year, the LSESU Mexican Society placed an ofrenda (altar) in the Saw Swee Hock Student Centre. Hoping to attract different students and staff at LSE, members of the Mexican Society explained the meaning of the Day of the Dead and the multiple items and symbols that could be found in the ofrenda. For instance, marigold flowers serve as a guide for the dead to return from the afterlife, while toys are included to celebrate children that have passed. Other items often included in ofrendas are tequila or mezcal, sugar skulls, and bread. Pillows and blankets are often left out too, so the dead may rest after a long journey. Little signs of respect like this can be seen throughout the celebrations. Importantly, celebrators will include

pictures of the dead throughout the ofrenda to serve as reminders of loved ones. The Day of the Dead is much more than the sugar skull face painting, a Halloween costume trend. For Mexicans around the world, death represents another stage of life that still belongs to the world of the living. More than mourning the departure of a loved one, we cheer for the experiences, laughs, anecdotes, and memories we have with them, like their favourite music, food, and all the things they enjoyed while they were alive — reminders of these are placed along with their photo in the ofrenda. The Day of the Dead is a symbolic way to remember our ancestors and deceased family members, while at the same time reconciling life and death through a colourful and vibrant celebration. The Day of the Dead can teach us all something about how we understand life, death, and our place in the world. Why do we need to worry

about death, when we can instead concentrate on having a life worth being celebrated by our loved ones? After all, if we are to be remembered once we’re dead, then we aren’t really gone.

Features

Tuesday 12 November 2019 | The Beaver

In Conversation: LSESU Tories, Labour, Liberal Democrats Talk General Election

With the General Election campaign underway, our Features Editor sat down with the leaders of LSESU’s Conservative, Labour, and Liberal Democrats societies for a wide-ranging discussion on Brexit, climate change, capitalism, workers rights, and more. Transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

Features Editor

he Beaver (Colin): So, obviously, it’s general election season – that’s just a little over a month away. How’s that going? Are your parties canvassing, or is it still pretty light at this point? Labour (Melissa Pittman and Chloe White): We’ve been really, really busy. We’re trying to go to all the marginal seats, there’s a lot around London, like Chipping Barnet and Chingford. We’re just working with all the constituencies around London to make sure we go to the ones that we really need to win. We have a lot of safe seats in London, luckily, like Holborn St Pancras and Hackney seats. But it is quite stressful, we’re out on the doorstep everyday pretty much. Conservatives (Hamish Mundell): Yep, we’ve been doing the same, getting out canvassing in these key marginal seats. Obviously, we’ve got a lot less safe seats in London, which is fair to say. We’ve also been doing some work on the phones, trying to reach people in the whole country. Liberal Democrats (Aadil Khan): We’ve been really big on targeting, and that’s the key priority for the national party as well. It’s finding a seat and winning it, and we’ve been really focused on the Cities of London and Westminster, which is LSE’s seat that we’re sitting in right now. Beaver: What are your thoughts on etiquette between parties? A couple of people have mentioned that the cross-party pub crawl, for example, has gotten kind of racy. Is crossparty dialogue moving in a good direction, or do you think we should try to scale it back? Tory: It’s fair to say that there are different scenarios. Today, I had Neil Coyle, who’s the [Labour] MP for Bermondsey knock on my door, and we had a nice little chat. That’s all fine, and most people are completely fine just having a chat. Obviously you do get flare ups, which aren’t really that productive – nobody really wants that. At the end of the day, when there’s not an election going on, you do want to have politics working quite harmoniously, with people getting on and actually finding solutions. So I don’t see a future in shouting at each other LD: On student politics at LSE, I think that LSE is probably one of the nicer campuses to do politics on. If you look at other universities across the country, the attitude towards politics is much more hostile, and there’s not the kind of places where you can have three different societies in a room talking to each other. Lab: I would say that debate it really important, and for us four to

be sat around together is important and productive. But I’d also say that what’s often overlooked – especially in this general election – is that these are people’s lives that we’re talking about. In this election, if there is a Conservative or Liberal Democrat government, people’s lives are going to be genuinely affected, people that do not have settled immigration status, homeless people, people who rely on state benefits, people who rely heavily on NHS and social care. So, there is an element where, yeah we need to talk to each other and there’s no

have a “lotI ofdon’t interest in

trying to build bridges and make friends, because that’s not what we’re here for.

“

Colin Vanelli

point shouting. But at the same time, I don’t have a lot of interest in trying to build bridges and make friends, because that’s not what we’re here for. We’re here to try to build a government that is going to genuinely protect people, and work for the people it needs to work for. Tory: I’d completely agree from the opposite perspective. We all agree that we want to talk about the issues and play to the issues, because we all want a government of our own party. At the same time, I’m sure we all agree that ad hominem attacks are not the way to do politics and generate a healthy, democratic environment. Beaver: What is this election? Is this the Brexit election? Is this an election on climate change, on the economy? What is the defining feature of this election? LD: I think that the defining feature of this election will be Brexit and the willingness of different parties to talk about it. I think you have an issue where some parties are going to have incredibly clear positions – the Liberal Democrats, who say we want to unequivocally remain no matter what happens, and the Brexit Party who are saying ‘we want no deal, we want to build a wall in the middle of the channel’. Then you have other parties struggle to get their messages across, perhaps they have more nuanced positions on Brexit, and maybe they’re sitting on the fence. But I think that’s where you’ll see a bit more of a squeeze and a lot of media pressure to speak up on what they actually believe. Tory: I think the Tories have quite a concise position. They have an oven-ready deal that’s ready to

go as soon as they have a parliamentary majority. Whether you like Brexit or not, it’s clear what their position is. I would say that there’s a second aspect: it’s sort of a bifurcated election. Brexit, get that done, resolve it however you might – revoking Article 50, or going through a 9-month delay process and renegotiating. Once that’s done, there is a discussion to be had about the future of Britain after Brexit. There’s obviously two different camps here with Labour and the Tories’ vision of how we’re going to grow as a country going forward. But, you can see that there are two strands to the election, so it will be interesting to see how they play off of each other. Lab: I do agree that Brexit is really important – we are going to renegotiate a deal and put it back to the people, and it’s going to include protections for the environment, workers, freedom of movement, and put us back in a new customs union which protects the people of this country. But it’s very easy for us to sit here and say ‘oh yeah, this election is about Brexit’ in this nice university with nice facilities. But, really, people have been suffering under austerity for so many years, and the NHS is failing without the funding that it needs. There have been so many cuts to schools. This country is literally dying. I don’t want to make it over-dramatic, it’s not, but people are dying because of Tory austerity and the cuts. We can sit here and say that it’s about Brexit, but for a lot of people like this, it’s so much more important than that. Beaver: A little more than twothirds of LSE are non-British. About 50-percent are non-EU, non-British. How will this election affect the average student at LSE, who is not from this country, and likely cannot vote? Lab: First of all, it’s important to say that Labour is a party that is pro-immigration. Especially under Corbyn’s leadership, we care immensely about immigrants. With immigration, you’ve got skilled immigrants and you’ve got immigrants that are slightly more vulnerable… Under the Tories, all immigrants have been affected by the hostile environment – which has really negatively affected people’s lives. I’m sure lots of international students and British students have received emails from LSE, part of Home Office rules that if you miss two classes then you could have your visa taken away. That is a hugely detrimental thing to send to a student who might be ill or suffering with their mental health – even at the level where LSE students are going to deal with the Home Office. We cannot trust a Conservative government with any sort of immigration. That is clear from the fact that their party – and their leader – is blatantly racist, calling black people “‘piccaninnies”’ and women in burkas “‘letterboxes”’. [Immigra-

tion] is hugely important in Labour policy, and our manifesto next week will be hugely pro-immigration – not just European immigration, although there will be a conscious effort to protect that – but also those from outside the Union. LD: The reason why I keep bringing this back to Brexit and our policy with the EU is that Brexit wasn’t seen as a signal that ‘we need a fairer immigration system, we want fewer from Europe but more from the rest of the world’. It was taken as a vote that the people don’t like immigration, that we don’t want a country that is accepting immigration. There was a consensus that we need fewer people entering the UK. I think that, if this election were to show losses for the Conservatives and potentially gains for the Liberal Democrats, it might show that people have changed their minds, and that this country has woken up to the value that immigrants have brought to this country. Not just high-skilled immigrants that are going to LSE, but also those who are picking our fruit and working in our hospitals. Tory: If we’re going to bring it back to Brexit, the fact is: we had a referendum, the majority of people – including many Labour voters – felt that they needed to leave the EU. But the result of the referendum hasn’t been honored. I think it’s somewhat farcical to say that you can have another referendum before you’ve actually implemented the results of the first one. It’s about faith in our democratic system, if nothing else. For many people who aren’t the most powerful in our society, who don’t have the capacity to use legal and economic means to implement their wills on Westminster as the Remain alliance has done, want the referendum delivered. Else, we’ll see the rise of things like the Brexit Party, as they did very well defeating the Lib Dems, Tories, and Labour in the last election. We have to ask: why is that happening? We should listen, rather than talk at them. Beaver: Apart from your individual parties in power, what is the fundamental thing thing that Britain needs in this moment? Tory: Get Brexit done, move the country forward. Start focusing on the priorities that people care about. Labour: I don’t think that getting Brexit done will necessarily make us focus on the priorities that people care about. I don’t think that we need to do Brexit and then everything will be fine. We need to focus on, right now, the second referendum and the process of that. As soon as we get into government, our party could reverse austerity and things like that. That’s what we need. We don’t necessarily need to get Brexit done, that’s not going to solve anything. The country is still going to be divided. Tory: Our political system is

