Monday 13th April 2026
Blog Page 420

University begins regular asymptomatic testing

0

The University of Oxford has announced that it will begin regular asymptomatic testing for students and on-site staff from the 12th of April.  Students that are able to return to Oxford for Trinity term will be expected to take two Lateral Flow Device (LFD) tests which will be available from their college upon arrival. After these initial tests, students are “strongly encouraged” to visit the sites twice a week for asymptomatic testing. 

Students will have access to two dedicated testing sites around Oxford, St Luke’s Chapel (Radcliffe Observatory Quarter) and the University Club (Mansfield Rd). Another site, the Richard Doll Building on the Old Road Campus will become operational on 26 April. Students can book the free tests two weeks in advance on the symptom-free testing for COVID-19 webpage and should aim to get tested on the same day each week. The result will take 30 minutes and will be communicated electronically.  

The updated guidance states: “Although testing is voluntary, we strongly encourage you to participate in the programme if you are required to be on site, whether for work or study.   This includes staff and students who have been vaccinated or have had COVID-19 more than 90 days ago.” 

“The risk of COVID-19 remains very high and it is essential that we as a community take all necessary precautions to stop the spread of the virus. Testing is a major component of this effort and we hope that the vast majority of eligible staff and students will join us in helping to stop the spread of COVID-19.   ” 

Students and staff who have symptoms of Covid-19 are reminded to instead book a PCR test through the Early Alert Service. If they receive a positive LFD test, they must self-isolate and also book a confirmatory test. 

Image Credit: Commonwealth Media Services / CC BY 2.0

BREAKING: Government confirms that students cannot return until 17th May

0

The UK government has officially confirmed that students not permitted to return under previous guidance will not be allowed to return until the 17th of May under updated guidance released via their website. This comes after mounting concerns following the delay of guidance for students, including backlash from the Oxford student body.

Students exempt under the previous rules remain exempt, and the government points out in the document that they “prioritised the return to in-person teaching and learning for students on courses which had to be delivered in-person and which supported the pipeline of future critical key workers” alongside “in-person teaching and learning for students who are studying practical or practice-based (including creative arts) subjects and require specialist equipment and facilities.”

The guidance states that all students unable to return currently will be allowed to return in step 3 of the roadmap, commencing on the 17th of May which “will leave a short window for in-person teaching and cocurricular activities to boost student engagement and employability before the end of the academic year.” This decision has been justified in-line with a “cautious approach to the easing of restrictions.” This is despite the document also acknowledging that “anecdotal evidence collated by SAGE suggests that there was limited evidence of transmission attributed to in-person teaching and learning environments.”

Yesterday JCR Presidents came together to launch the ‘Our Turn to Return’ campaign, urging the government to allow students to return to universities for the beginning of term. Templates for letters to MPs have also been circulated amongst the student body, alongside a petition set up by PresCom which has already received over 6000 signatures.

The University of Oxford has been contacted for comment.

Image Credit: Defence Images / CC BY-NC 2.0

13/4/21, 18:29 – some wording edited for clarity.

The Future of Tiger Woods’ career after serious car accident

0

On the 23rd of February 2021, golfing legend Eldrick Tont ‘Tiger’ Woods was involved in a serious car accident while driving solo on the outskirts of Los Angeles. While there was no evidence that Woods, who received a ticket for reckless driving after a minor accident in 2009 and pled guilty to driving under the influence in 2017, was inebriated, County Sheriff Alex Villanueva reported that it appeared that the star was speeding at the time of the crash.

At approximately 7 am in the morning, Woods’ SUV collided with a raised median, crossed two oncoming lanes of traffic, and struck a tree. The vehicle is thought to have rolled over several times before coming to rest on its side. This is known as a ‘rollover’ accident, which is more likely to result in fatal injuries than other types of crashes. The golf mogul’s injuries, while not fatal, were serious: they included open tibia and fibula fractures, which were compound (meaning that the bones broke through the skin) and comminuted (meaning that the bones were in fragments). After undergoing emergency surgery, which involved the insertion of rods, pins and screws into his legs, Woods is now in recovery.

While clearly fortunate to have escaped death, the ramifications of such serious injuries are of great concern, both for Woods himself and the golfing world at large. Widely regarded as the greatest golf player of his generation, his dazzling array of accolades include eighty-two PGA tour wins, five Masters Tournament victories (the latest of which was in 2019), and six-hundred and eighty-three weeks ranked world number one. Woods, age forty-five, placed his professional career on indefinite hold after a fifth spinal surgery in December 2020, and sports commentators fear that the debilitating injuries from his car crash may catalyse his retirement.

