Sunday, May 25, 2025
Blog Page 1205

Israeli Election results spell disaster for peace

0

On Tuesday 17th March, Israel elected their parliament for the next four years. In essence this was a vote either for the continuation of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government or for change. The result? A disastrous vote for more of the same.

Polls indicated a close-run election, but at the final count Mr Netanyahu’s Likud party managed to seize the win. With Israel’s proportional representation voting system meaning that a majority for one party is near impossible, Netanyahu now has 28 days to form a coalition. It will most likely comprise the Jewish Home party, Kulanu and other ultra-orthodox groups.

The Jewish Home Party is unashamedly racist and advocates the illegal expansion of Israeli settlements and the use of military force against the Palestinians. Their leader Naftali Bennett insists “on continuing construction in the West bank and Jerusalem”. He has also said that “there will never be a peace plan with the Palestinians” and that he “will do everything in [his] power to make sure they never get a state”. The other major member of the likely coalition, Kulanu, is focussed primarily on domestic issues and will do little to alter the course of the government, a course that currently flies in the face of international law.

The alternative prospect that was presented to the Israeli electorate symbolised change and progress and came in the form of the Zionist Union led by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni. The Zionist Union is a coalition of left-leaning parties that promised to repair relations with both Palestine and the international community. Their defeat signifies the death of any hope for an improvement in the Israel-Palestine conflict any time soon. As Saeb Erekat a chief Palestinian negotiator in the failed peace talks of 2014 notes, “It is clear Israel has voted for burying the peace process, against the two state choice and for the continuation of occupation and settlement.”

So what does the future hold for Israel, given the prospect of another four years of Netanyahu? Saeb Erekat described the incumbent’s campaign as a “platform based on settlements, racism, apartheid and the denial of the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people”. Mr Netanyahu’s rhetoric has indeed taken a turn for the worse over recent days as he has explicitly stated that he will not allow the creation of a Palestinian state and has vowed to build more settlements. A hint of racist undertones was evident when taking to Twitter he warned his supporters, “Arab voters are coming in droves to the ballot boxes. Left-wing NGOs bring them in buses.”

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11309%%[/mm-hide-text]

However, one only needs to look at the past four years to predict what the next four will entail. Under the guiding hand of Mr Netanyahu, the number of Jewish-only settlements existing on occupied Palestinian territory has grown by 23 percent since 2009. Israel has also carried out two large-scale military offensives in the Gaza strip over that time. Considering Mr Netanyahu’s clear stance, it is not difficult to envisage a future in which Palestine eventually becomes entirely consumed by an Israeli invasion to leave behind a single apartheid state in which Palestinians are treated as second class citizens.

The international community (including the UN, US and the EU) officially recognises a two state solution as the most desirable. This is by no means an easy or a quick solution, but it is the only one that is just. The barrier to achieving this and subsequent peace is purely political, and while it is undoubtedly a difficult stance to take, if an Israeli prime minister did support it, it would be entirely possible. The Zionist Union could have offered such a prime minister in Herzog.

Of course Israel do not deserve anywhere near the whole portion of blame for the continuation of this conflict. Hamas (internationally recognised as a terrorist organisation) have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in both Palestine and Israel. While this is clearly unacceptable, it is Israeli violations of international law that must be addressed before any change in Palestine can occur. So, it seems like the Israeli electorate have in effect voted to maintain Hamas and their devastating effects on both states.

There are three immediate short term steps that Israel must take to achieve peace. Firstly, they must stop building settlements on illegally occupied land. Then they must halt its military operations in Palestine. Finally, peace talks need to be reinstated.

In the long term, Israel must recognise the Palestinian state. From there it is then possible for a two state agreement to be reached whereby, with land swaps, Israel may keep the vast majority of its settlements. However, after Tuesday’s election we must now wait another four years before there is even the slightest possibility of the first of these steps being taken.

