type here...
Home Blog Page 75

UCAS May Require Applicants To Disclose Their Mental Health

Common Sense Contributors
-
0
UCAS May Require Applicants To Disclose Their Mental Health

by Dolline Mukui

Not too long ago we saw that the number of girl’s self harming has doubled over the years, which could only mean one thing, a cry for help!

Now UCAS forms may soon require students to declare whether they have any form of mental illness such as an eating disorder or have self-harmed in the past. UCAS, Universities and College Admissions Service, operates the application system for British universities. The majority of the UK’s population uses this service to access a place in their choice of University after leaving college.

Universities UK has urged the University Admissions, process potential students, to tell institutions about their mental health before they arrive for fresher’s week. The current application form on their site puts off students from declaring their mental health condition because it is under the disability section. Professor Steve West told the Independent that there is a ‘stigma’ attached to it. Ministers have warned that institutions risk “failing an entire generation”. Disability implies that you have an impairment which is defined as being diminished, weakened or damaged either mentally or physically. Having a mental illness or having gone through it does not necessarily mean you are disabled, however you may struggle.

UCAS Application

Ten students from the University of Bristol and two from UWE have died in the past two years. A number of those have been confirmed as suicides.

Professor West who chairs the UUK mental health group said “any big transition is a time when mental health is going to be tested, so our job is to encourage students that have a history of poor mental health to disclose it, to declare it to tell us before they even arrive at the university. That will allow us to put in mechanisms that will help them through that transition period.”

At least 95 university students took their own lives in the last academic year and UUK said this week in new guidance on understanding and preventing suicides that there is no room for complacency.

We are assured that some universities have the care in place for those struggling at university that may need help. However, if people do reveal they have a mental illness, then pastoral care and support at these institutions should have better systems in place to accommodate the needs of those who walk through their door or declare it on paper.

Hugh Brady, vice-chancellor of the University of Bristol said, “I think a lot of work could be done by Ucas to highlight that declaring a mental health problem will not harm their application. I do not believe students fully appreciate that.”

In comparison to the years before 2014-2015, eighty per cent of UK Universities noticed an increase in complex mental health crises among their student population. This may be due to rising costs associated with higher education, a difficult market to find a job after graduation and the increase of digital technology – displaying their filtered selves as opposed to reality – dealing with day to day life.

At the end of the day if you state your mental illness it should not be held against you that you want support throughout your time at university and the university should only disclose information with trusted personnel if they feel you are at serious risk.

Is it that important that applicants disclose their mental health on their application form; should every applicant fill out that section? The past doesn’t always affect the present and there may be people who have never had any problems until they get to University. Will they be properly looked after? Or will they be put on the bottom of the ever long waiting lists that the NHS already have. 

for more information please see the NHS website: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/suicide/

Dolline Mukui is a traveller, journalist and blogger who has palate to try new things. She is a very spontaneous person; you might find her skydiving over the Kenyan coast to kayaking on Lake Como. She can be an over thinker who thinks of every outcome but if she doesn’t she welcomes the change that wasn’t planned. However, she is a very simple person who is up for a good laugh or a book and enjoys living the moment. Dolline also writes for her small personal blog called ‘Swatches of Beauty’ and is currently a production journalist trainee at ITV Border.

Is the Consevative Party Headed for a Split?

Mike Omoniyi
-
0
Is the Consevative Party Headed for a Split?

Steve Baker (former Brexit Minister) warns the Prime Minister to drop Chequers plan or face Conservative grassroots revolt.

Over the last few weeks, the initial murmurs of dissent in the Conservative party have grown to an all-out raucous which now threatens the future of the Conservative party – commentators say.

Steve Baker says the Conservative Party could “split” over the PM’s Brexit plan (REUTERS)

Dissent Over Chequers Deal

Steve Baker, a former Brexit minister, has warned that Theresa May may only have until the Conservatives’ annual conference later this month to drop her Chequers plan or face a “catastrophic split” in the party.

Her Chequers plan, the strategy for negotiating Brexit, was backed by the Cabinet back when they met in the PM’s country residence in July. The agreement, which led to the resignations of then-Brexit Secretary David Davis and the former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, sets out a blueprint for the future relationship with the EU once the UK leaves in March 2019.

Baker is the former chairman of the European Research Group (ERG), a Eurosceptic group, which plans to publish its own proposals for Brexit ahead of the Conservative Party Conference. He has said, May faced ”a massive problem” because Tory party members do not support her Brexit blueprint.

Theresa May’s cabinet agreed the Chequers plan in July, but it led to a number to resignations (CROWN)

He called the plan “not acceptable” and claimed the lack of parliamentary support, for it would undermine the UK’s position in negotiations with the EU.

The ERG is demanding May ditch her proposals and instead seek to negotiate a Canada-style free trade deal with the EU. Baker joins a slew of senior Conservative figures that have cast aspersions on Theresa May’s plans, her leadership and the future of the Brexit Deal.

There Might Be A Revolt

On the current plan, Baker said “As many as 80 Conservative MPs are prepared to vote against the Prime Minister’s Chequers plan”

In an interview with Press Association, Mr Baker said: “If we come out of conference with her hoping to get Chequers through on the back of Labour votes, I think the EU negotiators would probably understand that if that were done, the Tory Party would suffer the catastrophic split which thus far we have managed to avoid.”

He then said: “We are reaching the point now where it is extremely difficult to see how we can rescue the Conservative Party from a catastrophic split if the Chequers proposals are carried forward. It is absolutely no pleasure whatsoever to me to acknowledge that, but I look at the mood of colleagues and the mood of the Conservative Party in the country and I am gravely concerned for the future of our party.”

Mr Baker said he hoped the party would emerge from the conference “united around the idea that we can either leave having accepted the EU offer or we have to leave with nothing agreed.”
But he said the Chequers proposal was “not acceptable as a lasting basis for our partnership”, adding: “What we need out of conference is a new resolve that these are the choices before us.”

Baker said they the ERG would give the government “absolutely every support” in forging a free trade deal. However, with 80 MP’s from her own party willing to vote against her Brexit plan, and Labour indicating they will as well, he said it would be “fanciful” to expect her to secure parliamentary approval.

Boris: The Gift That Keeps On Giving.

No stranger to controversy; Johnson’s column over the weekend in the Mail on Sunday, called the PM’s plan a “suicide vest”, with the detonator in Brussels’ hands.

Boris Johnson has criticised the Chequers deal in a number of newspaper articles (REUTERS)

These comments generate public discussion around Johnson, keeping him in the media, a key desire of his. However, they also further exacerbate the divisions in the Conservative party further heightening the likelihood of a split.

Just as senior leaders in the part are split around the PM’s chequers deal, they are also split around Johnson and his brand of Politics. Some strongly condemned his comments but other MPs leapt to Johnson’s defence, as dividing lines ahead of a possible leadership contest begin to take shape.