In a statement released on Twitter, however, Woods thanked the medical professionals who took care of him at the Harbour-UCLA Medical Centre and Cedars-Sinai Medical Centre, and assured fans that he is ‘recovering at home’ and ‘working on getting stronger every day’. As of yet, he has given no indication that he is considering retirement. One of the more optimistic commentators, former PGA Tour player Bill Mallon expressed hope for the star’s return to professional tournaments in an interview with BBC golf correspondent Iain Carter. Emphasising that Woods received immediate treatment and did not suffer from infection, Mallon estimated that his fractures could heal in as little as six weeks, and posited that the star would return to professional golf in a year.

As the world of golf awaits Woods’ recovery and, hopefully, return to competitive play, let us hope that both the star and his fans use this unfortunate event as an opportunity for reflection on the importance of vehicular safety and the discomfiting fact that injury can derail even the most promising of sporting careers. Currently still immobile, we hope to see the golf icon puttering around again soon and, eventually, resuming his former prowess on the grass.

Image Credit: Keith Allison via Wikimedia Commons

 

BREAKING: Closure of Oxford Fever confirmed

0

Fever, one of Oxford’s leading nightclubs, is set to close permanently. The popular late bar and nightclub was located on 13-15 Magdalen Street and has been closed since the first national lockdown last March. A spokesperson for Fever in Oxford told Cherwell: “We can confirm that the lease on property has expired and returned to the landlord, meaning it will no longer operate as Fever.  Where possible, we have redeployed our team to other sites.”

Cirkus, another nightclub venue on George Street, will also not reopen after lockdown restrictions are eased. On March 30 2021, the company, Cirkus Bars Ltd, was dissolved following a Gazette notice for compulsory strike-off, filed in November. 

The announcements of both Fever and Cirkus shutting their doors, follow the recent closures of other music and club venues across the city with both Emporium/Basement and Cellar closing permanently in 2019. After a petition to save The Wheatsheaf, one of Oxford’s last live gig venues, it has been announced that the planning application to convert the space into student flats has been withdrawn.

Speaking about the closures, Joshua Roche, Event Manager at Varsity Events, told Cherwell: “I think generally it’s unfortunate regardless of who’s running which night. It’s nice for students to have an option of where to go and it creates a bit of variety in the city because each venue had its own feel to it and people went to different venues for different reasons. So it’s a real shame. Unfortunately, it’s been a tough year for everyone and it’s just one of those things that has happened.” 

He added: “We’ve got to make do with what’s around now and we will still provide a fantastic night life for students with what we have available.” 

The director of Cirkus Bars Ltd has been contacted for comment. 

Image Credit: Luca Volpi/CC BY-SA-3.0

Oxford University Music Faculty responds to media coverage

The Music Faculty offered an explanation to students about curriculum reforms on 6 April 2021, following media coverage in The Telegraph and Daily Mail. They believe communications between Faculty Board members have been “represented in misleading fashion” by the Daily Mail. 

The Telegraph published an article on 27 March which details efforts to “’decolonise’ the curriculum”. It discloses the wishes of staff “to address this ‘white hegemony’, including rethinking the study of musical notation because it is a ‘colonialist representational system’”. 

The Daily Mail also covered, and have now altered, the story. The initial article detailed Faculty proposals for “scrapping” sheet music, which has now been removed. This article has been condemned by the Oxford University Music Faculty for representing the curriculum changes “in [a] misleading fashion”. The Faculty holds that the coverage follows “a Freedom of Information request to the Music Faculty in mid-January” by The Telegraph

In a statement released on 31 March 2021, the Faculty explained that they “are also enhancing our students’ opportunities to study a range of non-western and popular music from across the world” whilst “retaining — and in no way diminishing — the Faculty’s traditional excellence in the critical analysis, history, and performance of a broad range of western art music.” 

An open letter has been written by students to the faculty about the media coverage and statement. The letter seeks greater communication to students following the media coverage of course changes. It states that “the Faculty’s job is to its members, not the press or the public”. The letter also argues the statement put out by the faculty shows “no intention of changing the very cultures that have continued their exclusionary practices for so long.”

