Monday 28th July 2025
Blog Page 832

Eggseter College cracks world record

0

Exeter College broke a Guinness World Record last week by having the most people ever to simultaneously dip toast soldiers in eggs.

The record was cracked in the hall at Exeter at 8.30am last Friday. 183 people, including staff, fellows and some students, sat down to jointly dip more soliders in eggs than ever before.

The attempt beat a previous record of 178. All participants had two toasted soldiers, which they had to dip twice each in the soft boiled eggs before eating them.

Dr Barnaby Taylor, the college’s sub-rector, counted down to the dunking, which was overseen by officials from the Guinness Book of World Records.

The event was organised with the British Egg Industry Council to celebrate British Egg Week and World Egg day, which fell on Friday 13 October.

A representative of the BEIC told Cherwell: “We wanted to commemorate the occasion in a very British location, so where better than Oxford University.

“We selected Exeter college, in part for the stunning dining room and helpful staff who were willing to accommodate us, but also for the opportunity for another egg pun – Eggseter!”

Exeter first-year Harry Anderton said: “It was strange how precise it had to be.”

Another Exeter student, Kate McDermott, commented: “After struggling with the Norrington for a fair few years, this is exactly the kind of formal recognition the College deserves. Floreat Eggson.”

Love Oxland: ‘I was surprised when Fred turned on a puppy and aggressively kicked it’

0

Izzy Agerbak

Second Year, PPE

Worcester

Naïve young Izzy expected a wholesome afternoon in the pub, sipping on cider, with good chat flowing. Alas, this was not the case. After a pleasant greeting and a few minutes chatting, I was taken by surprise when my date turned on a puppy and aggressively kicked it. Obviously, I was horrified (should have called the RSPCA on reflection). After this, I started feeling a bit weird about the vibes and began downing drinks to numb the trauma. To end a nightmarish afternoon, I expelled the contents of my stomach all over my date, who had to call paramedics, although honestly I was just glad that it cut short my conversation with Mr Animal-Beater.

What was your first impression?

Smiley but a teensy bit vanilla

Personality?

He helped me concoct the above tale, so obviously pretty darn witty

Any awkward moments?

Dog-kicking aside, we are very smooth, cool individuals, so really no awkwardness at all

 

Fred Dimbleby

Second Year, History

Keble

As I stood on the street outside the pub, smelling the acrid whiffs from many years of beer disposal, I wondered whether this was the right setting for romance. But de- spite some confusion about where we were meeting, I was quickly able to escape the stink. After buying beers, we went to one of the tables and rapidly broke through the strangeness of our Cherwell- sponsored love lives. We chatted about our upbringings, Oxford ste- reotypes, and even formulated an artificial date to put in the paper. Perhaps a more exciting date than the reality, but I am glad that we did not have to experience our fake date and instead had a lovely chat together.

What was your first impression?

I didn’t get stood up!

Personality?

Sweet, kind, with strong humour

Any awkward moments?

A sweaty mutual friend arriving at the end of the date and insisting on taking photos of us

Female college footballers “don’t need referees”

0

Oxford University Association Football Club (OUAFC) prioritises referees for mens’ college football matches over womens’, a leaked email has revealed.

In an email sent to college football team captains, OUAFC’s Sabbatical Officer stated that referees will be allocated to individual games by hierarchy. Both men’s JCR and MCR games are now given automatic preference over women’s matches.

Senior association official Louise Nolan, President of the OUAFC women’s committee, has downplayed the move, saying “women’s college football doesn’t need referees.”

Speaking on the policy, Nolan told Cherwell: “We don’t play at a level where we are aggressive and dishonest; we play for enjoyment and don’t need a professional person in an unbiased position making decisions which are disputable.”

The Association currently has a pool of around ten referees to choose from every week. It has been claimed that women’s matches are a lower priority because they are often played at the weekend, whereas men traditionally play on weekdays.

The OUAFC Sabbatical officer who sent the email, Omar Mohsen, told Cherwell: “I can only speculate as to why the current order of priority exists, but one reason for why men’s JCR matches are more likely to be assigned referees is that they are spread across the course of a week, whereas women’s matches all usually take place on Sundays.

“Encouragingly though, the weekend of the 28-29 of October will see the first time that a full division of women’s football will be professionally refereed.

“This is a step in the right direction, and hopefully a landmark moment in women’s football reaching equal status to men’s football in Oxford.”

The former captain of Worcester College women’s football club, Caitlin Kelly, said: “Luckily for us at Worcester the women’s football club is highly respected by the college community, and the mens’ teams.

“This means we are often able to find male players to voluntarily referee for us.