Sajid Javid, the home secretary  said: “I think there are much better ways to articulate your differences.” He told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that the public wanted politicians to use “measured language” and that Johnson’s outburst was out of kilter with this.

Alan Duncan, a foreign minister who worked in Johnson’s team for two years, wrote on Twitter: “For Boris to say the PM’s view is like that of a suicide bomber is too much. This marks one of the most disgusting moments in modern British politics. I’m sorry, but this is the political end of Boris Johnson. If it isn’t now, I will make sure it is later.”

However, Senior Tory Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg told The Independent he thought Johnson’s “suicide belt” accusation was little more than “a characteristically colorful catchphrase”. He then added: “I agree with the sentiment. The criticism of Boris’s wording merely serves to highlight his point. It means more people hear of Boris’s criticism of Chequers and many will agree with him.”

Nadine Dorries, another Brexit supporter, said Mr Johnson’s opponents were “terrified of his popular appeal”, adding: “Don’t underestimate the vitriol that’ll be directed towards Boris today. He delivered the Leave vote, Remainers and wannabe future PMs hate him.”

Is May Going Down?

Although Tory Eurosceptics insist they are close to securing the signatures of the 48 Tory MPs needed to trigger a vote of no-confidence in May, there is little sign that the party is ready for the likely turmoil of a leadership contest. It would further spin the Conservative party out on control.

May’s allies insist she would in any event fight to stay on as Prime Minister and they are confident she would win; her critics would have to assemble 158 MPs — half the parliamentary party — to defeat her in a confidence vote.

Acknowledging the prospect of a split, Baker said he was “gravely concerned” for the future of the Conservatives if May pushes ahead with her plan, which he described as “not acceptable”. If things continue in the same trend, then the perfect storm that is brewing will in a few weeks rain on May’s Parade

STOP MISTREATING SERENA

Mike Omoniyi
-
0
STOP MISTREATING SERENA

Moments ago, in a stunning turn of events at the US Open Women’s Final, Naomi Osaka defeated Serena Williams. The ending was embroiled in controversy as Williams is once again treated badly by a sport she has given much of her adult life to.

Serena Williams and Naomi Osaka made history in the US Open final on Saturday.

The Match

The match ended with an Osaka victory, 6-2 6-4. Osaka won the first set as Williams struggled to find her serve. However, in the second set, things were far from conventional.

  • Serena Williams is given a code violation warning for coaching, with the score at 2-6, 1-0, which she fiercely disputes. “I don’t cheat to win, I’d rather lose,” she tells umpire Carlos Ramos. 
  • After being broken by her opponent Naomi Osaka to make the score 2-6, 3-2, Williams is given a code violation for smashing her racket in frustration. Coupled with the earlier warning, this brings about a point penalty. 
  • In response, Williams says: “Every time I play here, I have problems. I did not have coaching, I don’t cheat. You need to make an announcement. I have a daughter and I stand for what’s right. You owe me an apology.”
  • At the next change of ends at 2-6, 3-4 Williams unleashes a volley of abuse, saying: “For you to attack my character is wrong. You owe me an apology. You will never be on a court with me as long as you live. You are the liar. You owe me an apology. Say it. Say you’re sorry. How dare you insinuate that I was cheating? You stole a point from me. You’re a thief too. “
  • Williams is given a game penalty for verbal abuse, making the score 2-6, 3-5. She demands referee Brian Earley come on to the court. 
  • She says to Earley: “You know my character. This is not right. To lose a game for saying that, it’s not fair. How many other men do things? There’s a lot of men out here who have said a lot of things. It’s because I am a woman, and that’s not right.”
  • Osaka holds her nerve to win 6-2, 6-4 for first major title. 
  • Williams refuses to shake Ramos’s hand and demands an apology. 

The Boos

Standing a few feet away from the Grand Slam trophy which she had just won, Naomi Osaka started crying. This should have been the happiest moment of her life, however, the tears flowing did not seem to be tears of joy.

The 20-year-old Japanese had just beaten her childhood hero Serena Williams, who was bidding for a record-equalling 24th Grand Slam title and her first since giving birth, in the US Open final.

Williams said women players are treated differently to their male counterparts in the sport. (AFP)

It was not clear whether the boos, were directed at the competitors, however, they seemed directed at a sense of injustice the 24,000 crowd felt towards Serena Williams. Their anger was familiar because they had been here before. This is not the first time Serena Williams has been a victim of a double standard that permeates the sport.

Is there a double standard? 

Yes.

In short, Tennis, unfortunately, has a long history of treating men and women differently. The Male form of the game is littered with many ‘bad boys’ who swear, are aggressive towards umpires and even crowds. Its often called passion, ‘defending honor’ and Umpires routinely let things slide. However, an outburst in the woman’s game and particularly from Serena Williams may be been as more insubordinate.

All tennis fans have to do is cast their mind back to players like John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Ilie Năstase and others who routinely hurled insults at umpires. These players were known for their fiery temperament which helped the sport, drew crowds and invigorated games, They were seldom penalised for this, and most definitely did not lose games in grand small finals for it.

He’s “Mac the Mouth” both on and off the court — one of the most controversial and iconic players in tennis history,

“The men do it all the time.” 

At the center of this controversy is whether Patrick Mouratoglou was coaching Serena Williams.

Later, Mouratoglou confirmed that he had been coaching Williams in an interview with broadcaster Pam Shriver, but insisted that everyone does it.

He also suggested that the whole schemozzle could threaten Williams’s career going forward. “I was coaching but I don’t think she looked at me,” said Mouratoglou afterward. “I am honest, I was coaching, Sascha [Bajin, Osaka’s coach] was coaching the whole time too. This is one of the rules that is ruining tennis. She [Williams] will struggle to come back from this.”

He asserted that in his whole coaching career, he has never been penalized for that action. The match commentators also agreed, making it clear that they had never seen anything like this, especially at a Grand Slam final.
In her post-match news conference, Williams said she was she “was not being coached” and that she “did not understand” why Mouratoglou would say he was doing so.

“I just texted Patrick, like, ‘what is he talking about?’ Because we don’t have signals,” she said.

“We have never discussed signals. I don’t even call for on-court coaching [which is allowed on certain occasions in WTA events].”I’m trying to figure out why he would say that. I don’t understand. I want to clarify myself what he’s talking about.”

This has to stop. 

Yesterdays final was a strong reminder of the problem that persists in the WTA circuit and the inequality that still exists.  Many still see both sports through different gazes. This is understandable but must change. I myself have been guilty of looking at the WTA differently from how I see the ATP. When some fans look at the female game, they expect a more tame, less fiery affair. Big characters don’t do as well in the female game as they do in the male and this needs to change. Were we talking about Golf, where a dramatic and fiery outburst is uncommon, then the treatment of Serena by the Umpire, may have been justified. She would have been out of order and an outlier. This is, however, not the case. In fact, she was tamer than some in the male circuit. This double standard has to stop. This has to be the last time.