Emo: Not a dirty word

0

If someone says ‘emo music’ to you, you might cringe. In fact, you probably do. You probably think guyliner, dyed black hair, melodramatic song titles (44. Calibre Love Letter, anyone?) and blood-spattered album covers. Whilst this might represent an accurate if harsh image of the emo scene in the early Noughties, nowadays there’s a large swathe of the punk community who would take issue with it. Emo has changed.

In recent years, there’s been a lot written about the emo ‘revival’, the way in which, ostensibly, emo in the vein that people in their thirties will remember the genre developing through the Nineties. It’s not My Chemical Romance; it could be Weezer. Emo never really went anywhere – rather, it’s returned to its roots in a twinkly, open-tuning riff-based guitar sound with confessional lyrics about high school and small town Middle America. Imagine pop-punk mixed with post-rock instrumentals and you’re not far off the modern emo sound.

For those understandably less familiar with older bands who really struck out and made emo its own genre as it branched off from hardcore about twenty-five years ago (the name of the genre itself is said to be a shortening of ‘emotional hardcore’), bands like American Football, Mineral and Texas is the Reason are a good place to begin. Old emo sounds like the uncertain younger brother of grunge, and was arguably overshadowed by it. Kids from the Midwest would write songs in their parents’ garages, isolated from the world in a way Seattle grunge wasn’t, but with dreams of escaping suburbia nonetheless. The dynamic made for an interesting, often heartbreaking vibe.

It was all put on hold. The likes of Fall Out Boy, Taking Back Sunday and Alexisonfire gave emo a whole new aesthetic and fanbase in the early years of the last decade. Gone were thick-rimmed black glasses and lumberjack shirts; in their place, skinny jeans, dip-dyed fringes and snakebite piercings took over. These bands, despite making excellent music, marked a departure in style from what came before. They were still the voice of a generation of outsiders, but these were outsiders who wanted to be noticed, who wanted the jocks and the cool kids to see them and to reject them, rather than a generation who were overlooked, quiet and introspective.

And then, for some reason, came the revival. New bands and songwriters from Philly and the Midwest toured together. American Football reformed. Heralded by artists like Modern Baseball, high school reject vibes returned and the poetic loser desperate to escape the small town was once again celebrated.

The question of why this resurgence in popularity happened is still unanswered. Perhaps it’s the genuine truthfulness of the songs that appeals after a decade of gutsy but overstated drama. Modern Baseball’s Hours Outside in the Snow ends with a message, fictitious or honest, to a girl called Erin. It seems melodramatic, the kind of tactic employed by a band who want their fans to see how sensitive and tormented they are, but a quick Google reveals Erin is a real girl, and in fact her answerphone is included in the closing, resignatory chords of the song. Gimmick or not, the bravery to write about someone real, about something real, is admirable. Other lyrics speak of high school rejection (‘I told you I loved you/Just outside your mom’s place/You laughed then you felt bad/As we sat there red-faced’ and ‘Is he here? Are you making out?/Shut up, make out, do something already/I’m waiting’) and conjure images of running through small-town America to ask a girl to prom, inhabiting that murky stage between teenage years and adulthood.

Having seen the band live in Kingston, the loyalty of their fan base is testament to the community that emo has become. Indeed, many of these bands are just kids playing out of their suburban or rural U.S. garages, liberated to experience and release music as the kids of the 90s never were by the Internet. Most can’t sing, but it makes it all the more charming, and more importantly, honest.

If Modern Baseball captures the iconic lyrical quality of 90s emo and the high priests of the genre American Football, then Prawn and others get the riffs right. Emo is as instrumental as is it is confessional. UK bands are prominent too, namely Nai Harvest and Moose Blood, both harnessing the raw energy of young men with guitars, left with nothing to do but write about their feelings. Small labels in the U.S. such as Count Your Lucky Stars, Run For Cover Records and No Sleep Records put out splits between bands, often on vinyl and cassette tape – just one more in a vast array of indicators that emo has not yet finished its love affair with the past.