The Faculty has said that “the changes to [their] curriculum contribute to that process; undoubtedly, there will be more work to do, and we will look forward to continuing to engage with students in that ongoing process.” The Faculty has proposed changes to the undergraduate curriculum which follows consultations about the course since the Black Lives Matter movement in June 2020. The faculty have communicated that “over the past few years [it] has sought to diversify its curriculum”.  

Ella Marshall-Shepherd, a postgraduate music student at Oxford University, told Cherwell: “The need to decolonise Oxford’s music curriculum is long overdue. Many students (as well as several staff members) are consequently baffled at the culture of wilful ignorance and indignant resistance to suggestions of change.” 

The Music Faculty have taken action by seeking to “appoint an associate professor in popular music” as well as making curriculum changes, yet to receive approval from the University. The Faculty’s proposed “structural changes” to the curriculum includes making the Keyboard Skills an “opt-out” module for Prelims students. It also would make Foundations in the Study of Music compulsory in “a significant contribution to the decolonising and the rebalancing of the curriculum.”

The Daily Mail have been contacted for comment. 

Oxford Green Party launch manifesto for local elections

The Oxfordshire Green Party launched their manifesto for the upcoming local elections in a virtual event on April 12th. Local elections for the city and district councils will take place on May 6th.

In the online event, candidates Chris Jarvis and Dr Dianne Regisford outlined their plans for the role Green councillors will play in the Conservative-led County Council, and Labour-led City Council. Mr Jarvis criticised the city’s Labour councillors for “acting like Tories”, and said the Greens would hold both parties to account.

The party’s 2021 manifesto, ‘A Real Green New Deal for Oxford’, consists of six main target areas. The party aims to provide affordable quality homes, introduce sustainable solutions for transport, rebuild the economy after the pandemic, and tackle the root causes of health inequalities in order to ‘level-up’ health across the city. They are also committed to protecting and supporting nature, and ensuring that the council follows through on their policy to go ‘net-zero’ by 2030. 

Jonathan Bartley, co-leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, praised the Oxford Green party for “offering a whole package to local government”. He expressed hopes for the Greens to be running the council in Oxford in the future but said the party has to “work ten times harder” as a result of the base vote barrier and people not believing Green Party members can get elected. Mr Bartley emphasised the importance of Green party members “making a difference to peoples lives on an individual basis” and “transforming lives on the ground”. 

Mr Jarvis, candidate for Iffley Fields and St Mary’s, said the three main issues the party aims to tackle are housing, the climate crisis and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. He spoke of plans for a council-backed letting agency, the party’s aim to invest in renewable energy by amending the local plan and his desire to increase public ownership of public resources. He said the party would ensure that “people and the planet are put first” and that they are “constantly representing the city in its full diversity”. 

Dianne Regisford, a recent PhD graduate at Oxford Brookes University and candidate running for University Parks and Holywell Ward, spoke about her campaign’s grassroots focus and her slogan “Connecting Caring Communities”. Speaking of Oxford’s large student population, she emphasised her desire to “cultivate a culture of inquiry” into why students drop out of education and remove the “divide between the town and the gown”. 

Ms Regisford addressed concerns about student feelings of isolation, the vaccine rollout, housing, low traffic neighbourhoods and green spaces. She also spoke of her hopes to explore “how to create an equitably resourced post for diversity officer” and “reimagine the relationship between the people and those in authority”. 

The event was hosted by Green Group Council Leader, Cllr Craig Simmons, who concluded: “Green politics means doing things differently.”

Two student candidates are also running for local election. Kelsey Trevett, is a St Clements candidate and a first year PPE student at the University of Oxford, and Rosie Rawle, a PhD student at Queen Mary University of London and Co-Chair of the Young Green Party, is standing in Donnington city ward and St Clements County Division. 

Oxford JCRs launch campaign for the return of students

0

As uncertainty surrounding when students will be able to return to university continues, Oxford University students have started to campaign for increased clarity from the government. Our Turn to Return, a campaign launched by college JCRs, is campaigning for all students to return to university from the beginning of next term.

The government had promised to update universities and the public by the end of the Easter holidays about when students on non-practical courses would be able to return. While Prime Minister Boris Johnson confirmed that restrictions would begin to ease from April 12th with the opening of non-essential retail, theme parks and zoos, no information about universities was given. The University of Oxford announced on its website that guidance for non-practical courses may be delayed until after the vacation.