Sept 8, 2018; New York, NY, USA; Naomi Osaka of Japan (left) cries as the crowd boos and Serena Williams comforts her after the women s final on day thirteen of the 2018 U.S. Open tennis tournament at USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center.  Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports

American 12-time Grand Slam singles champion Bille Jean King: When a woman is emotional, she’s “hysterical” and she’s penalised for it. When a man does the same, he’s “outspoken” & and there are no repercussions. Thank you, @serenawilliams, for calling out this double standard. More voices are needed to do the same.

Maverick Boris Johnson and wife Marina Wheeler to get divorced

Mike Omoniyi
-
0
Maverick Boris Johnson and wife Marina Wheeler to get divorced

The former foreign secretary Boris Johnson and his wife Marina Wheeler have confirmed to the public that they have separated.

In a joint statement, they said they are now in the process of divorcing, after the Sun newspaper revealed that the pair were splitting up 

The couple have been married for 25 years and said the decision was taken some months ago.

This comes days after Boris Johnson’s public attack of Theresa May’s Brexit strategy 

In a joint statement, he and Ms Wheeler said: “Several months ago, after 25 years of marriage, we decided it was in our best interests to separate.

“We have subsequently agreed to divorce and that process is under way.

“As friends we will continue to support our four children in the years ahead.

“We will not be commenting further”.

Top 5 Trends for This Autumn and Winter

Common Sense Contributors
-
0
Top 5 Trends for This Autumn and Winter

by Tanya Mwamuka

It’s the back to school/college/University season and with that comes the trends for autumn and winter this year. For those of you looking to revamp your wardrobe, and become the new and improved (atleast style wise) then you’ve come to the right place. I’m going to give a you a run through of the five biggest trends for this Autumn/Winter.

Female Empowerment

Women’s March on Washington -Credit to: Wayne Tromble

This one is close to the heart, and frankly I don’t even want to call this a trend, it’s more a movement if anything. The rise of the “Me Too” movement, numerous anti-Trump marches, and the focus on LGBTQ  rights, have set president for another politically inspired runway. Whilst many would label fashion is simply materialistic and surface level, that simply isn’t the case. The clothes that designers make always have a story and this time the narrative was all around this politically fueled era we find ourselves in. This year the focus was around tailoring. Usually female empowerment and tailoring tend to take the route of androgyny; “the woman as the man” but this time, female empowerment was explored through strength in femininity; reflected in the shapes and silhouettes of the clothing.  Stella McCartney and Alexander Mcqueen were just a couple  of designer to jump on this trend.

Stella McCartney

The popular pastel suits of the spring and summer transitioning in to a more hard-lined black and navy. One thing I love about this is the meaning, secondly the fact that this trend well movement is one that will stand the test of time. Tailoring is really a classic staple of any wardrobe, and will keep coming back year after year, so you’re sure to get your money’s worth.

Animal Print

Animal print has been a trend that has seen no end on the catwalk. One year its in one year its out but you can be 100% sure it will always make a return. My favourite will always be  the cheetah print- the sight of anything zebra makes me a little sick tbh and trust the zebra print leggings I wore in year five will be the last time you’ll ever see me wearing that print. Animal print has always screamed fearlessness and bravery to me; perfectly matching the rhetoric of female empowerment. But as I’ve said animal  print isn’t something new, it’s been rehashed and reworked as since the raving 60’s, so what’s so special about it this time? Head toe is a must.

Dolce and Gabbana

Forget about a touch of cheetah print accessories here there, if your not fully dressed in animal print your not doing this trend justice. Remember the key message is power and confidence and wearing a print full body is really the only way to do that.

Silver is the New Gold

Fashion shows/ Collections Fall Winter 2018-19 /  Balmain

Apart from the dreary bleak winter weather, there’s always something else I think about when it comes to these cold months – party season. Aside tom Christmas and the other religious festivities you might celebrate, what else is there to look forward to during this season, certainly not the bad weather and lack of sunlight. Wearing everything sequins and glitter is probably one of my favourite things to do, and winter party season is the perfect place to do it. Forget about gleaming gold, silver is the metallic of choice, because who doesn’t want to look like a disco ball?

Logos

Fendi

This is probably the most wearable, genderless, ageless trend. Logos on t-shirts and jumpers are making a comeback. It’s time to declare your allegiance Nike or Adidas? Fendi or versace? What’s best about this is the relative accessibility, you don’t need to spend pile of money on clothing a simple touch of accessories: bags, belts, jewellery are all easy ways to dip your toes into this trend. This is a trend for everyone because really and truly you decide which brand you want to represent and since there are so many out there it doesn’t matter whether you’re more inclined to the sheekness of Anna Winter or the edgy vibes of Virgil Abloh – there’s something for you to pick in this logo mania.

Leather

One thing that seems to set high end away from highstreet in the attention to detail when it comes to textures, this season is always so rich with variety. Beautiful lace, silks, sequins and tweed were just a few to name which made a repeated appearance on the runway but the material which ruled the roost has to be leather.  This texture most commonly seen on accessories such as bags and shoes took a new stand in the clothing department instead. It was leather trousers, however which were the star but rather the leather dress seemed the most popular shape; holding parallels  with the “strength in femininity” tailoring. Mui Mui provide us with the short and sassy style meanwhile Lowe take a more edgy route with a utility style.  What excites me the most is the practicality, leather  is going to provide great warmth, particularly through those bitter months, and what’s better then managing to stay sheek and on trend but also warm and comfortable.

Tanya is currently studying Biomedical Sciences at the University of Manchester and hopes to pursue a career science communication, media and African development. She is a lover of fashion, travelling and has a keen interest in racial- social issues. She enjoys learning languages, being fluent in two and is currently adding Spanish  to her resume.

The Virtue Signalling Misogynistic Preacher

Richard Bolton
-
0
The Virtue Signalling Misogynistic Preacher

MP’s are set to vote this morning on an amendment to the Voyeurism (Offences) Bill proposed by MP for Walthamstow, Stella Creasy (pictured above), seeking to close a gap in the law and allow judges to jail offenders for up to two years.

Article 7 is to be discussed which addresses the intent behind acts of sexual harassment, namely misogyny. Misogyny is defined as a hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women or girls. Should this law pass into effect, it could then be considered by judges and juries as an ‘aggravating factor’ in the offences and lead to more severe sentencing for offenders.

The obvious danger, is the capacity for women to weaponise misogyny to their advantage against men in select instances, should it constitute a hate crime after tomorrow’s hearing.