All this serves to demonstrate one thing: it’s evolution, not revolution for emo music, and it deserves a fighting chance to win you over.

Clarkson and the cultural split

0

Workplace propriety has proven to be a minefield of potential wrongdoing. Even the best intentioned of employees may stumble into the inappropriate. I am horribly unqualified to make any judgments on such matters. My experience of workplaces is restricted to a couple of summer jobs and a Saturday job in sixth form.

But even I am confident enough to venture that it is always unacceptable to punch a colleague in the face. I feel secure in the belief that I would have the backing of my employer, and public sympathy, if I was ever punched in the face at work. So why have nearly a million people flooded online to sign a petition, protesting against Jeremy Clarkson’s suspension for indulging in such an act?

Those who have rushed to defend Clarkson haven’t done so to reflect on this particular incident. Their reasoning is far more instinctive. Clarkson has become a symbol of something far greater than an interest in motoring. Declaring yourself to be a fan or a detractor of Clarkson is a statement of an entire set of values. The strength of feeling in the responses to Clarkson’s recent suspension is a symptom of a deeper divide in society.

Those who stand by Clarkson do so because they believe he is a figurehead for the everyman. The popularity of his defence is really the popularity of the idea that the average Joe is being maligned by our society.

However, this idea is a dangerous one. It is one that encourages a naive mentality of ‘us’ and ‘them’, and promotes irrational behaviour like defending those who punch their colleagues in the face.

But there is some truth in this idea. A didactic and intolerant tone has become increasingly common in many liberal campaigns. Cuntry Living provided a recent example when someone started a thread suggesting “banning cis-men”. This is the kind of uninspired, unengaged thought that feminist movements should be acting against. No particular group is exclusively guilty of this. Anti-feminists can be equally aggressive and intolerant. The labelling of feminist concerns as “femi-nazism” is just one recent example.

Whatever the cause, be it feminism, immigration or the role of welfare, we need to avoid this irrational herd-mentality. Critical thought, and the debate that democracy depends on for its existence, will cease to function properly. As a result healthy societal tensions will descend into cultural warfare. As Clarkson’s fans have discovered, if you are uncritically and unthinkingly loyal, you defend the indefensible and end up looking like a bit of a moron.

Olivia Merrett announced as Union President

0

The Oxford Union has announced on their website that Olivia Merrett is to take on the role of President for Trinity Term. Merrett, who had formerly been elected as Secretary for the term, is replacing Roberto Weeden-Sanz, who was found to have automatically resigned at the end of last term.

Weeden-Sanz was due to be President next term. However, after missing three meetings, the Union’s Senior Disciplinary Committee ruled that he had automatically resigned his position.

It was expected that Stuart Webber, Librarian for Trinity, would take up the position as Rule 38(b)(vi) states, “The President-Elect shall be succeeded by the Librarian, the Librarian-Elect shall be succeeded by the Treasurer, and the Treasurer-elect shall be succeeded by the Secretary.” Webber elected not to, choosing to remain as Librarian. However, it has been speculated that he will run for President at the end of Trinity. 

Webber commented to Cherwell, “In the face of difficult circumstances, I am pleased that Olivia is now the Union President. I am sure that she will do a fantastic job, and I very much look forward to serving as Librarian with her next term as part of such a dedicated committee.”

Zuleyka Shahin had also announced earlier that she has accepted the role of Treasurer at the Oxford Union next term. Shahin, who had previously been elected to Standing Committee, is replacing Antonia Trent. Nikolay Koshikov has replaced Olivia Merrett as Secretary. 

Trent had taken up the position of Treasurer on Saturday of 8th week but subsequently resigned after she was found to have also breached Union rules regarding meeting attendance.

It is understood that both Merrett and Shahin will take on the responsibilities of their roles immediately.

Shahin won 207 first preference votes in the election for Standing Committee, the highest of any candidate running for the committee. Shahin is thought to be the first trans person to hold an executive position at the Union and is also the OUSU Graduate Women’s Officer.

