Letters
Empire Strikes Back
Dear Sir, I think I can speak for the majority of OUCA’s membership in expressing that we are disgusted at the Labour Club’s cheap attack on George Galloway MP’s attendance at the Association, which appeared as an open letter in your newspaper last week. OUCA prides itself in being a forum for debate, and as such is delighted to host speakers of all backgrounds and regardless of political views.
As well as George Galloway, our esteemed visitors this term include The Lord Bishop of Oxford, the Rt Rev Dr Richard Harries, the Rt Hon John Redwood MP and a number of members of the Shadow Cabinet. This hardly constitutes the ‘Tory party distancing itself from OUCA’ as written by the Labour Club Co-Chairs last week. Furthermore, members of the Association, accused of ‘holding extreme and offensive views’ by the Labour Club Co-Chairs, will attest that this statement is simply untrue.
Perhaps these self-important individuals should attend an OUCA meeting before publicly expressing views based on as much drivel as their termcard. The OUCA President, Chris Ware, has spent many hours preparing what cannot be anything but an excellent set of speaker meetings, and the Labour Club should perhaps concentrate on improving their own rather than trying to decry the achievements of others.
Unlike the Labour Club, OUCA does not defame other societies’ choice of speakers or indeed interfere with their meetings. This attack is nothing other than silly and immature in order to gain publicity for whatever ends they are seeking. Not only does this not help the Labour cause in the University, but it also strengthens the Conservative one.
Charlie Steel
Merton College
OUCA Publicity Officer
Dear Sir, It is rare that I write anything in favour of either OUCA or George Galloway.
However, I must defend both institutions against the comments made against them by the Labour Club in your last edition. One of the problems that British politics faces in general is that there is a lack of debate. Rather than confronting opponents, political animals of all colours seem to feel most comfortable among their own kind, scratching each others’ backs, never engaging deeply with the issues at hand.
For OUCA to invite George Galloway to speak to them, and for Mr Galloway to accept the invitation, is a refreshing change. If politics is to achieve anything, it has to be through a full and frank discussion of the issues at hand. The past form of the two parties involved suggests the events may only be theatre, but it is a healthy step forward. In a democracy, ignoring our opponents is wrong. It is our duty instead to change their minds and the minds of others by dealing with them headon.
For this, OUCA and Mr Galloway deserve to be applauded.
Ken Owen
Queen’s College
College Arms
Dear Sir, I was shocked to read in last week’s Oxford Student that our university is ranked the second highest educational establishment in the country to invest in the arms trade. I think it’s disgusting that an institution whose primary objective is to encourage learning and understanding can simultaneously invest so heavily in industries that profit from violent conflict.
I completely agree with Mr Davies that the university cannot continue supporting and investing in these companies. How is it acceptable to promote tolerance and respect on one hand, yet profit from societies’ imperfections on the other? This sort of hypocrisy cannot go unquestioned. Some of these arms companies are known to trade with governments that have appalling human rights records. It seems that they are far more concerned about making money than where their weapons end up.
Does the university share these priorities? I sincerely hope not. There are thousands of companies to invest in, why hold so many shares in morally dubious ones?
Aisling MacSweeney
Hertford College
Insulting Music
Dear Sir, As much as I appreciate Kate Turner explaining the world of Raggaeton to your readers, her suggestion that the themes of ‘crime, partying, and sex’ are ‘far more representative of youth culture’ is insulting.
For her information, most young ‘Latinos’ do not own guns, nor would they take kindly to being told that degrading song lyrics that express violence towards women are representative of their culture. Most hip-hop music is purchased by middle- class suburban white kids; does that make it reflective of their culture? Reggaeton artists and hollywood directors need no help in creating misinformed stereotypes of Latinos (as if a shared language somehow meant a common cultural identity?).
I expect more from The Oxford Student.
Matthew Carpenter-Arevalo
Wolfson College.
3rd Nov 2005