The CBB Punchgate Affair

Take Roxanne Pallet’s ‘punchgate’ allegations about CBB co-star Ryan Thomas, which led to 11,000 complaints to Ofcom and leaving her labelled ‘the most hated girl in Britain’ after camera footage revealed she lied to producers in the Diary Room where celebrities go to spill all. This leaves us to question: ‘where do men then stand when vindictive women abuse the amendment?’

Other celebrities like Lee Ryan, Blue’s singer, came to her defence that her ‘exaggerated’ claims could be down to mental illness. The defence of ‘mental health issues’ are frankly not good enough considering the damage Roxanne would have wrought upon Ryan’s life had the cameras not been on hand in a filmed show. Using mental health issues as an excuse precludes accountability for an individual’s actions.

What started as innocent playing around with Ryan feint-punching Roxanne, she skipped away accusing him light-heartedly of being a ‘women beater!’

Roxanne Pallet’s confession – A lucky escape for Ryan Thomas 

Not long after, she was in the Diary Room where housemates spill whatever’s on their chest, she went full on attack, stating it “wasn’t a joke” and “how can you let somebody that’s done that stay here?” 21 of Roxanne’s former Emmerdale co-stars criticised her making a ‘mockery’ of real abuse victims and false accusations were a pattern of her troubling behaviour. The confessions flowed as she left the show and was subject to numerous interviews. The 35-year-old fantasist could have ruined Ryan’s reputation and life over her mistaken and malicious conviction that she had been “attacked, had her personal space invaded and was genuinely disturbed” by the incident.

Roxanne Pallet is a warning of what could be yet to pass. Febrile women being seen as vulnerable as a petal, needing protection from horrible, predatory men, all brought to light in the wake of #MeToo!

Her excuse was textbook victimhood vocabulary – ‘fragile’, bearing connotations of needing protection and a general lack of responsibility for one’s actions. “I can’t prove a feeling” was how she sought to justify her malicious attacks against Ryan.

Career-ruining words: Roxanne claiming to be genuinely disturbed by the non-incident

And since we have to be inclusive of everybody in 2018, if the victim is convinced of this, then who are you to not validate their emotional distress?

Enter Stella Creasy, MP: Misogynist Propaganda Warrior

Labour MP Stella Creasy raised the proposal of making misogyny a hate crime. With her proposed amendments that would make hatred of women an aggravating factor in up-skirting cases today. If passed, courts will take evidence of misogyny into account when sentencing someone found taking sexually intrusive images. Police would have to record allegations and file reports of such abuses.

Stella Creasy, MP for Walthamstow, and ardent proponent of the amendment 

There are currently hate crimes consisting of prejudice towards disability, gender identity, race, sexual orientation and faith. A Ministry of Justice spokesman said of Ms Creasy’s amendment: “We already have robust legislation that can be used to protect women from a range of crimes.”

Besides police having to take a break from solving other crimes, they would also have to interview Larry the Lurker at number 9 and his neighbours to verify accusations.

This is a slippery slope when the law is used to punish a state of mind, as opposed to an action. It opens the door to further abridgements of misogyny with catcalling, flirting, unwanted advances and misinterpreted compliments as all potentially being indicative of aggravated hate crime against women. Forms of power-play where men try to objectify and denigrate women.

This poses questions such as: “Do all flirtatious advancers hate women, or may they like them too much for their own good? And do all women oppose being chatted-up?”

Misandry vs Misogyny – Whatever happened to good old equality?

Who gets to decide the definition of misogyny and what is the equivalent position for men? What are the comparable misandry women may commit? Since these answers are intractable because of thoughts being private property, the conversation should end here, and we should focus on condemning actions in society that are sexist and repressive toward women.

MPs meet today after PMQs to debate the amendment put forth by Mrs Creasy

Women don’t need misogyny to be classified a hate crime. Progress is visible and alienating men as some imaginary enemies is counterproductive to the gains women have made in society. Whenever are laws abused?

The Roxanne incident on CBB proves just how easy it would be for such a law to be abused and how quickly the backlash may swing full-centre.

A trial run in Nottingham saw police resent the exercise that used up precious time and resources as they had to chase up all the reports of harassment across the city. While done with the best of intentions to encourage more women to come forward, officers called it a “vanity project”.

2018: Men are still from Mars and Women from Venus

It is confusing enough for men in 2018 about what they can and can’t say, do or act around women. It’s too subjective for a compliment to be misconstrued or lost in translation that can be deemed sexist or misogynistic, while the other way around it’s somehow perfectly permissible.

Those who commit actions like ‘upskirting’ are patently motivated by uncontrollable, repressed sexual urges. These are individuals who should seek professional sex workers or counselling. A war on hate is yet another in the long line of never ending undefinable nonsense confrontations: both meaningless and unmeasurable. If actions are motivated by hatred, then they are misogynistic, if not, then they are not. An offence based on someone’s opinion that cannot be measured is nonsensical.

It is like a weak attempt at Occam’s Razor, wherein the simplest explanation is taken as the most plausible, and accordingly for Stella Creasy, misogyny fits the bill: of course, its women hating that is the exclusive answer. Any sexual offence can be the result of a complex multitude of motivating factors. Stella Creasy’s attempts to frame misogyny as the solo, simplistic cause is ridiculous. Much of what is covered under this law is creepy, antisocial, incel invasive behaviour. Something women are as capable of doing too. In simpler terms, Creasy means that men mostly behave in ways women don’t like.

It should be noted that many sexual offences are acts of hate and power rather than desire, reducing women to a victim where the man can exert superiority.

A Law Against Misandry?

The question then becomes of the law, what is the equivalent law to protect men from misandry? And whether we believe the inadequate threat of unpunished misogynistic behaviour leads to more sexual harassment than would otherwise transpire? And thirdly, is the risk of this greater than the cost of women weaponizing this update to the Voyeurism Law against men and, by extension, ruining lives and careers?

Being catcalled or wolf-whistled are not comparable to a man losing his job, being shunned by the community, having to leave the area, ending up destitute, when he may have been wrongly accused and is in fact innocent.

Women are at their most powerful point in history and if they still consider themselves pitiful victims in a world that views them as objects to be used and potentially in danger and in need of protection, I wonder what the suffragettes would say. Victimhood is a convenient shelter. A shelter behind which sensitive or resentful individuals can play the victim card. Amendments like section 7 of this bill are poised to allow for being weaponised against certain men. To pass it is to subject the odd innocent man to abuse at the hand of another Roxanne.

MPs: All Male, All Guilty Anyway?

A further problem with MPs discussing this issue is they are likely a pretty guilty bunch themselves being mostly men not eager to self-incriminate. Not everyone should feel safe, but everyone should be entitled to respect. Just because some individuals feel perpetually at risk and unsafe is not cause for authoritarian clampdowns. People irritate, anger or scare others just by their presence, simply by virtue of being who they are.