pretty paralyzed while Brexit is hanging over it. Have we been able to pass much legislation? Things like the Ag Bill, Environment Bill – these are really good pieces of legislation and they’ve been pushed back because they need to get Brexit through. The whole legislative session is being taken over by Brexitrelated debate. We just need to find an end to this issue – my position is to push through this nice deal, it’s very moderate and will take back control over all those things that people voted for, and it moves us forward. Then we can start thinking about compromise on how we can go through with a set of progressive legislation, which I think the Tories are outlining. LD: What we need is to stop Brexit and start decarbonizing capitalism. That’s something that the Liberal Democrats started whilst in government, and in fact the UK is one of the greenest countries in the G7 because of the Lib Dem record. Beaver: Have we lost time on combating climate change? Labour: We’ve lost time because the Conservatives have not been radical enough on climate change. We’re still unsure whether [Environment Secretary] Theresa Villiers actually believes in climate change. If you want to speak about the environment bill, the environment bill is not progressive. Ask any climate academic: the environment bill is not progressive. You cannot have a progressive vision on the environment while supporting capitalism. Neoliberalism will always put markets ahead of people, and will not protect people the way it needs to, i.e. against the global catastrophe of climate change. Tory: I’d definitely say – I’ve always been a big one on climate change – over the last couple of years, we’ve seen a massive acceleration of public policies on climate. If you went to the Tory party conference this year, I’d say that a third of all fringe events were related to the environment. It’s incredible; there’s so much energy in government towards doing stuff on the environment. See the Michael Gove environment bill speech a few months ago; that was such an aggressive and ambitious attempt to move the country forward on the environment. LD: I think that when it comes to environmental issues, there is generally a consensus across parties that climate change exists – thank God – and that we need to do something about it. The issue that people should be thinking about when they cast their votes is: who do we trust to decarbonize the economy. Do you trust a party that you suspect may actually be decarbonizing as a way of implementing their radical vision of what the economy should look like? Do you trust the party that is closely tied to vested interests that don’t want what’s best for the coun-

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline

Beaver: What is Britain going to look like in five, ten, twenty years, if your party wins a majority in December? Labour: Well, we’ve got two choices: disaster capitalism and Boris Johnson, or we have socialism for the many and not the few under Jeremy Corbyn. I think I know what the majority of people in this country need. I see a Britain that

welcomes and values refugees and migrants from all across the spectrum. I see a country that would have comprehensive state schools at a comparable or similar level to private schools, a country with less inequalities, better welfare, less mental health issues. Because at the end of the day, the mental health crisis we’re seeing is a direct result of the fact that the Tories have given us ten years of awful austerity – may I add that the Lib Dems did that as well, they were part of that. I would see

“

We all know that the environment is bigger than any one political party.

“

try? Or do you want the party that has a proven track record in government of actually cutting CO2 emissions? Tory: [Net-zero carbon emissions by] 2050 was actually a Tory policy, and that was really progressive. Labour: 2050? 2030! Tory: 2030 is mad. What are you going to have to do to decarbonize by 2030? Labour: So it’s mad to try to decarbonize a country? It’s mad to try to stop the biggest issue facing the world? What are you going to do, put markets before people? Or people before markets? Tory: People are inherently tied into markets, that’s the thing. If you ban diesel cars in a week – which I guess the Tories are actually doing, they’re banning diesel cars, it's a progressive action – Labour: It’s a good policy! Tory: But you’ve got to do these things over time, gradually. You can’t just pull the rug from underneath people’s lives. Labour: But we haven’t been doing enough gradually, and things are getting worse. Tory: We all know that the environment is bigger than any one political party. The idea of the environment bill is to take environmentalism as target-setting and kick it out of the realm of politics. Because let’s be honest, there is a consensus, especially among people our age, that climate change is such a big deal. We need to take the football away, move it out of politics, give it to an independent regulatory agency, and let them hold future governments’ toes to the fire on it. That sounds like a really good idea in my view. LD: We can set the UK’s carbon neutrality target to 2050, 2030, 2025, but what is more important than that is Britain's global voice. Can we become a world leader in showing countries and encouraging our friends and allies across the world to take action on climate change? Ultimately, we could go netzero tomorrow, and it wouldn’t do a huge amount to impact climate change. We need our partners to follow suit. The reason why stopping Brexit is so important [is] because it diminishes our voice in the world. We can be stronger as part of the European Union, ensuring that we can take global action on climate change. I know some parties have some really radical ideas – and I’m sure the Conservatives are going to do an adequate job on combating climate change – but if we’re doing it alone, I don’t really see the point.

Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk

a country where people got a better deal for the work that they did, and were recognized for that, and we weren’t giving bankers in the City of London million pound bonuses for work that they didn’t really do. Tory: I have a somewhat contrasting vision of what the world would be, rather than this socialist utopia. I think, over the next few months, we’re going to see Brexit come to a head. If the Conservative government is returned to power with a majority – as I hope it will be – we will see a deal go through, and we can head towards negotiations that I expect will be something like a Canada-plus type deal. Which is a quite progressive compromise, a softer compromise than the Farages of this world want. Once that’s done, I see a period of compromise. We have a lot more in common than you think on these policy issues. We talk about the environment, there is obviously a lot of common opinions to be shared here. I don’t see a huge amount of difference, after Brexit, between members of the Lib Dem and some members of the Conservative party in its current form. The Lib Dems have nailed themselves to the mast of the European issue – but after that, is there a massive amount of difference? Not really. LD: I think there are some really fundamental differences on social issues. For example, in 2017, the Liberal Democrats were the only party to put a minimum quota on the number of refugees and asylum seekers we wanted to take into the country, whereas other parties were scared, feeling that that sort of quota would alienate the white working class– basically presuming that those workers are racist. The Liberal Democrats are a party founded on standing up for minority rights. Things like equal marriage for everyone, are things that the Liberal Democrats will pursue that the Conservatives will not. Because as much as you’d like to pretend that you are a sort-of cuddly, free market party that is becoming more socially liberal, I don’t think that that’s the case, especially with Boris Johnson as your leader. Tory: You are a national po-

litical party. Apart from these very niche causes, which I personally support, you’re a national party: what are your views on the economy? Do you want to see a socialist-style economic system, or a progressive, centrist economy? Beaver: Workers, cleaners, security guards at LSE – many of them are migrants to the UK and could be considered more economically vulnerable than the average student. Why do your parties deserve their vote? Tory: In terms of ‘if you work hard, you get the rewards of your own labour,’ – I think the Conservative party has really been pushing that. Raising the minimum wage to £10.50 an hour within the next five years is a great policy. We’ve been trying to make tax cuts from the bottom up, which I think is fantastic and I am a really big advocate for that. If you’re not one of the biggest earners in society, then you shouldn’t have to be paying vast amounts of tax. Furthermore, making changes to national insurance – I think that is a really good policy. You have to remember that there is not only wealth redistribution in the world, there is wealth creation, and you have to make sure that people feel empowered to create wealth, as much as they feel they can. I don’t think that wide promises of a greener tomorrow without a huge amount of costing or realism is actually going to benefit society. Labour: We are definitely the party to protect workers’ rights – I don’t think there are any questions about that. Our whole culture of improving the welfare state, having things for people there when they need them. We are raising the minimum wage. We support the unions; you can look at the postal workers’ strike, which Jeremy Corbyn has come out in support of… [The Tories] have been in government for so long, and so many workers have suffered, why didn’t you do anything then? Tory: Workers and unions are no longer the same thing. This isn’t the 1980s; it is no longer the same thing. For example, South Western trains are going on strike for seventeen days in December: that is not a good thing for workers. That is actually going to make a lot of people’s lives hell. Labour: And train workers shouldn’t be allowed to strike? Maybe if the trains were nationalized then that wouldn’t happen in the first place. Tory: Look at the history of nationalized trains in this country and you’ll find that that is not quite true. Beaver: Is LSE a fundamentally different environment from the rest of the UK in terms of how we talk about politics, how we engage with politics? LD: I think the LSE is probably a better place to do politics than a lot of other places. I know at King’s they have a big culture of demon-