Nadia Hassan, President of the Trinity College JCR, started a petition to the government in order to bring attention to the frustrations felt by many students. She told Cherwell: “Considering the anger and upset that many students are feeling across I thought it would be the best way of uniting students under one cause and getting the national student voice heard”.

Ms Hassan continued: “Alike to the reopening of schools, universities should be prioritised because our education is essential. Why can our younger peers unite with their friends and resume their studies in-person while students in higher education are forced to remain and continue their studies online at home? Countless studies have shown how remote learning has had a negative impact on students’ mental health and wellbeing so it’s not illogical to conclude that students are better off studying at university alike to their younger peers in school.”

Since opening on April 12th, the petition has gained over 4000 signatures and has become one of the highest trending petitions on the website. The government responds to petitions which gain over 10,000 signatures, and those which amass over 100,000 will be considered for a debate in Parliament.

The petition calls for “all students to return at the start of the Summer term”. Before COVID restrictions meant that most students would be unable to return to university, there had been plans to stagger when students would be allowed to return to campus. Students on practical courses were allowed to return a week earlier than those who were not. Currently, undergraduate students on practical courses are able to return to Oxford from April 17th. Though those on non-practical courses are still waiting to hear when they can return.

Ms Hassan told Cherwell that staggering return dates for the Summer term would be unnecessary. “Most students [returned] during the last lockdown and a lot have returned for this term in different universities who interpret the guidance leniently. It is thus logical to state that this would not be a mass migration movement. We also have testing in place alike to schools, so we can minimalize infections in that way.”

Isobel Cook, President of the New College JCR, told Cherwell on behalf of Our Turn to Return: “At an earlier date, a staggered return may have been possible. However, the government has left the decision so incredibly late that, given the recent easing of restrictions in all other areas of society, the only fair thing to do is let students return for the beginning of their term. At the moment, these students, who have been made to wait for so long, are being made to feel like nothing more than pawns in a political game.”

“If students continue to study remotely at home, many will effectively have lost 1/3 of their degree to the pandemic. Whilst we recognise the sacrifices that have had to be made at all levels of society due to Covid-19, if the government is truly committed to prioritising education then it would not neglect University students in this way. The government has made the decision to re-open non-essential retail, as well as theme parks zoos and salons – is the education we are going into so much debt for really less important than all of these?” she continued.

Ms Cook also told Cherwell how students can help campaign to be allowed to return: “Sign the petition, share the link, follow the Facebook page, and spread the word in any way you can! You could share the petition with friends from other Universities, student leaders or societies, family members, or school group chats. You can also support the cause by writing to your MPs to encourage them to put pressure on Minister Donelan, and by contacting the media to increase the visibility of the campaign. Any efforts will be appreciated!”

A spokesperson from the Department for Education told Cherwell: “This has been an incredibly difficult time for students, and Government is committed to getting all students back into university as soon as the public health situation allows. Students on practical and creative courses started returning from the 8th of March, and we will be reviewing options for the timing of the return of all remaining students by the end of the Easter holidays. Decisions will take into account the need to protect progress across the wider roadmap out of the pandemic, including the spread of the virus in communities and pressures on the NHS.”

Image: SJPrice via pixabay.com

The Role of a Lifetime? It’s Never Too Late

0

While actors profit from an ability to be malleable, it is often the case that they are stuck playing the roles they are ‘right for’. Or so it seemed. Sir Ian McKellen being cast as Hamlet at 81 proves that fitting the actor to the part is a process easily reversed.

McKellen, one of the veteran theatre greats, said in a 2017 interview that he’d ‘probably’ never act in Shakespeare again. King Lear had been his crowning achievement: a world tour of recurring violent deaths and anguished howling, to bid adieu to a decades-long partnership with the Bard. A member of the RSC since 1974 (and making his Shakespeare debut nearly a decade previously), McKellen has given us Romeo, Richard III, and a chillingly vulnerable Macbeth. He has also played Hamlet before, at the tender age of 31.

Now, with theatres throwing open their doors, the rejuvenated not-so-juvenile Hamlet will hit the Theatre Royal Windsor this summer, directed by Sean Mathias. But how will this age-blind production work? Will McKellen attune himself to the mannerisms of a younger man? Or will Hamlet be absorbed into the likeness of a legendary actor? How will the Prince’s turbulent relationships with his elders play out? Do any of these questions matter? Hamlet’s age is often debated: some are firmly on team ‘angsty university student’, but the majority go by the evidence of the gravedigger scene and will calmly tell you that he is 30. It’s worth remembering that Shakespeare wrote for the talents of his acting troupe and Hamlet was a role for Richard Burbage, aged 32 when the play premiered.