It is not that nothing should be done to redress the imbalances in this area, but should one request favouring one party over the other when what we strive toward is equality, it doesn’t help the cause but further serves to alienate the parties involved.

2 Million Brits Have ‘Changed Their Mind’ On Brexit

Mike Omoniyi
-
0
2 Million Brits Have ‘Changed Their Mind’ On Brexit

It seems the tide may be changing on public opinion around Brexit. A collection of recent polls have been telling the same story. These polls seem to be revealing public anxiety and disdain about the Brexit process so far. 

“69% of Britons say Brexit is going badly so far”

On the topic of who is to blame, this week has revealed that the political class is still interested in pointing fingers in all directions. A recent standoff between Boris Johnson and the Prime Minister showed this. On the other hand, a YouGov study showed that the answer is very different depending on whether you voted Remain or Leave in the referendum.

The largest figure of blame for Brexit going badly is to ‘the government.’ Two thirds (68%) of those who think Brexit is currently going badly say that it is the government’s fault. This includes three quarters who voted Remain (77%) and 58% of Leave voters.

While Remain voters are far more likely to blame the government than they are to blame any other group, this is not the case with those who voted for Brexit. Leave voters are just as likely to see fault with the EU (58%, compared to 25% of Remainers) and anti-Brexit politicians (59%, compared to 15% of Remain voters). For their part, 53% of Remain voters blame pro-Brexit politicians (only 11% of Leave voters do so).

This may have been expected, however, what has surprised pollsters, is the number of Brits who now support a second referendum.

For the first time, the majority of Britons now want a second referendum on the UK quitting the European Union (EU), according to a new survey. A YouGov poll found that more people support a second referendum

“42% of Britons think there should be a referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal, 40% do not”

When this question was first asked in April of last year only 31% of people supported a second referendum, compared to 48% who wanted the 2016 vote to be the final say on the matter.

A Survation poll drew a similar conclusion, Fifty-three percent of people would back a vote on whether to accept the terms of the final Brexit deal, with 47% opposed,

Theresa May is finding herself increasingly isolated, not least because of attacks by defectors, Johnson and David Davis.  

Only 35% agreed with Theresa May that “no deal is better than a bad deal” in EU negotiations, the research for The Mail on Sunday found.

Global Future chief executive Gurnek Bains said: “The overwhelming majority of Labour voters want an open, outward-looking country which could mean staying in the single market like Norway and Switzerland already do from outside the EU. If political leaders insist on – or enable – an extreme form of Brexit that prioritises immigration controls by taking Britain out of the single market and the customs union, they risk being on the wrong side of the electorate.”

In light of these polls, The Inedepant have launched a #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

You can sign the Petition here 

The Blanket Media Dilemma

Richard Bolton
-
0
The Blanket Media Dilemma

Part of the rigmarole to a prestigious school’s 11+ entrance exams was to keep up to date with current affairs in The Times and Economist. The principle was to improve my conversing by informing thereby enabling me to hold my own in discussions, whatever the subject broached. These simplistic motivations overlooked the indoctrination that was going on all this while. What I was reading shaped the way I see things today. Things that are in constant flux. Naturally there is bias in the mainstream and alternative medias, so varying my reading between different approaches should account for this.

What they failed to mention was how stunting this would later prove to be. This non-introspective consumption of endless news and events from around the world did improve my grasp of the English language, but it also served to make me absorb information as it was presented to me. I wasn’t being trained to filter the wheat from the chaff. The good from the bad. What I was left with was largely swathes of useless information and a mindset that this was the way to become smarter.

Wind forward to the modern day, we spend a great deal of time exposed to media, whether through Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook, email newsletters and articles. It doesn’t lend us to question what we are told, read or see with much independent scrutiny. Our eye for scepticism is rather rusty.

Take the plea from ABC Australia that told the general public Sir David Attenborough’s message was to put out water and sugar solution to save the bees, or else we all perish.

Deploying Attenborough’s stature as a nature preservationist to mislead

This was later debunked by beekeepers and the man himself, with the BBC demanding Facebook take down the fake news. Other instances have been doctored or are just factually inaccurate, as the war photos in Syria and Yemen showed.

Syrian child by graves of parents actually photographer’s nephew

An undiscerning public, subject to incorrect news, influences our general narrative, and not always for the best. Fear-mongering spreads rapidly on social media sites, as the online panic over the alleged news of nuclear radiation traces found in sea life off the coast of California from the Fukushima plant displayed.

Fukushima radiation scare hoax

Even if a handful of readers were more in tune with reverse image searching on Google to fact check themselves before they shared, or perhaps a modicum of understanding on radiation dispersal they would know this was factually inaccurate.

The reality is we spend a great deal of our days exposed to media in its various forms. This makes a case for responsible consumption. We pay different media stories and breaking news differing levels of attention, but we should be conscious of the messages it sends our way.

If we are uninitiated and simply share or comment without thinking about the story, we are only acting as mindless, automaton vessels to share and disseminate the narratives of forces that be, pushing whatever agendas they may have – or just shoddy journalism cashing in on smear.

Media is a reflection of society; but, this works both ways.

How do we work to dispel and debunk?

To address this, one should be aware of ideologies that underlie the media. Awareness distinguishes the imposition of false norms from a narrative we can glean useful information from or at least reflect reality. Critiquing the outputs allows us to break away from the partial and adhere to better quality journalism. Not taking things at face value and also giving yourself time away from media enables creative thinking and introspection where great ideas are generated.  We have more time as we are not bogged down in the drivel of woe betide that is fed to us daily, and allows us to be critical with what others around us are sharing direct from the prescriptive agendas that be.

I believe my learning would have benefited substantially from media literacy and critical thinking in my formative years. Treading carefully, fact checking and deploying reason and logic to assess whether what we are presented with is reality. Teaching early prevents mindless consumers of media who don’t question what they hear or see. Without critical thinking and time away from the pessimism that drives the news, society will continue to perpetuate harmful stereotypes and prevailing dominant norms because they don’t know otherwise.

If before we were mere passive audiences, to the people with the power, to feed news outlets with the stories they wanted us to hear, we can now counteract these with the tools at our disposal – cynicism, reason, the internet, alternative news outlets for comparison, and the ability to fire a quick email to an expert to corroborate the findings. We can now tell and promote our own stories. Ones that used to be unheard and unknown can now gain the attention and reach they deserve at the click of a button.

And maybe we can recapture some semblance of perspective – that we can give a civil war, a mass pollution event or heart lifting story that had been swept under the rug the exposure each deserves. As opposed to some insufferable fake news or a celebrity breakup scandal dominating our headlines. A loss of trust that has arisen from the uncertainty muddying the waters between plausibility and gullibility.