strations and banners. In some aspects, that can be really positive. In other aspects, I’ve seen some of the things they wrote on the banners and they’re not particularly great. I think at LSE they tend more towards collaborating with societies, or an effort from groups to draw in different societies. For example, the Global Climate Strike last year, there was a huge effort to make sure that was cross-party; lots of societies were getting involved. I think that’s one of the perks of a small campus; everyone knows each other more or less. Maybe it is in part to do with the culture of LSE and the slightly different way in which we do politics. Tory: I completely agree, I like the consensus-based model of discourse, I like having a chat. LSE, because there’s so many clever people, policy specialists and such, it means you can get into quite a positivist debate about how, well, ‘we all agree there is this problem, how can we fix that’, and come to an understanding, which I think is really nice. I don’t really like this sort of normative, name-calling style of politics which I think has come into the UK as largely an American import. I don’t like that among student politics. LSE is better in some ways, but at the same time has polarization for the sake of polarization, which I don’t think is very productive. Labour: University politics in general is not very reflective of the rest of the country. Back home, the way you talk about politics is so different from here. A lot of the issues – you know, workers rights, it’s great that we’ve had a conversation about that today, but that doesn’t get brought up. I feel like it’s so much economic and Brexit policy, very tothe-script. People don’t talk about emotions enough, and how this affects people’s lives. Benefits are definitely not spoken about enough, because a lot of people here have never met anyone who has needed benefits. Our society is trying to make people more aware of that, and we have a lot of working class students, which is great. It’s great that there’s such an international environment, but a lot of people here have loads of money, and that is obviously going to skew the way we talk about politics.

have seen really encouraging signs that that is happening. Labour: I’d like to say that I thought the average LSE student would vote for Labour. There are a lot of great policies for students: we’re going to remove tuition fees for British students. I’d like to see more protections for international students in our manifesto. We can definitely win people round. I’m not going to say every student at LSE is left-wing, obviously that’s not true. But I think we’re going to have a good manifesto, we have a really good cause, and hopefully we can convince a lot of people to vote for us. Tory: A lot of people in this election will go, ‘there’s a clear choice’. Jeremy Corbyn as the Prime Minister, running the economy, running the City, running their future employers... do they want to be run by Jeremy Corbyn, or do they want to be run by a responsible Conservative government, which has managed this economy for quite a long time and will continue to do so in a far more proficient manner, without the politics of the 60s and 70s pervading it. Labour: One thing I would say is that we have a choice. A lot of people at LSE have a lot of money, so I would say to them directly: whatever happens, you are going to be okay, you’re not going to lose your home, your family, your healthcare. What would be a really encouraging thing to do is to vote to protect the people who, under a Conservative government, that would happen to them. Beaver: Final thoughts?

LD: For those of you who aren’t bored of Brexit and would like to remain: vote tactically. Have a look, not just at the 2017 election, look at what happened in the Euros and look at some of these tactical voting websites. See who actually deserves your vote. But remember: voting Lib Dem is the only way to show you want to stop Brexit. Tory: When looking at this election, you’ve got to look at two issues. Do we want Brexit done and being resolved as an issue in the next year, or do we want more delay, another referendum, and even more divisiveness? Do we want to move on Beaver: How do you think the in some sort of consensus? I think average LSE student will vote? there is only one option, and that is a clear majority Conservative govLD: I think the average LSE stu- ernment. We can start dealing with dent is fundamentally quite liberal. the issues, which I think there is a I think that – I may be a bit biased consensus for if you look past the – but from the conversations I’ve tribalism. been having at the Fresher’s stall, Labour: If you want the choice people who tend to be less engaged between a sensible Brexit deal and in politics tend to intuitively place remain, and on top of that you want themselves, not necessarily on the to ensure protections for workers, left-right spectrum, but feel quite investments in education, investstrongly in their libertarian views on ments in the NHS, green policies, social issues. Particularly when you carbon-neutral goal by 2030, Lastudy things like international insti- bour is the party for you. I think tutions, things like Brexit become that is a broad-encompassing manikey factors when you vote, particu- festo that a lot of people would relarly if you have a lot of family or ally like to see. friends from abroad. I hope, at least, that the student vote is moving towards the Liberal Democrats. We Photoillustration by Colin Vanelli

Features

Tuesday 12 November 2019 | The Beaver

Renting as an LSE Student? Know Your Rights As legislation is gradually shifting to balance the power dynamics in the private renters markets, students should be aware of their rights.

Features Editor

uring the 2018-19 academic year, there were 5348 undergraduate students at LSE, out of which 1753 were first years. Only first year undergraduate students are guaranteed accommodation at LSE Halls of Residence, with over 4000 places offered across 18 locations. While the number of spaces seems large enough to house the majority of undergraduates, 1,777 spaces across 5 halls (Butler’s Wharf, Sidney Webb, Lilian Knowles, High Holborn, and Grosvenor) are reserved for postgraduates. For all other LSE halls, second and third years are only given offers from the end of August, if there are vacancies available after priority has been given to new students. Over two-thirds of undergraduates students in the 2018-19 academic year found alternative accommodation to these halls, whether from private student accommodation managed by providers such as Unite Students and iQ Student Accommodation to renting from private landlords. As such, finding housing is a significant concern for most undergraduates heading into their second year at LSE, in a city undergoing crises in housing and soaring rents, with the highest rent to income ratio of any region in the UK. According to the National Student Accommodation Survey 2019, about 54% of students rent from estate agents or private landlords. The average student rent is reportedly £125 per week nationwide, but jumps to £161 per week in London. LSE students who seek private student accommodation will also find that rental costs in central London are likely far greater than in outer zones, which are further from LSE and may entail significant transportation costs. While facilities in private student halls, like 24-hour staff and CCTV security, can be attractive, the closest iQ student accommodation to LSE is its Paris Gardens branch, and its rent per week is £309 for a 51-week contract or £349 per week for a 43-week contract. Notably, iQ student accommodation is the largest private student accommodation provider – students seeking lower prices must do further research into available options. For students renting for the first time from private landlords or via estate agents, rental prices can be off putting and the obscure privaterental industry practices are often mind boggling. Nearly 1 in 5 students start looking for the following year’s accommodation in November, and the stresses of searching for suitable housing over many months may mean students neglect to research tenancy law and equip themselves with the knowledge of their rights throughout the process. Prior to June of this year, once students found a private flat or house they wanted to rent, many of them faced their first big hurdle: a list of deposits, uncapped agency fees, and other miscellaneous charges that needed to be paid to secure

“...telling your

landlord or estate agent explicitly that you know of appropriate regulation and legislation may make them less inclined to ignore your complaints...

“

Marianne Hii

their housing. The average student would cash out £311 in deposits and £119 in admin charges. However, June 2019 saw the Tenant Fees Act come into force, meaning that tenancy deposits must be refundable and capped at five weeks’ rent for properties where annual rent is £50,000 or less (or six weeks’ rent when annual rent is greater than £50,000). Holding deposits are now also capped at no more than one week’s rent. Furthermore, landlords and agents are banned from charging unnecessary “agent/miscellaneous fees”. Now they can only charge reasonably-incurred costs such as from lost keys or security devices, and must provide evidence of such before any charge. This is part of a broader policy shift to balance power dynamics in the private rental market, which have always been heavily skewed towards landlords, into one that is fairer, better quality, and more affordable. Students who entered contracts before 1 June 2019 need not despair completely. Even if it is currently stipulated in your contract that it is your responsibility to pay for charges such as inventory or cleaning fees at the end of your tenancy, these fees can only be charged until 31 March 2020. From 1 June 2020, any such stipulations for unnecessary fees will no longer be binding on tenants. Importantly, though a landlord can request the property be cleaned to a professional standard, they cannot request a specific company and cannot deduct from a holding deposit if the condition of the property is due to fair wear and tear. Any costs must be justified by evidence from an independently-produced inventory, receipts, or invoices. This act also empowers tenants to recover any unlawfully charged fees via the First-tier Tribunal from landlords within seven to fourteen days, or a relevant redress scheme when a problem involves an estate agent. A landlord cannot recover possession of their property under the Section 21 eviction procedure