In many ways, Hamlet’s youth is vital, dividing him from the older figures in his life and rendering his ontological meditations all the more disquieting. McKellen himself described him as ‘a boy who knows exactly what has to be done but lacks the manly resources to do it.’ However, he added, ‘Shakespeare’s heroes all go on such painful journeys to maturity.’ This is exactly it. Maturity is not necessarily determined by age. The role of Hamlet has been hailed as the most challenging: an actor’s greatest test, less a part, and more a life experience. It has been tackled by stalwart thespians and fresh faces of television alike. Let’s not forget that Hamlet himself is an actor. Playing a man obsessed with acting obscures the identity of the ‘real character’, and complicates the very concept of theatre. This is the beauty of the play. It’s five acts about acting – and if anyone has experience in this field, it’s McKellen.

But does age-blind casting actually make a difference to the story?  Age profoundly shapes what we can say about our experiences, capabilities and relationships. An older Hamlet is in danger of becoming dissociated from his textual origins. Watching an octogenarian interact with the ghost of his father, we might be more prone to see a conversation between equals. The voice of an older man delivering each soliloquy intrinsically possesses a kind of wisdom. As we imagine a more senior actor clutching a skull and raving about death, the scene becomes significantly more morbid. But haven’t adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays long thrown off the shackles of age, race, and gender?

In Olivier’s film version, he cast an actress half his age to play his mother. A 2010 production at the Bristol Old Vic had Romeo and Juliet as two geriatrics in their retirement home. A Midsummer Night’s Dream’s Puck could just as easily be played by a 90-year-old woman as by the typically bare-chested, glassy-eyed young man. Shakespeare is diverse and adaptable. It’s how you can flick from a Victorian Measure for Measure to a camp 80s Much Ado to the latest RSC Hamlet, with Paapa Essiedu the first black actor to play the role at the company. It’s how the play has made the screen, the opera, been endlessly parodied, turned into video games and memorialised in Disney canon as The Lion King. Hamlet was first played by a woman in 1796. 1921 saw silent film actress Asta Nielsen star as a cross-dressing female Prince of Denmark. The play’s the thing: a springboard from which to launch in all directions.

However, blind casting is a different kind of adaptation. Not addressing McKellen’s age means a whole dimension falls away from the story. Surely nothing can ever be completely ‘blind’? Every time Sherlock Holmes and James Bond are recast, new debates spring up. Discrimination in the acting community is sadly ever-present. Actresses turning 40 should not have to fear being told to get Botox, or receive three scripts in one year inviting them to play a witch (the latter happened to Meryl Streep). Blind casting ultimately depends on the role. Of course, the stage is a place for representation and diversity. But how is this possible if remaining fixedly ‘blind’ means a refusal to acknowledge age, race, and gender? Such important elements of identity should not be swept under the carpet.

Perhaps we shouldn’t consider what will be lost or gained, but what will be different. I won’t pretend I’m not wary. But Hamlet’s function in his play is entirely different to King Lear’s function in his. Lear’s collapse into grief is public and exposed. Hamlet isolates himself; he creeps on the fringes; he is not anchored to events but withdraws from them. I would hope to see McKellen capture the character’s dancing quality: mercurial, impulsive, yet bizarrely stagnant. Hamlet is a mess of paradoxes, like all of us. Anyone could take his place (as critic William Hazlitt said two hundred years ago, ‘It is we who are Hamlet’). He is a character that transcends dimensions. The more diversity in the actors who play him, the more ways we can watch our experience as humans play out on stage. Shakespeare’s characters are what can be made of them. I’m excited to see what happens.

Image credit: StarGlade via Pixabay.

Everything wrong with social media infographics: an informative thread

0

In the past year, we’ve all seen it too often: terrible tragedy in the news, followed by a host of social media PowerPoint presentations about the social issues surrounding the event and why people should care. Tragedy, Social Media Outrage, Repeat. Like clockwork, the process repeats itself, following the steady hum of the news cycle.  In the past year, these infographics have given rise to several social media accounts such as @shityoushouldcareabout and @feminist which have grown to millions of followers. They provide bitesize information cards to news and social issues, both local and global. But amidst the COVID-19 crisis, we’ve got another crisis: an information overload.