Whether spam or politically-motivated agendas with catchy headlines, juicy stories sadly have little concern for the truth beyond tricking some uninitiated sod into sharing it.

Let us strive instead toward some better selves, wherein veritas vos liberabit ‘the truth shall set you free’ prevails triumphant.

Boris Johnson Attacks Theresa May…Again!

Mike Omoniyi
-
0
Boris Johnson Attacks Theresa May…Again!
Boris Johnson: UK gets ‘diddly squat’ from May’s Brexit plans

In a move that has become somewhat characteristically familiar, Boris Johnson has again put down Theresa May’s Brexit plans, saying they would leave the UK with “diddly squat” after the negotiations effectively handing the EU a “victory”.

In a recent article in the Daily Telegraph, the rebel used his column to assert that the PM’s Chequers deal – which led him to resign in July – “means disaster” for Britain.

Johnson wrote that “the reality is that in this negotiation the EU has so far taken every important trick. The UK has agreed to hand over £40 billion of taxpayers’ money for two-thirds of diddly squat”. Johnson added that by adopting the Chequers plan, in which the UK would adopt a common rulebook for food and goods, “we have gone into battle with the white flag fluttering over our leading tank”. It will be “impossible for the UK to be more competitive, to innovate, to deviate, to initiate, and we are ruling out major free trade deals”, he added.

Johnson is not alone. Another, sharing his sentiment, is Michel Barnie the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, who said that he is “strongly” opposed to key parts of Theresa May’s proposals for a future trade deal.

  “precise and pragmatic”.

The UK government insist its Brexit strategy is still the way the country should go 

The so-called Chequers deal was agreed by cabinet at the prime minister’s country residence as the UK’s preferred way forward in negotiations with Brussels. 

When Can I Have A Go?

The launch of these fresh attacks will no doubt be seen by many as Johnson’s final preparations for a leadership challenge to May just as the Brexit negotiations reach their critical phase in the autumn.

Johnson called on May to return to the argument of her Lancaster House speech of January 2017. He said that on the current plan, “we will remain in the EU taxi; but this time locked in the boot, with absolutely no say on the destination. We won’t have taken back control – we will have lost control.”

ATTACK: Mr Johnson has been a n ardent critic of Mrs May’s strategy

Weeks after his statement that veiled Muslim women look like letter-boxes and bank robbers, Johnson appears to be using his platform to create more distance between the Prime Minister and himself. He wants the British public to believe there is another way, another Brexit and that potentially, he can lead the country that way. His statements and attacks, seen as unpatriotic by some, also consolidate his image as a right-wing maverick – an image he has been manufacturing for some time. Leaving the cabinet frees up Johnson to make any assertions, promises, and statements because he won’t have to back them up. Just like the 350 million for our NHS, these promises don’t have to materialize.

In his first intervention since quitting the cabinet, Johnson compared negotiations between Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab and Mr Barnier to a wrestling match.

He wrote in his column: “The whole thing is about as pre-ordained as a bout between Giant Haystacks and Big Daddy; and in this case, I am afraid, the inevitable outcome is a victory for the EU, with the UK lying flat on the canvas and 12 stars circling symbolically over our semi-conscious head.”

Boris Johnson claims the negotiations are rigged in favour of the EU

Johnson said negotiations based on the Chequers plan had so far seen the EU take “every important trick”, adding: “The UK has agreed to hand over £40bn of taxpayers’ money for two-thirds of diddly squat.”

He said by using the strategy – defended by Mrs May in the Sunday Telegraph over the weekend – the UK had “gone into battle with the white flag fluttering over our leading tank”.

If it continued on the same path, Johnson added, the government would “throw away most of the advantages of Brexit”.

Tory Brexiters have welcomed Johnson’s comments. This is from Owen Paterson, a former Northern Ireland secretary.

And this (tweet below) from Steve Baker, who resigned as a Brexit minster over the Chequers plan, like Johnson, and how is now puts opinion against it on the Conservative backbenches.

Labour politicians have condemned Johnson. Below is a tweet from Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary.

And this is from the Labour peer Andrew Adonis.

One has to wonder what Johnson’s motivations are with these attacks. It is unlikely that the Prime Minister will change course. She has freshly confirmed her plans to go ahead. Cabinet members, bound by Cabinet Collective Responsibility have equally buttressed their commitment to this strategy. It seems Johnson’s desire is to create space between the Prime Minister and himself in preparation for something. Commentators will no doubt conclude this to be a leadership challenge. With Johnson, no one can  known for sure. However, to the degree he wants to further alienate himself from the May administration, there he is successful.

2018 Premier League Winners: Liverpool?

Jireh Antwi
-
0
2018 Premier League Winners: Liverpool?

With only a few teams having won 4/4 games in the Premier League so far, what are Liverpool’s chances of winning the Premier league title for the first time in the modern era?

Liverpool played Leicester on their game on the 1st of September. Liverpool were off to the races as the game began, which lets be fair every team is used to. Like clockwork we saw a quick early goal from Sadio Mane making it a total of 4 goals in 4 games this season. At the 10th minute mark as he darted into the penalty area thanks to a Robertson assist and placed it past Kasper Schmeichel. Mane is proving to be a valuable player for Liverpool which fans already knew, but it seems this season he’s ready to take it to the next level. He certainly is a fantasy team dream player.

Sadio Mane celebrating his 4th goal this seaons Premier League campaign (Source: Reuters)

Liverpool already had created some earlier chances with Mo Salah missing a glaring open goal to put the visitors ahead. It should be noted that the Salah of last season would have converted that chance. All throughout the first half things seemed to be even between the teams with Leicester gaining a good amount of possession. Liverpool looked stale during large parts of the game. Though they did bring it all by making all advancements towards the goal seem threatening. The downside is that against an opponent of a clinical stature, such a performance just does not work.

Just before the stroke of half-time Robert Firminho headed in a James Milner corner as he was left unmarked and allowed to pick his spot into the net. Making it 2-0 going into the break.

In the second half, Leicester ramped up the pressure and really put Liverpool’s backline under examination as there was several unnerving moments from Van Dijk. However, Joe Gomez really stepped up and showed that even at such a young age, he is a quality player, gaining 100% on his ground and aerial duels against Leicester players. The quality of his plays were definitely noticed by fans and pundits alike.

Liverpool were even further put to the test as at the 63rd minute Alisson made a catastrophic blunder as he tried to do a tricky cut-away; essentially a Cruyff turn from Iheanacho and instantly lost the ball leading to a Leicester goal from debutant Ghezzal’s left footed shot into the corner. Alisson himself is aware of his risky plays and warned fans prior to his debut. Klopp stated after the match that an error was ‘clearly going to happen one day’. This is still only a minor blip compared to Karius’ blunders in the Champions League final. It’s better off for Alisson that it was now rather than at a crucial moment in their campaign.