Illustration by Jinny Lee

until all unlawfully charges fees or unlawfully kept holding deposit are repaid. Besides ensuring you are being charged fairly during the rental process, another concern is dealing with property issues during a tenancy. The charity Shelter has calculated that about 10% of renters had their health negatively impacted because their landlords did not address poor conditions and repairs on their property last year. When faced with housing problems, only 2 percent of students seek legal advice, which means they may not be aware of what they are legally entitled to as tenants. Problems a student can encounter while renting include broken mechanical, security, or electrical items that have been left in a poor condition by previous tenants or landlords. Older properties may have electrical wiring or fixings that do not conform to modern safety regulations, such as exposed, fraying wires, and wooden, as opposed to metal, electricity boxes. Even after making a complaint to your estate agent and landlord, many students complain of long wait times for their problems to be addressed. In fact, 45% of students don’t have their complaints

addressed within a week, and 10% wait for a month or longer to get any resolution. While it may not seem like much, telling your landlord or estate agent explicitly that you know of appropriate regulation and legislation may make them less inclined to ignore your complaints, and many tenants-rights activists consider this step to be the single most effective technique available to tenants. It is also useful to read through your contract and quote the relevant duties of your landlord, which should at least include compliance with the law. It is worth mentioning that private tenants can apply for a refund for up to 12 months’ rent if their landlord does not handle health and safety hazards in the property. For example, in 1994, the Electrical Equipment (Safety) regulations act came into force, making landlords wholly responsible for repairing and maintaining the electrical supply. The government has also legislated new, mandatory 5 yearly electrical installation safety inspections. A 2005 amendment to building regulations requires only fully-qualified electricians to work on property. Moreover, the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 came into force in March 2019, re-

quiring property be fit for human habitation at the beginning and throughout the lease. Significantly, this allows tenants recourse to take legal action, while previously, their main method of redress was through their council’s environmental health teams, which often struggled to meet rising demand. With students understandably concerned about what may be their first time renting a flat amidst soaring rent and stories of poorly-conditioned flats, it is important for them to know that the law is changing in a way that balances the housing market. Students may also consider joining the London Renters Union. Even if your landlord is a city, country, or a continent away, they are still obligated under the 1985 Landlord and Tenant Law to provide an address or an agent for you to communicate with them; your landlord cannot avoid issues with the property forever. It is the right of all students to live in a safe and dignified manner. The SU Advice Team gave advice to the Beaver: “The first thing thing to advise would be that the student 100% needs to keep paying rent. Threatening to withhold rent is not an option in this situation and can lead to eviction. The student should firstly notify the landlord by email,

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline

“

There is a significant distinction between a landlord being slow to make repairs and actively refusing to do so.

“

then by letter of the need for a repair. All correspondence should be dated and done in writing (as opposed to over the phone). The landlord has a duty to make repairs in a ‘timely manner’.” The nature of the issue will also affect the speed of repairs: a broken boiler will be fixed quicker than a leaky tap. There is a significant distinction between a landlord being slow to make repairs and actively

Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk refusing to do so. The SU Advice Team also said: “If the student still has no luck with the landlord, they can make a formal complaint. This is basically a letter to the landlord detailing the complaint, including as much information as possible (photos, emails, screenshots, dates etc). Often, just mentioning that they intend to make a complaint will make the landlord act faster. You cannot legally

be evicted for making a complaint – this is what is known as a retaliatory eviction. If their landlord attempts to do so, the tenants should contact their local Citizens Advice Bureau ASAP.” If the landlord does not respond, tenants can submit a complaint to their local council. If there is a concern that affects the tenants’ immediate health and safety, like a gas leak, rodent infestation, or large

mould patches, tenants can contact the Environmental Department of their council and report their landlord. LSE students are welcome to discuss any housing problems with the SU Advice Service, or check their rights at the Shelter website (https:// england.shelter.org.uk/get_help).

Carlos Peñalver: Conjuring Art and Environmental Activism at LSE We sit down with the artist of the Centre Building's new murals.

News Staff Writer

ver the last few weeks Carlos Peñalver, a young Spanish artist, has been transforming the Central Building’s white walls into a large-scale, inclusive, and lively work of art. As students paced in and out of the building, the lower ground floor has undergone a complete metamorphosis. Peñalver began painting during the start of the academic term, engaging with students and incorporating their thoughts within the mural. The Beaver recently met with Peñalver and art curator Beth Fleming to learn more about this intriguing project. It all began in March 2019. A team from Artiq, an art advisory company, visited the Central Building’s construction site and brainstormed a way to incorporate art within the future classrooms and lecture theatres. Armed with yellow construction helmets and steel boots, the team came up with the idea of a mural. The project evolved and grew at the same pace as the

building’s construction, as they exchanged ideas on themes to include in Peñalver’s artwork. After long conversations, Fleming and Peñalver decided they would combine political and environmental themes within the mural, including deforestation and species extinction, to grab students’ attention. Peñalver told The Beaver: “Originally, we wanted to feature some global issues. I wanted to create something beautiful from plants and animals that were vanishing. Imagine a beautiful garden, composed of scenes that are now disappearing.” While he was painting in the

The answer to global “issues lies here, among LSE's community.

“

Raphaelle Caramcat

first few weeks of term, students frequently came to Peñalver and shared their thoughts on the topics. The openness of the dialogue allowed the painter to spontaneously incorporate student ideas within the mural. For instance, Ethan Stratford,

the President of LSE’s Sustainable Futures Society, showed Peñalver the society’s logo, which is now featured within the mural. "We approached Carlos with the idea to immortalise the Sustainable Futures Society's logo within the mural artwork. We thought it fit well with the themes of Carlos' work, and was symbolic of the lasting impact of our society's projects," Ethan told The Beaver. Other students mentioned key political figures in environmental activism, which were later included. Can you spot Greta Thunberg with her iconic braids, and beloved figure David Attenborough? The painter used the building’s U-shaped structure to deliver a story composed of short episodes, similar to a biblical story mural. The narrative is focused on environmental change, particularly in the LSE community. In the first episode, Carlos presented the memory of an idealistic garden. Acrylic line-paintings of lush vegetation and wildlife swirl and dive along the wall, conjuring feelings of freedom and liberty in the viewer. The painter represented chaotic scenes on the following walls: the Amazon rainforest is bursting

into flames, anchoring the artwork to present-day climate disasters and raising a sense of actuality and emergency. Carlos wanted this episode to reflect the consequences of global warming and cause the viewers to reflect on environmental change. The story continues to unfold – after the fire, vegetation has disappeared. Black line-drawings outline the shapes of polar bears and walruses purposelessly roaming around waves of plastic. Animals are no longer in their natural habitats: they have been displaced, which brings about a sense of absurdity and disarray. The next scene stresses the lack of public reaction and care. A grotesque carnival is depicted, emphasizing people’s ignorance regarding the gravity of the situation. Characters float in the air and dance around, wearing flowers in their hair and animal skin. The final episode is not painted: it can be found within the student body itself. Along the last wall, the building’s main wooden staircase springs up from the lower ground. Students usually study and chat, sitting on the steps. This view repre-

sents the mural’s final episode. What Peñalver wished to highlight is that the answer to global issues lies here, among LSE’s community. Students are creative, bright, and engaged – they are taught to question, think critically, and solve problems. The mural tackles this idea, by pushing people to think, react, and engage and perhaps even, one day, solve environmental disaster.

Photos by Carlos Peñalver

FLIPSIDE VOL. 22

NOV 12 FREE

MSc Financial Astrology launching in 2020

Netflix or BBC? Here’s what to watch

Moustaches, mental health and Movember

EDOUARD

Background – the beauty in a film about films

PANCIULO HÉLOÏSE REGNAULT de MONTGON

tailed his great struggle to convince his teachers to let him apply for Economics instead of Management: “I remember the teacher sort of smiling saying it’s not gonna happen. But she did, she did write a very good reference. I’m so very grateful for her.” Héloïse’s “peculiar” school gave her a much easier time: she describes their enthusiastic support despite not knowing much about the specifics of Anthropology at LSE. As for other French stereotypes, Edouard says “you can always tell if a person is French…. I think every country and language has its very distinct features. And it’s true that French tend to hang together.” Héloïse agrees.

ou might think that all the French people at LSE already know each other, especially if they’re in the same year, but you would be wrong: Héloïse Regnault de Montgon and Edouard Panciulo had never met before this interview. They’re both second years, studying Social Anthropology and Economics respectively. Héloïse grew up in Paris and was educated at a school which she describes as “peculiar”. Edouard’s upbringing was more meandering: he was born and raised in Hong Kong and spent time in the Philippines before spending his last years of education at a boarding school in the south of France. I sat down with both of them to talk about LSE, stereotypes about French students, astrology, and being queer at LSE.

We talked about Edouard’s successful campaign to be LSESU LGBTQ+ Students Officer and what he plans to do with his new mandate. He wants to increase the diversity of events for LGBTQ+ students on campus, specifically, he hints towards more careers events. “I have a couple ones lined up already, which I’m really excited about. I won’t disclose the names yet.” He would also like to strengthen the ties between the Athletics Union and LGBTQ+ students as he thinks both sides stand to benefit from a closer relationship. His own club, LSE AU Rowing, is like family to him.

Before we could start any real conversation, we had to bridge the quintessential Flipside question: why did they choose LSE? For Héloïse, it was a matter of expertise: “I wanted to do anthropology and it was a really good university for that. And I thought that the British education system was much better than the French one, in many ways… I always wanted to do my studies abroad.” The fact that she’d be undertaking her studies in her second language hardly phased her. “The first – I would say – two months were rough though because it was academic language… but now I’ve gotten used to it.” For Edouard it was a matter of escaping the ennui of the countryside: “I got really bored when I was in high school. We were in the middle of nowhere in France... I thought that London was an excellent compromise. It’s just an hour away and it really reminds me of where I grew up. [LSE] was really just looking at the best university within the city I wanted to live.”