“However, we really should not have to rely on the goodwill of our friends to be able to run a football match that has an equal status to a mens’ match, and self-refereeing has occasionally caused disputes in match situations.”

The Social Secretary of the Hertford-Keble women’s football club (‘Hertble’), Annie Simm, told Cherwell: “It’s unbelievable that women’s firsts come so low down the pecking order for referees, and disgraceful that women’s football is generally categorised lower than the men’s.

“This is a wider issue of blatant discrimination. It’s what prevents new interest, and antiquated attitudes need to change.”

Why does Oxford need a zero-emission zone?

Last week, Oxford City Council announced plans to enact the world’s first “zero-emission zone” (ZEZ) around Oxford city centre by 2020, hoping to further extend the region in coming years.

The proposals come as a response to the illegally high levels of toxic NO2 found in many of the UK’s most populated cities. Oxfordshire Air Quality (OAQ) highlights that “twice as many people currently suffer from asthma today, compared with 30 years ago,” with a Public Health England study also estimating that illegal levels of NO2 have contributed to 5.3% of all deaths for over-25s in the UK. The Committee of the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants clarifies that “it is not plausible to think of the figure of ‘attributable’ deaths as enumerating an actual group of people whose death is attributable to air pollution alone i.e. the victims of outdoor air pollution” – rather a contribution that accelerates existing illness as well as affecting a much larger demographic through generally reducing wellness and increasing susceptibility.

Continued inhalation of NO can cause inflammation in the lining of the lungs, leaving one susceptible to an array of respiratory diseases and eventually wearing down the lungs’ function.

NO2 is formed once the nitrogen and oxygen in the air react under the high temperature inside an internal combustion engine. NO2 can decompose to NO, more commonly known as “laughing gas”, once it leaves the engine and interacts with sunlight.

The European Union set a legal limit for emissions each – levels must not exceed 40 micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3) of NO2 at on average. As of June 2017, of the 70 locations where Oxford City Council monitor levels of air pollution, 17 lie over the EU’s legal limit.

High Street, the area targeted for the first stages of the ZEZ plans, had an average of 47 µg/m3. St Clements Street was the worst offender with NO2 levels at 61 µg/m3, though this was a decrease from 85 µg/m3 just five years ago.

Oxford’s council have said that the ZEZ would ban “petrol and diesel cars, taxis, light commercial vehicles and busses”, with hopes to “cut the nitrogen dioxide level in Oxford city centre’s most polluted street, George Street, by 74% by 2035.”

Levels of NO2 have been steadily declining due to the development of better catalytic converters, and the steady rise of electric cars – with levels about a quarter of what they were in 1970. However, many urban areas in the UK still lie far above the 40 µg/m3 limit. In 2016, government monitoring stations found that about 40% of local authorities breached the legal limit. This prompted the government to introduce an immediate implementation fund worth £255 million “to address poor air quality in the shortest time possible.” This implementation fund is also partly responsible for funding Oxford City Council’s efforts.

The introduction of a zero-emission zone in Oxford is a bold initiative that serves as an example to other cities. On balance, Oxford has the resources and geography to enact a ZEZ with the least amount of significant adverse effects.

Air quality affects us every day. Hopefully, taking quick and decisive steps to combat air pollution can lead the way to tackle similar issues such as global warming, whose effects are considered less immediate and seem far removed from our everyday experience.

You can find the current levels of air pollution in Oxford here.

Investigation launched into Union president’s alleged rule breach

0

A formal investigation has been launched into the allegedly illegitimate decision by Oxford Union President Chris Zabilowicz to expand the Union’s Standing Committee.

A Senior Disciplinary Committee (SDC) – the Union’s second-highest disciplinary body – is to be convened within the next several weeks to investigate claims that Zabilowicz breached Union rules by allowing two unelected members to be appointed to senior committee positions.

Due to changes brought in under the presidency of Michael Li, the Standing Committee was set to increase from five to seven members, with an amendment stipulating that the new rule would take effect following the Michaelmas Term 2017 elections.

After becoming President, Zabilowicz passed an interpretative ruling bringing forward the expansion to the close of Trinity term, which allowed Kaleem Hawa and Grace Joel to be appointed to the committee, the latter of whom had previously failed in her attempt to be elected.

In an official notice issued at the time justifying the decision Zabilowicz stated: “Although the second schedule states that the first election affected will be that in Michaelmas Term 2017, it also states that the Rules change shall ‘take effect immediately’… I have therefore decided to issue a binding Ruling that this Rules change is now in effect… There should now be seven Elected members of the Standing Committee.”