This issue isn’t binary. These infographics can partially be worthwhile as well. For international issues, Instagram infographics give a platform to topics that aren’t receiving Western media coverage. In 2020, this was particularly instrumental for movements such as ‘End SARS’ in Nigeria which calls for the disbanding of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad, a notorious unit of the Nigerian police with a long record of abuses, as well as the Farmers Protest in India – an ongoing mobilisation against three controversial farm bills which were passed by the Indian Parliament in September 2020. In these cases, infographics help break down what exactly the issue is and how people can directly contribute to the movements. 

Especially for people not familiar with the local geopolitics of a region, the graphics have merit. They give you a simple ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘when’, ‘where’, ‘why’ breakdown followed by a ‘how you can help’. And, on a local scale, it empowers individuals to advocate for issues they find important. Anyone with enough followers is able to spotlight issues that matter to them or share fundraising links and open letter drafts. One might say social media even makes activism accessible.

So what, then, is the issue with infographics? I would argue the problem is three-fold: oversimplification of complex issues, a rise in ‘slacktivism’, and activism fatigue that results from information overload.

Last summer, for instance, Eve Ewing, a writer and sociologist who has researched racism and social inequality, encouraged users to be conscious of information consumed on Instagram. “Graphics like this can be a helpful teaching tool, but some of the ‘racial justice explainer’ posts that go viral grossly oversimplify complex ideas in harmful or misleading ways or flat-out misstate facts,” she wrote. “[They] are not attributed to any transparent person, people, or organization who can be held accountable for errors and draw on the work of scholars and activists who go uncredited.” This is because ‘explainer’ posts particularly rely on the simplification of complex histories and ideas and usually derive from dense academia. The information, therefore, goes through a process of generalisation to fit the facts into the 10-slide Instagram carousel. This alongside the use of eye-catching fonts, backgrounds and visuals sometimes have the potential to trivialise serious topics such as racism or sexism.

Even with the ‘StopAsianHate’ posts, Taylor Noelle, a Filipina woman, for instance, shared a post explaining, “You can’t ‘shop Asian owned businesses’ out of Xenophobia and ‘follow Asian creators’ and ‘celebrate Asian joy’ when these things, while being side effects of racism, are not the cause.” These infographics, because they lack depth, are usually unable to effectively address a majority of these issues. Furthermore, because of the viral nature of these posts, it means that this oversimplification can misinform millions of people who may consume the content. 

But infographics also generate slacktivism, which gives you the warm fuzzy feeling of doing something and creating change, whilst in reality not much is being done. In fact, Urban Dictionary defines slacktivism as “the self-deluded idea that by liking, sharing, or retweeting something you are helping out”. 

Therefore slacktivism has begun to create certain contentment around activism whereby people are unable to take the next step to translate their social media into action. Instead of having difficult conversations with friends and family about race, for instance, people have become complacent with simply sharing a black square captioned ‘#BlackOutTuesday’. 

It has led to the rise of performative activism, a social phenomenon whereby people feel compelled to reshare social justice content in order to maintain optics of their supposed allyship with certain marginalised communities. In reality, the purpose for resharing is self-serving. 

A side effect of slacktivism is that it has also somewhat glamourised what protesting at the grassroots level looks like. In reality, organising is a tedious and emotionally exhausting process that requires fighting for basic human rights in a political system that is reluctant to change. In fact, activist Nupol Kiazolu, president of Black Lives Matter New York, called #BlackOutTuesday “frustrating” and “counterproductive”. She is one of many activists who believes that it is important for real and tangible civic engagement to be built beyond just the popular, easier “alternative”. 

And all of this culminates in activism fatigue or social justice burnout: a feeling of exhaustion that comes with having to emotionally invest yourself in a variety of causes. When the rate of activism feels like it’s not bringing with it a steady stream of progress or when people are constantly being exposed to new harsh depressing content, there is a lack of motivation and passion to actually fight for social justice issues. Online platforms only heighten this by clouding your mental sphere with massive amounts of info.

Ultimately, advocacy is designed to address systemic issues. While infographics are surely a means to inform and spread awareness, they do not translate to tangible impact. In conjunction with activities such as protests, letter writing, advocacy, and more, they serve a purpose. But alone? They don’t get a double-tap from me.