Héloïse’s endeavours are a bit more ethereal: she’s really into astrology. “I got into tarot at first... when I was about 10. I really started studying astrology properly when I was around 15.” She adds “a lot of people misunderstand it, rightfully so because the image you have of astrology is mostly from magazines, which is actually a fabrication from the 1950s.” Then she took Edouard and I through the actual process of doing an astrological reading. It starts with the person’s birth chart, which requires their precise time and location of birth. “Down to the minute,” she says. This birth chart then “gives you like kind of a snapshot of the position the exact position of planets, constellations are signs, asteroids and so on, at the exact time that you were born.” Turns out, astrol-

I know what you’re thinking: it’s curious that I found two French people that don’t do Management. We spent quite some time unpacking that before arriving to the conclusion that there’s a kindergarten to management pipeline in the French education system. Edouard de-

ogy is a lot of maths. Héloïse does paid readings for people but otherwise she recommends the app The Pattern over its competitor CoStar, citing the latter as disingenuous. Late into the interview, we talked about not being straight. Edouard recently came out as gay and Héloïse is bisexual. If you don’t already know my sexuality then I haven’t been doing this job right. Knowing this, I asked them if they thought LSE was doing enough for its LGBTQ+ students. They think the school is overwhelmingly positive for queer students, compared to the situation in France. Héloïse says “it was a big change to see that people were really included, that there was a Pride Alliance, that there was an LGBT officer in the first place and that LSE was willing to publicly speak [on these issues].” Héloïse describes coming out to her family at 16 after attending a very homophobic middle school. “My environment where I grew up was really homophobic in general but I’ve also always been used to having to fight and having to debunk stereotypes like especially biphobic stereotypes.” At LSE, Edouard thinks people stay in the closet not out of safety concerns but “because they feel deep down ashamed that they are and so they’re not ready to accept it for themselves.” He relates his own experience coming out to his parents over the summer: “I was expecting, like, an average sort of response, like, you know, acknowledgement, but they were actually more than supportive and I’m so grateful.” The point where we do think LSE could be doing more to support students who come out is to have provisions for students who find themselves cut off from the financial support of their families after coming out – or worse – being outed. I left the interview feeling fulfilled, a renewed sense of honesty and purpose in my heart. I really hope Héloïse and Edouard feel the same. They obligingly shared with me their thoughts on their less-than-simple relationships with their home country, their sexualities, and LSE. I’m grateful for that.

quickfire questions Red or white wine?

E: White, because red stains. H: Am I even French? I actually I don’t drink wine, beer, or champagne. Only spirits.

Baguettes or croissants?

Both: Baguettes. [Apparently, the real debate is whether to say pain au chocolate or chocolatine, both say it’s the former.]

HÉLOÏSE

REGNAULT de MONTGON EDOUARD

PANCIULO

interview: Christina Ivey photography: Izabella Rei Ishiyama lighting: Sebastian Mullen

SOCIAL

Cliteracy Class 4: There’s more to porn than just Pornhub It would be easier to ask who hasn’t been on Pornhub than who has. Maybe once as a teen you opened it in a cheeky Google search with friends while your parents were out, or maybe you’re a versed navigator with favourited videos you can rely on to get you off. Either way, with the advent of online porn and flaccid sales for naughty video stores, Pornhub is the current king of cumming. In 2017 there were 28.5 billion visits to Pornhub, four times the world’s population. To put it bluntly: we love to watch people doing the dirty, and there is nothing wrong with that. However, as with so many of the writhing issues around sex, porn is shrouded with shame. Porn is taboo to talk about, and those who watch it are often deemed misogynists or sexually frustrated weirdos. To this I say: Bullshit. Watching porn in moderation is totally healthy and natural. Humans have been enjoying erotica since prehistoric times: the earliest documented porn was a sculpted statue of a man and woman getting it on — in 5200 BCE. Whatever your fantasising muscle power, porn can lubricate the rusty cogs of imagination to help you enjoy the release of a good wank.

needs are growing trends, but we can’t shut off our intrinsic need to be touched. People still want intimacy, it’s now just commodified. Cuddling cafes have popped up around Tokyo offering an hour of embrace for 60 Euros. Do we want to live in a world without free hugs? Hell no. To avoid this cold desensitisation, remember the importance of human intimacy. Porn is a helping hand, not the main event. You’ve got to test a couple of hands before you find the best; there’s more than just Pornhub. Pop culture misrepresents porn by mostly portraying the more extreme genres. A study in The Journal of Sex Research tracked the most watched genres of different consumers (men, women, heterosexual, and homosexual), none of which were extreme in nature. One of the most popular genres is Amateur porn, which involves none of the awkward acting and strained production. It’s just normal people having good sex. But if you are looking for something more tantalising, with expert choreography and beautiful design, Erika Lust answers your call. Her classy films will leave any person dripping, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. Lust’s work realizes all the little fantasies I barely admit to myself. If you’re turned on more through your ears, try Dipsea. The sexy tales will give you aural stimulation and make you short of breath. The penetrating point is that porn is a Pandora’s Box, with almost infinite genres and production styles to meet everyone’s tastes. It is also a topic with endlessly important issues, including the reasons we watch porn. This is the first of many times Cliteracy will undress porn to the naked truth. Unlike Pandora’s Box we won’t shut it entirely, nor leave it wide open for unhealthy consumption. We’ll leave it half open for a hippie balance.

Now a note of caution from Miss Pussy: porn is only fun when consumed in moderation. I hate to sound like your local hippie, but it’s all about balance. Porn can be a sensual tool for arousal or play with a partner, but when you can’t enjoy sex without porn it has become an obstruction rather than a helper. Porn addiction is born out of a desire for escape rather than titillation, and it’s often a symptom of a problem like depression or anxiety. Porn reliance has been singled out as a problem in Japan’s increasingly sexless society. Single living with little intimacy and a functional relationship between porn and sexual This week’s homework is particularly fun: check out a new type

of porn with Erika Lust and Dipsea. Learn more about the porn industry and sex around the world with the Netflix documentaries Hot Girls Wanted: Turned On and Love & Sex Around the World: Tokyo. Also, for learning how to be cliterate in your porn consumption, learn more about porn addiction issues at: https://bit.ly/2NVqmlL

e r o l a G y s s Pu

MSc Financial Astrology Launching in 2020

One of the most common criticisms levelled at the economics profession is the failure to predict the financial crisis of 2008. Indeed, it was this very issue that was raised by the Queen during her now (in)famous visit to the LSE in the aftermath of ’08.

Pictured: Bloomberg crystals to be introduced into the course.

“Why did no one see it coming?” Her Majesty at the LSE, Nov. 2008

It appears that lack of foresight with respect to economic performance may soon be a thing of the past, however, as LSE announced plans for a new MSc programme designed to train students in the techniques of astrological forecasting. The Financial Astrology MSc will see the introduction of cuttingedge tools and techniques, with the aim of harnessing cosmic energy to predict and prevent unwanted downturns. Up to 130 brand new Bloomberg Crystals are reportedly being brought in as part of the updates. Despite its reputation for being a collection of hocus-pocus new age nonsense masquerading as scientific practice, finance is an integral part of the economy at both the national and international level. It is hoped that this new interdisciplinary approach will bring a much-needed credibility boost to the university’s syllabus.

“We have really tried to take on board the concerns and criticisms of our teaching, research, and overall vibe,” said a representative from the finance department. “Under increasing public scrutiny, we have taken the decision to get ahead of the curve and take our subject to the next level of excellence with some really exciting new energy,” she added, before throwing up peace signs and skateboarding away from our reporter. On the topic of predictions, it has been widely reported in recent weeks that LSE’s very own Dame Minouche Shafik is tipped for the top job at the Bank of England, as current governor Mark Carney’s term draws to a close. This puts Minouche in the running for the ‘Most Relatable Director Ever’ award, having come to LSE only to end up working in a bank.

C. Hewson

Tuesday 29 October editor: Analía Ferreyra

lifestyle/advice/satire

Race and Sexuality: Stop it. Weirdo. LSE is one of the most international universities in the world, and interracial couples aren’t uncommon – don’t get me wrong, I think this is a good thing. It only starts to get icky when someone says something like “My type is only this race,” or that ‘“This race’s women are just so much more attractive than everyone else,” or that “Being this race just automatically makes you at least 2 points hotter.” It’s super weird, not flattering and we all want you to please go away. Urban Dictionary – the worlds most reliable lexicographical source – defines “Yellow Fever” as “sexual obsession felt by a non-Asian (usually white, usually male) towards Asians of the opposite gender.” Although this term refers to those who are racially East Asian, as many people of colour know, the concept extends much further. My relationship with the colour of my skin hasn’t been simple. I grew up in East Asia, but I was in the minority because I’m brown. I used to say to

my parents as a child that I wished they would paint me peach, which sucks to think about. I got over it eventually. Almost immediately afterwards I was confronted with this weird world no one ever warned me about – one in which my skin would be tied to my sexuality and be used to harass me, making me feel dirtier than any casual racism I experienced as a child ever did.