A subsequent notice calling for applicants for the position was displayed on the Union board during 9th Week of Trinity for four days, before an Emergency Committee Meeting lasting just six minutes on 26 June saw Hawa and Joel appointed to the Committee by its existing members, including Zabilowicz and other senior officers.

Cherwell spoke to several influential figures within the Union who claimed that a process is now underway to assemble those eligible to sit on the SDC which will scrutinise Zabilowicz’s ruling.

As soon as a date is agreed upon, former Union officials – at least one of whom is supposed to be a qualified lawyer – will assemble to hear the case.

The dates on which the hearings will occur will be decided by the SDC members themselves, but constitutionally must take place within 28 days of the official summons.

The decision to appoint two unelected members is reportedly highly likely to be struck down, with Hawa and Joel to then be removed from the Standing Committee, according to numerous sources within the Union.

Allegedly, Zabilowicz is unlikely to face further disciplinary proceedings himself as it will be near impossible to prove that any rule breach was committed intentionally.

Under the terms of the Union rules, the SDC can then elect to expand the scope of their inquiry to consider any other possible rule breach, an option that Cherwell understands is a distinct possibility.

The Union rulebook states further that any accused party and any member of Standing Committee holds the right to appear before the SDC and present evidence, that no person is required to give evidence that might incriminate themselves, and that no person can be convicted unless “the Committee is satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt”.

Oxford Union president Chris Zabilowicz said in a statement to Cherwell: “I appreciate the efforts of the Cherwell Editors to amend the significant number of errors in their lead article dated Friday 20th October.

“As their now amended article highlights, a Senior Disciplinary Committee will be convened simply to consider a ruling I made in Trinity 2017, and has no bearing on my position as President.

“I hope, now, the focus can return to fulfilling the potential this term at the Oxford Union has to be a positive and engaging one.”

An earlier version of this article published in Cherwell’s print edition (20/10/17) wrongly suggested that Oxford Union President Chris Zabilowicz was under investigation for “electoral malpractice”, that he was currently the defendant in this investigation, that he had “placed” the unelected officers onto the Union’s Standing Committee, and that he could be impeached directly as a result of the process. Cherwell would like to clarify that Zabilowicz is not as yet a defendant in the case, is not facing allegations of “electoral malpractice”, cannot face impeachment directly as a result of the process, and that the two unelected members of the committee were appointed by its existing members. We apologise for any confusion or upset caused.

Don’t separate black history from British shame

0

Rosa Parks sat at the front of the bus. Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream. Barack Obama stood up and said: “Yes We Can.” For many, this remains the extent of their knowledge of black history. It is a narrative of persecution and vulnerability in which those of colour are presented as the victims of a largely untold story, filled with stock images and stock narratives.

The education system continues to laud our history as a tapestry of pioneers and war heroes whilst ignoring the seemingly undeniable fact that the victories of the British Empire were deeply embedded with a dark history of colonialism and slavery. In countries which have both caused and harboured similar atrocities, their historical narrative is marked by a deep and inescapable shame. They acknowledge the failings of the past, and look optimistically to the future, in the thorough knowledge that such events cannot repeat themselves.

Yet Britain’s curriculum remains in denial, and monumentally so. In my secondary school there was no option to study black history, and Black History Month was limited to a display board of the faces of Afro-Caribbean icons. Such efforts were acknowledged as a token gesture to the small number of black faces which walked the halls, rather than an attempt to educate the largely white student body. Black History Month holds value because the impact of black history pervades every aspect of our present society, totally inescapable no matter how much we try to disguise it. Over the past five years there has been a 49% increase in ethnic minority long-term youth unemployment, compared with a 2% fall in white youth unemployment.

The same report also found that black and Asian workers are more than twice as likely to be in insecure work. Figures tell us that black workers with degrees on average earn 23% less than white workers with degrees. Such statistics shatter the self-congratulatory rhetoric of ‘post-racial Britain’. Perhaps the reason our country still harbours racial divisions and insensitivies is because we are yet to confront our questionable history with any sufficient vigour.

British scholars will make a conscious effort to engage disparate voices, realising necessarily that their own narrative does not tell the whole story. There are of course figures within academia who acknowledge the euro-centrism of the current system, approaching prominent intellectual figures with a certain degree of scepticism. They understand that the position which such intellectual figures hold in the academic hierarchy has the potential to demonstrate how deeply racist ideology is rooted in our education system and an inherent colonial bias.

But this does not change the fact that the villains of British history in the large part hide in plain sight, and despite some valiant efforts, remain there, unexposed by our education system. In some cases, they are made to be the heroes. Just last year, the History faculty took steps to correct the disparity between prizes offered for European and African history. More still needs to be done, however – and not just in Oxford.