 

Time for Vinnie’s to enter the Twenty First Century

0

“Both women and men have equal opportunities to join sports-related drinking societies.” So argued an article on Cherwell.org last week, entitled ‘Why Vinnie’s should remain single-sex. This article runs the tired argument that has been floating around the sporting community ever since Vincent’s Club failed to gain sufficient support for removing their restriction on female membership. It argues that accepting women to Vinnie’s is not as simple as it seems, that there is more to it than voting for gender equality. A ‘Yes’ vote would actually ruin the “balance” of the gender-segregated “equivalent” clubs of Atalanta’s and Vincent’s.

The emotion felt by myself (and perhaps other sportswomenupon reading this was one of pure frustration. Facepalm momentImagine your frustration at Eduroam failing to connect for a fifth time in a row; that equals about a hundredth of my anger at the continued gender exclusion prevalent in the most important sporting society in Oxford.

And that is what Vinnie’s is. Let’s be frank here; Vinnie’s is the heart of the social side of Oxford sport. To correct the previous article, Vincent’s Club is not “a drinking club for male Oxford Blues”It is a centuries-old institution that offers the only space preserved for the sporting community to meet, mingle and discussAnd it is not solely for those who have achieved Blues; Vincent’s themselves have assured in a recent statement on this very vote that “members have always been elected for their all-round qualities: social, sporting and intellectual”. Synonymous with Vincent’s membership is supposed to be a level of personal quality and contribution to Oxford sport. Just only for men.

The reason I emphasise the unique importance that Vinnie’s holds in the sporting community of Oxford, and how membership of Vinnie’s is so much more than a place for male Blues to drink, is to refute the notion of Atalanta’s being an “equivalent” clubAtalanta’s admits any woman who has ever played a varsity match. Conversely, Vincent’s members undergo a selection process by the current committee for their all-round qualities: social, sporting, and intellectual.

Sporting achievement is preferable but not required. By not allowing women to become members of Vincent’s, sportswomen of Oxford are denied the opportunity to become members of a club that transcends merely sporting ability, based solely on their sex. This is ludicrous in 2015 when the true definition of equality is having equal opportunity and equal access. Vincent’s and Atalanta’s are not equivalent clubs. They serve different groups with different objectives. 

For those unfamiliar with the clubs, Vincent’s lies through the famous ‘Blue Door’ on King Edward Street. One buzzes through (of course members have a swipe card, and women have to state the name of the male member they are visiting) and travels up to a beautiful, and recently refurbished, clubhouse, complete with leather sofas, a bar and another floor of dining/meeting room space. Vinnie’s offers an extensive menu (including a wonderful £6 Rump Steak) for lunches and dinners for members and guests every day, as well as the option to book dinners, and use the bar facilities at will. That’s not mentioning the vast array of reciprocal clubs Vincent’s members have access to: 12 at the last count, from London to Johannesburg. Pretty snazzy stuff. 

Although we should by no means underplay how far Atalanta’s has come in recent years, due to the hard work of Oxford sportswomen, it is undeniably a far cry from “equivalent”. For startersAtalanta’s has no permanent clubhouse. On Thursday and Friday afternoons, the second floor of The Varsity Club (No. 9 to old hats) is turned into a dining space for Atalanta’s members and guests. Although crew dates and dinners can now be accommodated, with the lack of a permanent clubhouse, and such a huge disparity in club resources, one cannot compare the two. And there is little on the horizon to suggest that this will change. No promise of a clubhouse, no imminent increase in resources.

​So when it comes to arguments of ‘the same but separate’, it is all too easy to prove just how far Atalanta’s has to go to become anything similar to Vinnie’s. But more importantly, this misses the crucial point when it comes to arguments for gender segregation. In order for gender segregation not to be the equivalent of gender discrimination, there has to be free choiceWomen should be able to join Vinnie’s, and men, shock horror, Atalanta’s. 