“Dropping!” “Oh fuck. I’m gonna lose a million dollars. Fuck!” “There goes your bonus.” At 7.30pm, the building was largely empty. Most people had left. But the cast of Enron—a play written by Lucy Prebble and to be staged by the LSE SU Drama Society—was rehearsing a scene titled AN ORGY OF SPECULATION. “These traders, as we’ve seen, are foul-mouthed, fasttalking individuals,” explained Jamie Boucher, a codirector of this production, to the cast. “You all have lovely, obscenity-ridden lines like ‘double-breasted douchebag’. That’s a good one. Savour those.” On the opposite side of the room sat Caitlin Gilhespie, the other co-director. She watched intently, gaze fixed on the actors, her chin resting on one hand with her copy of the script in the other. She spoke in an even and measured tone, “Try to get the balance between being snappy and articulating your words.” Jamie’s direction was often by animated analogy: “So it’s very purposefully, very consciously ignoring him.

I used to think that being brown made me ugly, but trust me, fetishizing comments makes me feel worse. I cannot emphasise this enough, they are not compliments. Being attracted to people of colour is way different to fantasies of our mystical exotic heritage. Because it’s not me fetishists find attractive, it’s their fantasy. And the core of that is racist.

I first got glasses when I was 13. My eyesight isn’t particularly bad, but I needed them to read whiteboards. I got these great black and blue squarish frames and was so excited to wear them to school the next day. I was a weird kid; I really looked forward to getting braces too. A boy in my class stopped me as we were leaving and told me how I reminded him so much of Mia – “Mia who?” “Oh she’s really talented, get inspired! Mia Khalifa.”

Zehra Jafree

When I figured out who she was, I wanted to claw my eyes out. I was 13. They were just glass-

Pockets of Community: Enron Taster A FLURRY OF shouting roiled in a classroom at 32 Lincoln’s Inn Fields one school night. It was a hive of activity, tempers flaring, voices blaring. Someone yelled, “If the market closes below twenty-one, this guy’s fucked!”

es. I spent much of the rest of my time in school squinting.

by Elias Wee

It’s like how we in New York deal with movie stars when they block other people. Yes, you’re Daniel Day-Lewis. But you’re also in my way, and I want coffee,” he said, before a cheeky grin betrayed him. “That’s how I see it in my head, at least. I’ve never actually done that.” In another scene, we are no longer amid the raucous of the trading floor, but in the office of Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, played by Percy Fagent. Circling the room like a predator, Percy delivered his monologue in a booming tenor that reverberated in the stillness of the night. His face twisted into a scowl. His entire being was proud and resentful, his speech drenched with contempt and impunity. When in character, Percy’s usual, boyish charm—curly blonde hair, pleasant demeanour, round glasses—transformed into a most brutish monstrosity. But before each scene was polished to perfection, directors and members of the cast engaged in a dialogue around the question, “What is this scene really about?” After one evening’s rehearsal, Pearl Salamon-White, who plays fictional Enron executive Claudia Roe, reflected on the process, “It’s nice to have a range of opinions on these lines.” She said, “There’s a lot more nuance to it. I like how there are layers of meaning— keeps things interesting.” Back in the fluorescent-lit classroom, Pavan Rao was playing Enron chairman Ken Lay, who had just fired Roe on Skilling’s urging. Lay spoke to Skilling in conspiratorial doublespeak, so Pavan had the delicate task

of conveying, through inflections in his voice, a highly nuanced and implied message: Firing her was a real nasty thing. You made me do it. Now you owe me. I also know you’re up to something shady. But I don’t care. Just make us money. Don’t tell me how. Don’t implicate me. You understand? Watching Pavan’s performance transported me to a dimly lit, wooden panelled backroom where cigar-smoking, back-slapping men colluded in hushed voices as they plotted to expand their criminal enterprise. It was 9pm, after one rehearsal on a Thursday, when the cast walked to Penderel’s Oak for a few beers. Along the way, I asked them for their initial reactions on hearing that the Drama Society was going to stage a production of Enron. Invariably, they’d break out into laughter and say, “Wow, that’s very LSE,”—presumably, because preventing the next Enron scandal is precisely the sort of thing you’d imagine being taught here. (The LSE SU Drama Society’s production of Enron will take place at the Venue on the 18th, 19th, and 21st of November, 2019. Tickets can be found on the SU website.)

SPORT THE MOVEMBER EDITION

written by the freshly shaven seth rice, alfie hick, raef jackson, peter bradbrooke

longside thousands throughout the country, the LSE Men’s FC has this year decided to take action against what we regard as damaging and archaic expectations of men. Taking aim at the restrictive nature of the ‘bloke’ stereotype, we would like to take this opportunity to remind anyone in need of a chat to speak up and speak out. You will be amazed at the weight off your chest. Of course, a prerequisite of this openness is an accepting and compassionate environment. We believe that the route toward this state, besides simply showing understanding in conversation, is for those in charge to set examples and maintain our ‘door always open’ policy. University is the time to ne-

gotiate feelings which plague us. Waving goodbye to adolescence and shaking hands with the adult world is confusing and messy, but nothing is worth the mental health of the individual. It is a term we hear sprayed about to the extent that it is difficult to remember what it means. Put simply, mental health refers to the state of one’s mind. However, this does not do quite enough to cover it. Each individual is a bundle of nuanced emotions and thoughts; in a sense, there can be no single or standardised process for help; this is precisely the reason why open conversation is so crucial. Your individual experience matters.

knowledge that for too long they have confined men to silence.

The damaging stereotype of men manifests itself in a cyclical process - you might feel anxious or deeply sad, but you can’t bring it up in the fear of being labelled a pussy; when you see a fellow bloke expressing emotion, you might yourself feel the need to target him. We have doubtlessly and unfortunately found ourselves on both sides at one point or another. It is self-perpetuating and inevitably leads to alienation and discrimination. The Men’s FC aims to eradicate both stages in the

At the time of writing, we have raised £2,411 - a remarkable feat. This has been the result of tireless work from the boys and extraordinary generosity from our friends and family. It is refreshing to hear guys talk with such understanding and care. Really, truly, this has been a heartwarming experience.

And so we are growing horrible little hairs on our upper lips as a signal that we will be looking out for one another. If the gesture seems futile, it is merely representative of a much wider issue we are taking steps in tackling. It may seem obvious, but it is also important to note that this is absolutely not solely for those involved in sport. For anyone ploughing through a difficult period, remember to situate yourself in the right environment: help yourself out by keeping in contact with mates and look after your mind in the right ways.

To donate, visit the following link: https://uk.movember.com/ team/2355452

and if you feel like you need it... Anxiety UK CALM Charity providing support if you have been di- CALM is the Campaign Against Living Misagnosed with an anxiety condition erably, for men ages 15 to 35 phone: 03444775774 phone: 0800 58 58 58

Alfie Hick club captain

I am so happy to see so many members of the club participate in such a worthy cause. The purpose is to raise awareness and foster an open environment where anyone can talk to anyone about anything. Some of my closest friends have suffered from mental health problems, and it’s great to see them getting the treatment to which everyone should be entitled. We’re getting rid of the stereotype and we’re helping men to speak up.

Peter Bradbrooke outreach officer

Jack Forman [pictured bottom right] treasurer

Mental health is an important issue in today’s society and is too often swept under the carpet. Suicide is the biggest cause of death for men under 35, and this is something that needs to change. Therefore, the Men’s FC and I are attempting to grow the little facial hair we can to raise awareness and money for men’s mental health.

I’m doing Movember to show support for men around the globe who are afraid to speak up because of the stigma around men’s mental health. Doing it with the FC as a whole shows support is available from anyone around you, even if you might not think it would be.

I was lucky enough to grow up without going through serious physical health or mental health issues, and I believe that it is necessary to help those who have to live through such difficult circumstances. Even if this means simply raising awareness as well as a few pounds - it is the least we can do.

Seth Rice [pictured bottom left] 6th team captain

Quinn Kiernat

I endured a difficult period in my first year and went it alone. Knowing now that the support was and is available, I strongly recommend personal expression as an antidote to adversity.

Alex Kiermier 5th team captain

[pictured third down from the left]

6th team

My experience with Movember is that my grandpa has beaten prostate cancer three separate times so that’s why I have chosen to participate in this cause.

Sam Taylor [pictured first from the right] 7th team captain

Benji Flacks 7th team I’m participating in Movember this year to raise awareness for men’s issues, particularly those that get swept under the rug. Too often we are told to harden up, or feel timid about getting checked out at the doctor’s, so it’s all about being visible and saying it’s OK not to be OK.