British history is clearly full of triumphs, tales of military strength and groundbreaking innovation. But it has had more than its fair share of gross miscarriages of justice. Part of the mark of an intelligent community is not to conceal our errors but to shove them into the light, warts and all. It is, if anything, to make British history more holistic and accurate. Black History Month has an important role in the British consciousness. It is affirming to those who are often overlooked, and educates those who, through no fault of their own, have been left largely oblivious to the complexity of black history. But it can be better. Instead of just championing our black heroes like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, we should take this opportunity to assess our own British villains.

David Lammy slams Oxford for “social apartheid”

2

Oxford University has been accused of “social apartheid” by Labour MP David Lammy. The allegations come after data was released showing that nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit any black British A-level students in 2015.

The data, released under the Freedom of Information Act, is the first of its kind to be released since 2010. It shows that ten out of 32 did not give a place to any black British students with A-levels in 2015. In the same year, six Cambridge colleges did not admit any black British students with A-levels.

It was also found that Oriel College offered just one place to a black British A-level student in six years. This comes after findings from 2010 that showed that Merton failed to offer a single place to a black British student in five years.

Lammy, a former education minister and current Labour MP, told The Guardian: “This is social apartheid and it is utterly unrepresentative of life in modern Britain.”

He went on to say: “Difficult questions have to be asked, including whether there is systematic bias inherent in the Oxbridge admissions process that is working against talented young people from ethnic minority backgrounds.”

There were also findings released which showed that 82% of Oxford offers went to students from the top two socio-economic groups in 2015.

Large regional disparities were also revealed, with the north-west of England and disadvantaged regions of Wales being underrepresented.

The data had been first requested in 2016. While Cambridge released their data immediately, Oxford only released their data earlier this week when notified about The Guardian’s article, having denied the earlier request. Lammy’s attempt to have this information released sooner involved directly approaching the University’s vice chancellor.

Lammy claimed that the University’s decision to only partially release the information now was “defensive” and “evasive”. He also said that he was “disappointed that the University has combined all black people together into one group”.

In response to these findings, a spokesperson for the University told The Guardian that fixing the problem will be “a long journey that requires huge, joined-up effort across society – including from leading universities like Oxford – to address serious inequalities”.

This new data also showed that only three Oxford colleges made at least one undergraduate offer to a black British A-level student in every year between 2010 and 2015.

David Lammy is known for campaigning for racial equality and increased access to top universities and has had several disputes with Oxford. He had previously obtained data that, in 2009, only one black British student of Caribbean descent had been accepted as an undergraduate.

Lammy has also previously criticised Oxford for “unconscious bias” which he claimed systematically disadvantages applicants from ethnic minority backgrounds.

In response to Lammy’s comments, Oluwatobi Olaitan, Exeter’s JCR Equalities Rep, told Cherwell: “David Lammy’s comments are a huge reminder that our education system has a serious problem with providing equal opportunities to those socioeconomically disadvantaged.”

Having worked with University access programmes, he is aware that “steps are being taken to address this issue” but emphasises that “there’s still so much more work to be done to ensure we make places like Oxford accessible to all regardless of background.”

This comes after data released by Ucas earlier this year found that, of the 2,555 offers made for 2016 entry, just 45 were to black applicants.

Offers were made to 26.3% of white applicants, but only 16.8% of Asian and 16.7% of black applicants.

Hope Oloye, a third year Pembroke student who founded the Afro-Caribbean Tyler Prize, an access mentoring programme for Afro-Caribbean students, said: “I think the data’s hardly surprising, you only have to look around Oxford to realise it has a diversity problem.

“I think we have to be careful not to further propagate the idea that Oxford isn’t a place for black students, because a lot of the current discourse has the potential to deter prospective Afro-Caribbean applicants.

“It’s good that we’re finally having a frank and open discussion about it now as it gives us the opportunity to address the problem. Oxford needs to take an active approach in rectifying this issue.”

Anger over Exeter’s plan to ban smoking in college

0

Exeter College has revealed plans to ban smoking on site, leading to backlash among students.

The move comes after students failed to follow the college’s smoking protocols last year. In a post on the JCR Facebook page, Domestic and Accommodation Officer Avanish Parmessur reached out to undergraduates looking for feedback on the initiative. The proposal has been received angrily by Exeter students.

Grace Tully, the JCR’s Disabilities Rep, told Cherwell: “Habitual smokers are aware of the drawbacks and danger of the habit, but our community gains nothing from physically and socially ostracising those of us who do still smoke.”