And Atalanta’s has not done itself proud in this debate. This is meant as no personal attack on any member, or the committee, but the flaws in the ‘surveys’ conducted by Atalanta’s were astounding. Before the vote, Atalanta’s presented to resident Vinnie’s members the statistic that 89 per cent of Atalanta’s members wanted the clubs to remain distinct. This survey came after a discounted first survey, which presented 53 per cent in favour of women members, and was presented as a vote that represented the views of Oxford sportswomen. In fact, with only 91 registered members compared to the 1,114 sportswomen registered with Sport Federation this year, Atalanta’s membership makes up only a slither of Oxford sportswomen. And for the society to support a decision that has any kind of bias based on gender is even more baffling. These actions from Atalanta’s have stifled the real voice of Oxford sportswomen.

Lets get real and stop stating how nuanced and complicated this is. Yes, there are considerations to be made for the future of Atalanta’s, but that is far from the principal concern here.  That concern, plain and simple, is equality. Denying women the  opportunity to become a member of Vinnie’s is to discriminate against them purely on the basis of gender. No one should stand for that. Not a single Vinnie’s member, Atalanta’s member, or any sportsperson in Oxford. No more fudging this, it’s time for change.

Boat Race Weigh-In Photo Gallery

0

This morning, Cherwell‘s Sport Team headed over to the Royal Academy in central London for the 2015 Boat Race Weigh-In. Hosted by Claire Balding, this was a historic ceremony, occurring ahead of the first Women’s Boat Race on the Tideway. Cambridge weighed-in considerably heavier in both the men’s and the women’s events, just under a kilo ahead in the women’s and five in the men’s. Following years of dominance and a formidable season so far, Oxford go into the race looking to be firm favourites. But this year it’s all about this historic milestone for women’s sport and Cherwell will be there with every stroke.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11302%%[/mm-hide-text] 

As Clare Balding put it, “In this race, second really doesn’t count.”

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11297%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Making history 2015: the 2015 Newton Women’s Boat Race Blue boats.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11298%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Men and women dark Blues racing together for the first time.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11306%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Sean Bowden pays tribute to Dark Blue legend Dan Topolski.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11304%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Sun’s out, guns out for fiveman Jamie Cook.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11301%%[/mm-hide-text] 

OUBC President and four time Blue Constantine Louloudis, unfazed by the challenge ahead.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11300%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Anastasia Chitty of OUWBC and Caroline Reid of CUWBC ready to make history.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11305%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Michael Di Santo, one of four Harvard alumni in the Oxford Blue boat this year.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11299%%[/mm-hide-text] 

The closest Cambridge will get to lifting the trophy this year.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11303%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Success or defeat immortalised forever.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11307%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Light and Dark.

Vice-Chancellor named next President of NYU

0

Outgoing Vice-Chancellor of Oxford University Professor Andrew Hamilton will replace John Sexton as the next President of New York University (NYU). He is expected to take up the position in January 2016.

Andrew Hamilton became Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford in 2009, having previously served as Provost of Yale University.

Prior to this appointment, Hamilton had several academic posts as a chemist, including at Princeton University. He has also held professorships at the Universities of Pittsburgh and Yale. In 2004, Professor Hamilton was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society.

Hamilton’s time as Vice-Chancellor has not been without controversy. He has previously been criticised for his salary of £442,000, which is the third highest of any university boss in the country.

In 2013, Hamilton also spoke out against the current tuition fee rules in the UK, suggesting that top universities should be able to charge more to reflect the difference in the quality of teaching between institutions. Hamilton noted at the time that it costs £16,000 a year to teach a student in Oxford.

Speaking of his departure Hamilton said, “It is a huge privilege to serve this great university and will remain so for the rest of my time here. It is premature to talk of achievements and legacies – there is still much to be done on my watch – but I am delighted to have been part of a very exciting, dynamic and successful time in Oxford’s long and illustrious history.

“It won’t be easy to leave Oxford. I have learnt a great deal, and I’m sure the insights and experience gained here will stand me in good stead in my new role in New York.”