Matty Haynes [pictured fourth down from the left] 2nd team Currently, I think there are far too many environments whereby men feel uncomfortable sharing their feelings with others. I’m taking part in Movember so that we can help change this attitude. We tend to avoid talking about our insecurities for fear that it will come across as weakness. One reason why Movember is such a great cause to get behind is that we demonstrate to everyone that it’s OK to seek help from others.

Partaking in Movember has given me an opportunity to see how much facial hair I can actually grow. It provides me with a semi-acceptable excuse to leave this scraggly embarrassment on my face for a month. In all seriousness though, men’s mental health is a cause close to my heart and something I feel doesn’t get talked about enough. The simple, albeit not at all easy, act of growing a moustache in order to raise awareness for a very noble cause was, for me, an easy decision to make. It also gives me a chance to come up with some shocking moustache puns.

Asyraf Naim 7th team As someone who has had mental health issues in the past and having had friends with similar experiences, it’s great to see the FC boys coming together in support of men’s mental and general health. These kinds of activity play a huge part in helping break the ‘stiff upper lip’ stigma that men have become accustomed to, and such progress will help save more lives as the years go on.

Raef Jackson 1st team captain

One of the kindest and most loved people I was lucky enough to call family took his life this August. Death is inevitable, but death in this manner should never, ever happen. We can’t eradicate suicide, but we can help men learn to be vulnerable and start a conversation. Don’t be afraid to ask someone how they’re doing, no matter how they seem on the outside.

REVIEW Screen Wars:

End of the F***ing World - with a bang, not a whimper By Shahana Bagchi

It's not enough to say that being a teenager is awful and end the conversation there. Charlie Covell, creator of End of the F***ing World, thinks so too.

Bonnie (Naomi Ackie) is the new Before I go any further: there threat, but despite giving a poware spoilers in this review, so erful performance, she seems if you haven’t watched season under-utilised. There is no ad2 yet, proceed with caution. equate conclusion to the emptiness inside her; she doesn’t deAlyssa (Jessica Barden) and velop a strong connection with James (Alex Lawther) (SUR- our duo either. She deserved to PRISE, I told you.) return in the be treated better by the show. second season of this bleak drama, re-uniting to confront Season 2’s soundtrack is a worthy their turmoil after fleeing home sequel: you bob your head along in season 1. Back with its char- as things fall apart very quickly. The acteristic dark humour and re- narrative structure is almost identiflections on existence, the show cal to season one. There are standis just as irresistible as before. ins for characters from season one, This time the spotlight is on Alys- be it the kind shop assistant, the sa, it is her character which un- sexual predator, or the policeman. dergoes significant changes as However, the show focuses resoshe grapples with the aftermath lutely on the three main characof the previous season. Barden ters, dwelling less on the failure of conveys her grief beautifully, a surrounding adults to help them. jarring contrast to the Alyssa who Elements such as abuse, absent felt everything too much. Con- parents, and crime (be it murder

Illustration: Gabriela Krol

Living With Yourself - thank you, next. Netflix does television insanely well. Anyone who has asked me about Sex Education or The End of the F****** World knows I feel strongly about this. But don’t make the mistake of taking in these master-shows and putting blind faith in all Netflix series. Netflix does that itself: Shows like The Umbrella Academy, Dirk Gently, and now Living With Yourself are highly ambitious, making it glaringly obvious when they fall short of their potential.

Paul Rudd stars in this comedy-drama as Miles, a man with a pending mid-life crisis working in advertising, married to Kate (Aisling Bea). Feeling disillusioned with himself, Miles goes to a spa that claims it

versely, James strives to resolve his relationship with her. Gone is the spectre of the psychopath; Lawther is incredibly endearing throughout.

will change his life. He wakes up in a grave and finds himself replaced by a clone - his dream self - Miles 2.0. As an overdramatic Paul Rudd escaped from his grave, I was ready for the next 4 hours to fly by. They didn’t. A combination of several errors made me itch to change screens.

Paul Rudd’s mediocre double-act made me wonder if I’ll be able to enjoy him in Clueless the next time I see it. Rudd acts alongside himself, which I understand can be hard, but if Lindsey Lohan could do it in The Parent Trap (2003), why can’t he? The scenes with both of his characters have obvious, awkward blocking mistakes and, when coupled with an abundance of cliches and

painfully slow pacing, I constantly found myself cripplingly bored. The idea is interesting enough, and very stereotypically Netflix. Imposter syndrome, anxiety, and self-loathing, coupled with ‘ultrarapid reproductive cloning’ sound like the beginning of something super cool. The overall plot is decent and at times I was invested and excited, but then the show would repeat storylines from different perspectives, unnecessarily delaying the plot, and lose me again. The show is shot in a way that reflects the knowledge that it could be special. The wide variety of camera angles and strange focus

or car theft) make a comeback. You feel a sense of déjà vu: our protagonists have been on a similar journey before— except that now, it won’t be the end of the f***ing world. At times, this season feels like a diluted version of the previous one, shining in its reflected glory. It is somehow less urgent, more interested in acceptance than rebellion, there is less at stake. However, it retains the magic of the previous season, uplifted by wonderful performances from Lawther and Barden. Ultimately, season 2 shows our characters finding their place in the world instead of just being subjected to its cruelty. It gives them and their love story a kinder resolution.

By Zehra Jafree choices are clearly in place to connect the audience with the mental state of both Mileses, but the choices remind me of a high school drama class who have just been introduced to physical theatre. The shots are more distracting than useful — and certainly aren’t artsy. I don’t hate this show though! Yes, I was bored, yes I don't like it when things are overly artsy for no reason, and yes, I am no longer sure if I like Paul Rudd. But the story was heartfelt, tapping into something very human and relatable. The show asks important questions about love, ethics, identity, humanity, and who gets to sleep with Aisling Bea. It invites real

self-reflection. Living With Yourself isn’t a bad show, but if its execution were better, it would have been absolutely phenomenal.

Tuesday 12 November editors: Amber Iglesia and Zehra Jafree

Netflix v. BBC

Seven Worlds, One Planet - Attenborough’s most harrowing and astonishing documentary yet Attenborough’s nature documentaries always establish a benchmark for all that follow. His latest, Seven Worlds, One Planet, is no different. It examines how humans have altered the ecosystems in each of the seven continents, with the message that we are living in “the most critical moments for life on earth since the continents began”. Attenborough highlights how activities including illegal poaching, burning fossil fuels, and wildlife exploitation are beginning to have irreversible consequences on our planet. He explores each of the seven continents, revealing extraordinary stories and unseen wilderness.

The first episode opens with the continent that has experienced the most radical change to date: Antarctica. We witness the birth of a seal pup. Newborn pups are unable to swim for the first ten days of their lives and therefore cannot seek shelter underwater. Weather patterns have become more extreme, making it harder for the pups to survive in blizzards that can reach -40C. Many mothers are forced to abandon their pups to take shelter underwater, leaving the newborns to fend for themselves. Many don’t survive. This opening scene underlines how small changes create dire challenges for wildlife.

Seven Worlds, One Planet is truly breathtaking. Drones, underwater cameras, and admirable dedication from the crew provide a level of magic that CGI and big-budgeted Hollywood movies cannot. With a soundtrack by the legendary Hans Zimmer, Seven Continents, One Planet, shows us epic never-seen-before moments of animals in their habitats.

The most heartbreaking scene comes in episode two, as we venture to Asia. The largest continent on the planet includes biomes as diverse as frigid wastes, rich rainforests, and scorching deserts. Within the first ten minutes of the episode, we see heartbreaking footage of walruses being forced to jump off rocky cliffs after being attacked by polar bears. It’s a theme across the programme: beaches that once

sheltered the walruses have If anyone is in doubt as to shrunk due to climate change. the state of the world, I urge you to watch Seven Worlds, One Planet. We endure a similar level of horror Uncover the diversity of every contiin the forests of Borneo, as an oran- nent and learn how humankind is gutan battles a bulldozer. These acts altering the Earth’s natural balance of cruelty are senseless, and we are at the expense of precious diversity. forced to confront our complicity in This programme reminds us that the crisis that is causing the devas- there truly is no place like home. tation. Through rapid urbanisation and population growth, “the largest Watch Seven Worlds, One Planet population it seems, is no longer on BBC IPlayer and every Sunable to provide space for its wild- day at 6:15pm on BBC One. life”. Attenborough mourns. “Back in 1956 I never imagined that, in my lifetime, these intelligent apes and the forests they live in would be placed in such dire threat. Just how much longer they survive on the planet is up to all of us.” It’s not all doom and gloom, as we see hopeful gestures towards sustainable development. Fishermen of the oceans in Southern Asia have developed a strategy which is sustainable for both people and wildlife. Caring for wildlife is undoubtedly a shared responsibility and it is decisions like this one that safeguard the future of our planet.