Alisson showing his thanks to the fans post game

Salah proved further to be ineffective in this game, which was evident to Jurgen Klopp as he was subbed off for Shakiri at the 71st minute. In general Salah hasn’t started off from his stellar form of last season. He’ll have to be an integral part if they are indeed to win the Premier League title. Liverpool had to dig deep to get these 3 crucial points with a 2-1 win in the end, these points will prove valuable early in the campaign. Leicester showed very promising signs in the game and will definitely get better as the season progresses.

So far Liverpool have started well and are winning games they would have drawn or lost last season. With their new signings and general improvement of quality in the squad, they are better equipped than they were last season.

Klopp celebrating Liverpool’s tough win against Leicester

With the Champions League draw having taken place this week, Liverpool loom to be in one of the harder groups. The teams in Group C being Red Star Belgrade, PSG, Napoli. Coming against Napoli and PSG will be an interesting tie as they will pit themselevs agaisny the best of the best, if they can succeed in this group then their morale will be boosted massively in all other competitions.

The question now is, could do they go unbeaten in the league and win? Will they slip up to Chelsea or Manchester City like the infamous 12/13 campaign where a Steven Gerrard mistake essentially cost them the league. With new management and players at the helm can they break this mental curse?

Does a No Deal Brexit Impose a Threat to How Much We Earn?

Common Sense Contributors
-
0
Does a No Deal Brexit Impose a Threat to How Much We Earn?

by Dolline Mukui

According to the Resolution Foundation, the average earnings of people in the UK are about £13 lower than they were 10 years ago. Around 800,000 employed workers are on zero-hour contracts. Zero-hour contracts mean that the employer is not obliged to provide minimum hours and the employee does not have accept any working hours.

2.1 million people have found stable jobs since the financial crisis in 2008. However, within that 1.2 million figure, are a third of the poorest households. Economic analyst, Stephen Clarke says “while employment is at a record high, Britain is still some way off full employment and too much work remains low-paid and insecure. Steps to provide advance notice of shifts and a right to a regular contract for those working regular hours on a zero-hour contract would help those in work who have precious little job security.”

What does this mean for millions of Britons who could be facing the possibility of Brexit with no deal

This is a prime example of what will happen closer to 29th March when we leave the EU:

https://twitter.com/GirlGiada/status/1035068126168264704

Does the situation get worse? In 2003 households who were on the lower half of incomes were typically earning £14,900. Thirteen years later, that figure has fallen to £14,800. There are over eight million low and middle income homes with children in the UK. Large banks, insurers, asset managers and other financial services have either considered or confirmed they are moving their operations to the EU.

National Living Wage to increase to £9 per hour

Currently the employment rate for people aged between 16 and 64 years for the UK was 75.4% for the period December 2017 to February 2018. The research by the foundation reveals that the economy has struggled to create wealth for people in work. Although employment rates in some regions of the country remains high, many of the jobs are lower paid. Once in jobs there is also a lack of progression into higher paid jobs. This is likely because a lot of parents can’t afford the demand of long hours of a higher position, especially with young kids or other priorities. 

The National Living Wage was introduced by then Chancellor George Osborne in his Budget in July 2015. It came into effect in April 2016, and is £7.83 an hour for workers aged 25 and over, with the aim of increasing it to £9 an hour by 2020.

The fact that the UK is leaving the EU with a possible no deal could effectively change the aim.

Dolline is a traveller, journalist and blogger who has palate to try new things. She is a very spontaneous person; you might find her skydiving over the Kenyan coast to kayaking on Lake Como. She can be an over thinker who thinks of every outcome but if she doesn’t she welcomes the change that wasn’t planned. However, she is a very simple person who is up for a good laugh or a book and enjoys living the moment. Dolline also writes for her small personal blog called ‘Swatches of Beauty’ and is currently a production journalist trainee at ITV Border.

May The Dance Be With You: Theresa May Rebuked In Kenya

Common Sense Contributors
-
0
May The Dance Be With You: Theresa May Rebuked In Kenya

by Zulaikha Abiri

Uhuru Kenyatta, Kenyan businessman and the fourth and current president of the Republic of Kenya, made a complaint stating that it had been 30 years since a British Prime Minister visited Kenya. The last to visit before Theresa May was Margaret Thatcher back in 1988. He delivered this diplomatic rebuke to Theresa May at a Joint press in the state house in Nairobi Kenya.  This was also the final day of her visit to the continent. Kenyatta was later asked about an agreement to allow stolen funds in Britain to be returned to Kenyato fund health, education and other development projects. As the Kenyan President answered this, he seemed to have forgotten the former foreign secretary’s name. He said:

“Last year, if you recall – then Boris, erm, Boris Johnson- the bicycle guy….Boris Johnson was here with ambulances… These ambulances were bought courtesy of funds that had been seized, returned and utilized to buy ambulances which were distributed across the country ”.

The prime minister gave a wry smile as Uhuru struggled to recall Johnson’s name.

Earlier on her trip, May made a reference to the former’s Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson’s visit to Africa as an example of U.K’s commitment to the continent. Though Johnson had resigned as foreign secretary last month due to a dispute over May’s plans for Brexit.

The President hoped there will be more visits, despite the long gap between the Prime Minister’s visits. He adds: “Yes, it has been 30 years, but I don’t want to dwell on the past- we want to look to the future”, he said.

May stated her delight in visiting Kenya and that she is going away with memories of the continent’s unforgettable “vibrancy and beauty”.  May took this opportunity to dance again awkwardly. Her dancing in South Africa earlier in the week had gone viral on social media platforms across the world.

Will Theresa May ever stick to doing politics?

Zulaikha Abiri is a graduate of Media with Media Practices from Nottingham Trent University and is so start a Master’s in Broadcast Journalism next month to further her interest in the Media.
Her interests include youth, women and children empowerment, especially in under developed and in developing countries. Some of her passions are photography and writing, both creative and factual.

Place Your Bets: UEFA Champions League Is Upon Us Once More

Fidelis Olaniran
-
0
Place Your Bets: UEFA Champions League Is Upon Us Once More

It is that time in the footballing calendar, where the football elites find out who they are clashing against in this year’s Champions League. Will it be a 3rd in a row, for current champions Real Madrid or will a new team take the crown from the reigning champions.

Last years runners-up Liverpool, have made use of the recent transfer window and boosted their defence between the sticks by replacing the villian of the 2018 final Loris Karuis and replacing him with former Roma and current Brazillian No.1 keeper Allison Becker. Could this change take Liverpool all the way to the final again this year? We shall soon find out.