Image Credit: Creative Commons – “BBC: Social Media Infographic 2” by Jamie Sneddon is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The Uyghur genocide and global inaction: Responsibility to Protect

0

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine is a global political commitment embraced by the UN General Assembly. It serves as a basis for collective action against genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Crucially, the R2P dictates that a state’s primary obligation is to protect its citizens. In cases where a state fails to uphold this obligation, it loses the right of sovereignty. The international community must then fulfil their secondary responsibility and intervene.* 

With this in this mind, one only needs a brief contextualisation of what is occurring in Xinjiang to recognise that the situation is a textbook R2P case. Comprising just 1% of China’s population, the Muslim, Turkic-speaking ethnic minority of the Uyghurs have long been subjected to a series of highly repressive policies, all operating under the guise of counterterrorism. What began as mass surveillance, prohibition from teaching the Uyghur language, and the expunction of ancient mosques, soon escalated into the active detainment of the Uyghur population in internment camps, euphemistically titled ‘re-education facilities’. Chinese authorities are not only failing to protect their population from genocidal impulses, they are actively enforcing policies that nurture such atrocities. 

I am not writing this piece with the intent of proving that the Xinjiang region is in urgent need of intervention from the global community. I believe that the case for this is most evident. Rather, I seek to answer the question of why nothing has happened thus far. The problem is not that government officials are unaware of the severity of the situation at hand: back in 2019, UN ambassadors of 23 European countries released a letter to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) condemning China over the detention of Muslims in Xinjiang. And so, when this population is so desperately in need, why is nothing happening? 

The crux of the matter is simple: the R2P doctrine crumbles when held against powerful countries. China, one amongst a host of global superpowers, exists in a ‘buffer zone’ from humanitarian intervention. To take action against the Chinese government is simply undesirable to the global community, over fears that it may lead to adverse economic consequences for major powers also. Even the US, who under the Trump administration had made clear their autarky from the country by fuelling the recent Sino-US trade war, depend heavily on China for low-cost consumer goods. The decision to intervene is clearly grounded in mutual self-interest, exposing how the R2P warps humanitarian intervention into something distinctly political. When communities are being exposed to such terror by their own state, we have an obligation to move beyond the politics. 

On top of this, hegemonic powers such as China will never face a truly universal international response, for their economic clout grants them significant impunity. Indeed, just four days after the UNHRC council received a letter of Chinese condemnation from European countries, 37 other countries signed a letter countering the censure. By and large, these countries are not supporting China for moralistic purposes. Rather, their support of such abhorrent policies is largely an attempt at self-preservation. Under the guise of ‘aid and assistance’, China has built up countless alliances with smaller countries – creating a dependency complex. In doing so, they have configured an entire band of countries who are forced into loyalty. Take Pakistan, for example, whose economic future is largely conditioned by the Chinese-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a collection of under-construction infrastructure valued at $10 billion. Do we truly expect Pakistan, along with a host of other countries whose stability hinges upon Chinese economic aid and assistance, to stand against the state? A unified global response is but a mere dream. 

Chinese authorities can thus continue with their systematic abuse of the Uyghur community without fear of any substantial condemnation – their sovereignty is unfettered. The doctrine will never be a global norm. Instead, it will only ever be enforced upon smaller, weaker states where intervention is a hassle-free process. In this way, the R2P actively works to reinforce structural inequalities of global hegemonic power: granting global ‘superpowers’ effective impunity against intervention, while leaving behind vulnerable and poorer states where claims to sovereignty are significantly overridden. This result is not necessarily a calculated or premeditated outcome of the R2P doctrine. However, it is certainly an inevitable by-product of a global political commitment which fails to recognise that inequality is embedded into the very framework of the international community.  

We must continue to negotiate and work towards a redefined sense of humanitarian intervention, one that breaks away from hegemonic structures of power rather than reinforcing them. The internal community must also face up to the reality that the hierarchical global system that currently exists means that a universal applicability of intervention will never be truly universal. The R2P doctrine has failed to protect the Uyghur population in Xinjiang and, if serious reforms are not made, future vulnerable populations may face a similar fate. 

*Here, intervention is not interchangeable with military involvement. Rather, the process of preventing mass atrocities extends to a whole continuum of obligations, insisting that a host of less intrusive measures (for example, trade sanctions) need be considered before the more coercive and intrusive ones are applied.

Image credit: Malcolm Brown via Wikimedia & Creative Commons