The War of the Worlds - a long overdue British adaptation The first British TV adaptation of H.G. Wells’ acclaimed novel The War of the Worlds is set to be released on 17 November at 9pm on BBC One. I was lucky enough to attend its preview and talk to director Craig Viveiros, writer Peter Harness, and actor Eleanor Tomlinson (Colette, Poldark).

less classic in the science fiction genre.

The film follows unmarried couple Amy (Eleanor Tomlinson) and George (Rafe Spall), who find themselves in the midst of a Martian invasion during the Edwardian era. At the time of its publication in 1898, Wells’ work was the first novel to detail humanity’s conflict with an alien race and has become a time-

The novel’s critique of British imperialism, Victorian superstition, scientific progress, and Darwinism is cleverly reflected in the series. What sets it apart from the book, however, is the show’s inclusion of Amy’s journey. The final scene, where Amy grapples with grief while remaining reluctant to display her anguish to loved ones,

Harness explained that “the version of The War of the Worlds that I wanted to make is one that’s faithful to the tone and spirit of the book, but which also feels contemporary, surprising, and full of shocks.”

By Amber Iglesia

is testament to Tomlinson’s acting. For Harness, the finale was the perfect opportunity to capture the central conflict between optimism and pessimism. Harness admits, “I am quite a miserable bastard. I don’t like an allegory, but it’s good to have a plot and finale which sparks resonances with contemporary issues.” The series considers finding a truthful version of Edwardian England.

These “contemporary themes” that Harness is keen to portray are evident from the title sequence, whose archive footage draws clear parallels with the British Empire and the theme of colonialism. Viveiros drew on the example of the Tanzanian

genocide, saying that it is “writing about what it must be like when people are going about their everyday life and then to suddenly be attacked by weaponry and races that can wipe you out.” Though the series takes a science-fiction approach, the underlying themes are real and immediate. Soundtrack and effects were particularly important for the production team. The insect-life visualisation of aliens and links to a ‘Red World’ evoke the invading force and fear of the “other” present during the Industrial Revolution. The clever design of the Red World examines how Amy adapts to the new world

By Amber Iglesia order imposed on her. There have been several adaptations of The War of the Worlds, and now it’s finally returning to Britain. While Orson Welles’ infamous radio broadcast prompted an alleged mass hysteria about the end times, Viveiros hopes that this series serves to “raise questions about the state of the world.”

PART B

Tuesday 12 November

editor: Maya Kokerov

arts & culture

Moving to Mars Exhibition WHERE FICTION MEETS SCIENCE by Ashley Hsu

Imagine packing only a small number of personal items, abandoning your normal routine, and uprooting your life wholesale. Those of us who have emigrated from one country to another can relate to some degree. But in the modern age, with fast communication and global enterprises like McDonald’s on most street corners around the world, there are fewer uncertainties and shocks compared to travelling a century earlier. Now, imagine abandoning life on Earth entirely, dressing in a microfibre space suit, stepping into a well-lit flight capsule where a months-long unknown journey awaits. Destination? Mars. “What would life look like on the red planet?” and “Is there intelligent life on Mars?” are the kinds of questions which authors of science fiction have attempted to answer well before the first mission to explore Mars, in 1960. From The War of the Worlds to The Martian, tales about Mars have evolved from myths into realistic narratives after being informed by scientific research. Similarly, space exploration was sparked by human curiosity about the universe. In recent years, pessimistic prospects for humanity’s long-term survival on Earth have prompted even more discussion on the possibilities of inhabiting another planet. This relationship between the wide imagination, technical practicalities, and the future of humanity are at the core of the Design Museum’s Moving to Mars exhibition.

Agency and Roscosmos, is only one of three missions to Mars in 2020. NASA’s MARS 2020 mission also aims to send a rover that collects geological samples from the subsurface in order to search for signs of potential microbial life. Another objective is “to gather knowledge and demonstrate technologies that address the challenges of future human expeditions to Mars,” according to NASA. After all, the next logical step would be to send human explorers. However, unlike the three-day journey to the Moon, the trip to Mars could take six to eight months depending on the position of Earth and Mars at the time of launch. Therefore, after demonstrating how astronauts eat, sleep, and exercise in space from experiences on the International Space Station, the exhibition looked at designs that are suitable for long-term living on Mars. Building and designing a house on Earth is no small task, but the complexity increases tenfold when creating a shelter that can adapt to the hostile environment of Mars without material and labour available on Earth. One possibility is to send 3D-printing robots to build the houses out of regolith, a loose material of rocks on the surface of Mars. Even then, it would take decades to send different components necessary to create a self-contained system on Mars for human explorers to live there long term. The exhibition is a demonstration of human ingenu-

ity where fiction meets science. It was stimulating to see designs that overcome the problem of showering in space and address building a sustainable housing unit on Mars through intricate calculations of intake and discharge of the oxygen, CO2, and water of its inhabitants. One part of the exhibition also addresses the psychological consequences of living in isolation in a confined space, and dealing with home-sickness for Earth during the journey to Mars. Just seeing the detailed aspects of the space expedition that the exhibition covers is worth the price. The exhibition concludes with the overarching question “Is mass migration to Mars possible?” The short answer is no, as exciting as it sounds. The cost of travel is too high, and the hostile environment, where oxygen is scarce and fresh water is unavailable, is a huge challenge that makes Mars a destination for exploration, not migration. Despite that somewhat disappointing conclusion, the Moving to Mars exhibition is a great way to spend an afternoon watching science and creativity come together, and to walk away from it with a new appreciation of the planet we have. The exhibition is being shown at the Design Museum until Feb 2020.

Although the topic of space can be overwhelming, especially coming from a non-science background, the exhibition’s multi-sensory experience is directed at the general public. When entering the exhibition room, one is drawn in by the concealed glass display containing drawings of Mars by astronomer Christiaan Huygens. His encrypted scribbles on yellow pages are juxtaposed with a series of digital images on the wall, taken from past Mars exploration missions, showing how far humanity has gone in unveiling this red mystery. But this is just the beginning. After a short chronological introduction of past missions to Mars, the rest of the exhibition focused on the future. It is not what we know but what we could do that differentiates Moving to Mars from the typical science exhibit. The exhibition continues with a display of rover models that are currently in development for the ExoMars Mission in 2020. The ExoMars mission, a joint collaboration between the European Space

Moving to Mars Exhibition at London’s Design Museum, Photographed by Ed Reeve

The 2019 winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature by Salomé Melchior

Beauty’s Background by Salomé Melchior

Toni Bestard’s short film Background, broadcasted on Arte this month, radiates a poetic understanding of cinema. It is a meta-narrative, telling a love story on a film set. In a way, the filmmaker and cinephile is making a declaration to the cinema, indirectly expressing his passion for movie making in this short taste of life. Background personifies film itself. The black and white atmosphere creates a wide-ranging interpretative space: we are free to associate our own colours with the feelings depicted in this meta-narrative. The actors inhabit each other's cinematographic space, crossing paths repeatedly. Their love is artificially narrated, yet it unfolds tangibly beyond the horizon of the camera. Bestard’s short film could be perceived as a succession of paintings, where actions pause as if life were to stop for a moment. In the hectic pace of daily routines, beauty must be enjoyed secretly. In fact, the secrecy of the actors’ crush opens a sort of reverie. Perfection lies in the unsaid and the unrealized.

Griffen, 1942. A boy named Peter Handke was born in a small Austrian town. ‘When the child was a child, it didn’t know that it was a child,

Background ends with an open field of desires, since the actors’ love has been merely platonic. In that sense, Toni Bestard is suggesting that a love story, like one's passion for an art form, is an endless game.

everything was soulful, and all souls were one.’ In Song of Childhood, by Peter Handke, enacted by Bruno Ganz in Der Himmel über Berlin

In October 2019, Peter Handke received the Nobel Prize in Literature, an award whose legitimacy he once questioned. Not only does he recall Albert Camus’s controversial stance by doing so, his twofold description of the crudity and beauty of the human condition evokes the work of his fellow Nobel laureate. Handke can be seen as a poet in dialogue with great authors of the past, partly by translating writers like René Char, a French poet and resistant fighter during the Second World War. Handke inscribes himself in the literary tradition and societal consideration. He seems to prefer controversy to conformism, innovation to redundancy. This Nobel Prize rewards the creativity of a man who seeks to depict glimpses of life, even if it means digging into the most profound wounds of memory. Beyond representing existence itself, Handke reaches towards canons of artistic beauty and harmony. He inspired Wim Wenders’ filmmaking, in particular Der Himmel über Berlin (Wings of Desire), which portrays states of eternal childhood and reverie. In his ability to elevate our thoughts beyond the mundane, Handke embodies a flagship figure in literature. He navigates from the particular to the universal simply using drops of ink. His expression of a poetic Weltanschauung (world view) is a vector of hope in today’s messy world.

Stills from Background

Codeine and Beer by Michael Shapland

We sit here, still, in an unkempt room High on codeine and beer I don’t know how we got to this state Indeed it took a lot of work Writing But now the warmth engulfs all And we find ourselves slowly drifting off to sleep.