The committee in charge of nominating the next Vice-Chancellor is expected to put forward a name by early June.

Festival Blues

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11291%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11292%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11293%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11294%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11295%%[/mm-hide-text]

Bad Rose-Mance

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11287%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11288%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11289%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%11290%%[/mm-hide-text]

 

 

Review: Wild

0

★★★★☆

Four Stars

In 2005, Reese Witherspoon won an Oscar for her portrayal of June Carter in the Johnny Cash biopic Walk the Line. In Wild, she walks a line once again. A very long line. A very, very long line. A line over a thousand miles long, to be more precise. Based on Cheryl Strayed’s 2012 memoir, the film tracks Witherspoon – as Cheryl – taking on the infamously arduous yet breathtakingly rewarding Pacific Crest Trail, which stretches from the Mexican to the Canadian border of the USA. What’s she walking towards? What’s she walking away from? Why is she walking at all? We have to walk alongside her to find out.

In the opening in medias res scene, squeamish audience members were forced to turn their heads as Cheryl, bruised and battered, yanked off her bleeding big toenail. Casting her fate (and her shoes) to the wind, she beats on – determined, resolute, indomitable. Through flashbacks, we learn how Cheryl came to be so alone in her life, and how she found herself so alone in the middle of the wild. A downward spiral of infidelity and drug use on her part led to a painful divorce, but Cheryl is adamant that she can forgive herself. It’s a raw, vulnerable and exposed performance. At one point she is mistaken for a homeless drifter by a passing “Hobo Times” reporter. When she struggles to answer his questions about where she is living and what her job is, it dawns upon Cheryl – and us – that she really has nothing to lose.

As her ex-husband tells Cheryl that he is “sorry [she has] to walk a thousand miles just to…” he cannot help but trail off, unable to finish his sentence. That’s not too dissimilar from how the audience feel at times. We’re not exactly sure Cheryl knows why she has undertaken this tumultuous journey, but – through Witherspoon – we are able to accept that this is something she simply knows that she has to do. She claims at one point, her eyes clasped on the sublimity of her surroundings, “I’m lonelier in my real life than I am out here”. It’s perhaps the first time that Cheryl has truly been honest with us.

This is, without a doubt, a solo adventure. The only other role of significant screen time is mastered by Laura Dern as Cheryl’s mother Bobbi. It’s odd that Dern, only nine years Witherspoon’s senior, is cast as her mother, but then again Cheryl and Bobbi’s relationship is a bond more like sisterhood than mother and daughter. They even enroll at college at the same time (Cheryl having to awkwardly pass her giddy mother in the school corridors). Dern, playing a single mother who escaped the clutches of an abusive husband, supplies an impenetrable optimism in her fleeting but impressionable performance. Perhaps this is where Cheryl gets her determination from. Bobbi’s death hits Cheryl hard, and one of the most sensitive scenes sees Cheryl fall to her knees in the middle of the wild, cast up her head to the skies, and tell her mother directly that she misses her.

With each step Cheryl learns something new about herself. Out in the vast open and against the grandeur of nature, she realises her own insignificance in the world, and moreover the insignificance of mankind. Cheryl finds a kindred spirit in a wandering fox (a metaphor?) and through howling with wolves in the dead of night. Transience is a prevailing theme. The only evidence of Cheryl’s journey that she leaves behind are small notes in the form of laconic phrases and epigrams – comforting words of advice to any others who may seek the same quest of self-enlightenment that she has.

Some of the best moments of the film are when it allows us to stop and admire the beauty of the natural world (a credit to Yves Bélanger’s lens flare cinematography). It should be noted, however, that it’s not a picture especially flattering to men. We are made to feel apprehensive of every single male Cheryl encounters along the way just as uneasily as she does, and often – unfortunately – they are just as predatory and threatening as she fears. Wild is a loud shout for feminism – Cheryl epitomising a strong-willed and independent woman determined to take life into her own hands – and feet.