Liverpool Goalkeeper Loris Karius (Source: Getty Images)

This years Champions League draw took place in Monaco, with the UEFA Player of the Year going to Real Madrid’s Luka Modrić and Gongs handed out to fellow teammates Keylor Navas, Sergio Ramos, former teammate Cristiano Ronaldo and Women’s Player of the Year Pernille Harder. Then it was time for the draw.

Alisson Becker, Liverpool FC goalkeeper (Source: LiverpoolFC)

Group A consists of the Europa League champions Athletico Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, Monaco and Club Brugge. My prediction for the two teams to go through are Athletico Madrid and Borussia Dortmund

Group B consists of Spanish La Liga Champions Barcelona, Englands Tottenham, PSV and Internazionale. I predict that Barcelona will finish comfortably in first place while Tottenham takes second.

Group C consists of French Ligue 1 Champions PSG, final runner-ups Liverpool, Napoli and Crvena Zvezda. This group is without a doubt the toughest in this year’s Champions League and to be honest it could go either way with the top three teams. So I’m predicting PSG and LIverpool going through the group.

Group D consists of Lokomotiv Moskvva, Porto,Schalke and Galatasaray and frankly the least exicitng group in this years Champions League but none the less I’ll give my prediction. Porto and Schalke are my two teams to go through.

Group E contains German Bundesligas Champions Bayern Munich, Benefica, Ajax and AEK. With Bayern Munich’s consist presence in the knock out stages each year gives me the confidence to say that Bayern Munich will top the group and it would be between Benefica and Ajax for second.

Group F contains English Premier League Champions Manchester City, Shaktar Donetsk, Lyon and Hoffenheim. Guardiolas team was a formidable force in the premier league last season but fell short against Liverpool but I see them going through their group and mounting a challenge this season. Manchester City and Lyon are more likely to go through.

Group G consists of the current champions Real Madrid,Roma, CSKA Moskva and Plzen. With the experience Real Madrid have in the champions league its no doubt they are strong contenders this season even without their star man Cristanio Ronaldo. Even though he didn’t really do much in the last final. Real Madrid and Roma will probably progress

Last but not least Group H which consist of Italian Serie A champions Juventus, Manchester United, Valencia and Young Boys. Its a return for United favourite and Juve new boy Cristanio Ronaldo at Old Trafford, its alsoa fixture that will reunite Paul Pogba with his former employers and team mates.It should be an exciting game. However United form at the start of this season has come into question and I doubt they will make it through to the knock stages.But you can’t underestimate the “Special One”. Saying that ill give Manchester United the benefit of the doubt, so I predict it will be Juventus and Manchester United who progress to the next phase

Looking forward to this seasons Champions League because I think this years winner could be any team.

The double-edged sword of ‘entryism’

Alex Davenport
-
0
The double-edged sword of ‘entryism’

A spectre is haunting the Tory party – the spectre of entryism. Or so, at any rate, many would have you believe.

The Conservatives are far from the first to point the finger at so-called entryists, members of one party or political grouping who join another with the aim of taking it over and steering it in their desired direction. The prospect of the party being infiltrated and overrun by a hard-Right faction has been a source of concern for more moderate Conservative MPs, who fear they may be outvoted by entryists in the case of a leadership election.

Such fears are understandable given the openness of the campaign to take over the Tory party. Leave.EU, the unofficial pro-Brexit campaign group financed by right-wing businessman Arron Banks, has candidly and repeatedly urged its social media followers to join the Conservatives. Doing so, the group has suggested, will allow them to insert a leader more sympathetic to their cause, such as Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg, in the event of an apparently “inevitable” leadership challenge to Theresa May.

A number of moderate Conservative MPs, including the outspoken Anna Soubry, have spoken out about the dangers of entryism to their party. “These people are absolutely dedicated to their cause. And you don’t need an awful lot of people to make a huge amount of difference – so it’s really worrying”, Soubry argued. “Some of it is people who over Europe felt they no longer support us and went off to UKIP and are now rejoining the party.”

Yet while it makes sense to speak out about the threat posed by entryism, these MPs would do well to consider that by making too much of an issue of entryism, they risk such an approach backfiring and undermining their own arguments.

Moderate Tory MP Anna Soubry (Source: Getty)

The issue is that a lot of the supposed infiltrators have views on Brexit (as well as other issues) which are not particularly far removed from the current Conservative membership or even many of the party’s MPs. An overwhelming majority of Tory members voted to leave the EU while many prominent voices within the party have spoken out in favour of the most extreme separation possible in the form of a ‘no deal’ Brexit. It seems that perhaps the new recruits would not be so distinct from the values of the party as a whole after all.

In this context, right-leaning new and old members alike may view moderates as the real opportunists, playing up the threat of entryism to try and maintain power. By making out the newcomers to be extremist agitators for backing a hard Brexit, these moderates risk coming across as at best out of touch with the majority of their party’s membership, and at worse cynically trying to outmanoeuvre those on the right by stopping them from admitting new members. In line with this, many Conservative MPs have reacted angrily to the idea of a shady ‘takeover’, asking why a party with dwindling membership figures would decline the opportunity to welcome new members, with the ideas and financial contributions they would bring.

It is worth remembering the near identical situation that took place in the Labour party in 2015 as a lesson of how not to deal with entryism. When Jeremy Corbyn stood for the party’s leadership from a left-wing platform, many of the party’s leading figures made a great deal of supposed infiltration by ‘Trotskyists’ trying to influence the results of the election by supporting Corbyn.

Whether or not such infiltration took place, it was dwarfed by the number of genuine Labour members (many of whom had been in the party for decades) who backed the left-wing candidate. Large numbers of these members, including those who had been originally undecided on which way to vote, felt that the rhetoric on entryism was little more than a ploy by the party’s elite to neutralise anyone who disagreed with them, so they could remain in the ascendancy. Rather than receiving genuine counter-arguments as to why moving the party leftwards was a bad idea, they were told Corbyn was only popular because of outsiders agitating to win him power, despite themselves being insiders sympathetic to his cause. Whether a genuine fear or a cheap trick, the entryist hype backfired massively, pushing more people away from what they saw as a corrupt centre.

Whatever their motivation, those who play up entryism from the left or the right are certainly playing a dangerous game. Push too hard, and they risk alienating genuine party members and supporters who just want their opinions heard, while reinforcing stereotypes about the ‘establishment’ and its penchant for keeping power through machinations and muck-raking rather than the strength of their arguments. Sometimes, it may be more effective to play those on the extremes with a straight bat, and challenge their arguments and beliefs head on, than try to have them excluded in the first place.

1...747576...91Page 75 of 91

Editor Picks

Must Read

Hot Topics

About Us

Our mission is to make democracy healthier by creating spaces for people who disagree to have fruitful dialogue.

Contact us: hello@tcsnetwork.co.uk

Follow Us

© Copyright - Newspaper theme by tagDiv