Partisan Politics
Simmering tensions between the Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA) and the Labour Club (OULC) came to a head this week when OUCA asked the proctors to censure OULC for what they saw as libellous comments printed in last week’s Oxford Student, regarding the intended visit of George Galloway to the Conservatives.
OULC had been outraged over his proposed visit, penning an open letter to Galloway in which they said, “Perhaps you are unaware that even the Tory Party itself has in the past had to distance itself from OUCA due to the Association’s reputation for holding extreme and offensive views.” Quite what the Labour Club was getting so upset about is unclear.
Surely they could not have wanted the man who ran a campaign against Oona King in Bethnal Green and Bow, which proved seriously to damage his former party’s fortunes in the capital, to speak to their society? This is the man who had been sacked by the party, and then criticised for his decision to fight Ms King’s particular seat. The likelihood is that they were far more worried about the publicity OUCA would get from this talk, and wanted a piece of the action themselves.
Not that the OUCA response was any more rational or mature. In going to the proctors with complaints about the legality of the content of such an innocuous letter, they did little to help their own credibility. Of course, neither side was ever really that interested in credibility, as comments from OUCA President Chris Ware suggest. He called OULC “little more than a small collection of far left gimps”. Both these groups of political hacks were in it for their own selfpublicity.
Both OULC and OUCA were equally driven by one other motivation: the fear that people may realise that they are not so different after all. Much like Galloway himself, their hunger for fame or notoriety often overshadows any real political discussion. Figures from either group often share common backgrounds and ways of speaking.
While policies ostensibly differ, what unites the two is that they are both willing to make themselves appear more extreme than they actually are to make sure their voices are heard above anyone else’s. Historically, OUCA have been better at taking themselves less seriously than their leftist counterparts, and here once again, they may have won the publicity war. Ware’s comments contrast starkly to the opinions expressed in last week’s letter from the Labour Club.
It should be remembered that as long as OUCA continue to make comments such as these, they will continue to be what half of them wish to be anyway: the greatest advert for socialism this university could produce. The attitude of the proctors towards the complaint received from OUCA was not to take it too seriously. For once, we could all do with taking a leaf out of the proctors’ book.
3rd Nov 2005