They added that the move would discriminate against students from poorer backgrounds, saying: “cigarette smoking is ‘symptomatic’ of the working class…many of us who develop a smoking habit before university do indeed come from backgrounds that differ significantly from those of our more affluent peers. Banning [smoking] outright will make matters worse for all parties.”

Naomi Packer, the college’s Access and Academic Officer, told Cherwell: “I imagine what will happen is people will just stand outside college smoking rather than this move actually helping anyone to quit.”

Charig Yang, a second year student and a non-smoker, raised fi re safety concerns about the move. “Honestly, I don’t think everyone with an urge to smoke at 2am will go out of the college to do so,” he commented on the JCR page.

“Where, then, is the place you won’t get caught? Your bedroom.” Exeter’s current smoking policy bans students from smoking on any college property – including college owned houses and Cohen Quad – “except when standing in designated areas outdoors.”

The fi ne for smoking in a nonsmoking area is £30, and students can also be fined the same amount for failing to deposit stubs in the correct bins. In November 2016, students living in the back quad were warned about smoking in a non-designated area in front of staircase 14.

Two months later, the Junior Dean for the Turl Street site, Michelle Hufschmid, emailed the undergraduate body about a “spike in inconsiderate behaviour surrounding smoking and drinking,” and mentioned that she had received “numerous complaints” about smoking in the wrong place.

Seven colleges currently have blanket bans on smoking on-site, including St. Edmund Hall and Mansfield. Teddy Hall introduced their ban in 2011, and came under fi re from students for their failure to consult students first. Then-JCR president Joshua Coulson said: “some of you will be furious, and I can see why,” when addressing students on the issue.

In 2014, Mansfield’s Home Bursar identified smoke entering nonsmoking areas within the college, the “unpleasant smell of smoke for those around”, and the mess created by cigarette butts in college.

The University’s smoking policy states that “the University would be failing in its duty to promote the health, safety, and welfare of those on its premises – staff, students, and visitors alike – if it did not seek to minimise the exposure of both smokers and non-smokers to all forms of smoking by prohibiting smoking in all university buildings.”

Earlier this year, an NHS survey reported that 19 per cent of those aged 16-24 in the UK described themselves as ‘smokers’, a figure which represents a decrease of seven per cent since 2010.

Exeter College has been contacted for comment on the matter.

Protests widen the rift between public and police

0

The only protest I’ve ever been caught up in happened three summers ago, one Saturday in August, when pro-Palestine rioters took over Edgware Road. My confused and slightly worried 15-year-old self tried making his way through the crowd and in the process, ended up contributing five pounds to the Palestinian cause and receiving a free bracelet. I didn’t really know what I’d contributed five pounds to, but it felt like I’d done something good – until the protest turned violent, with a group of men choosing to boycott the local MacDonald’s. I’m still not really sure how that was effective.

Although the vast majority of the people protesting in August 2014 were of Arab ethnicity and thus directly linked to the cause they were defending, it seems a lot has changed in the past three years. What was previously a political statement has become a wider cultural trend. Protests have become a mainstream part of our day-to-day lives. Protesting is hip, it’s edgy, it’s fashionable. You post your photo on Instagram to show the world you went to an anti-Trump rally, holding up a banner with a message about combatting fake news or something.

Last summer’s women’s marches are probably the most legitimate of recent protests. Yet at most protests nowadays, people don’t protest because they support the political cause being defended, but rather because protests are thrilling experiences. If people want to make a political statement, all they have to do is go online and launch a petition on change.org. If they’re joining protests, disruptive marches, and riots, it’s because these have become exhilarating spectacles. Who can design the best poster? Which brilliant mind has come up with the best slogan? Riots are euphoric events, disguised as political activism.

One can explain this unsettling new trend by the change in the political climate over the past few years. Not only have politics and showbiz never been as intertwined as they are today (the Glastonbury chants of “Oh Jeremy Corbyn” epitomise this), but political discourse in the past years has also turned nasty. The debate of measured arguments has become a sour exchange of insults. The reawakening of the hard-left through Corbyn, and the intensified voices of the hard-right in post-Brexit Britain, has created a populist and volatile backdrop where opinions are more extreme.

The gap between the right and left extremities of the spectrum continues to widen, causing riots. The increase in protests is only one symptom of the anger that typifies our current political landscape. Journalist Cosmo Landesman argues that protests, particularly in America, are no longer about the battle of ideas, but about the battle against the police. That the police behave in a discriminatory way towards minorities is a fact. And yet the current level of confidence and trust in the police is higher in metropolitan areas than it has been for a while.

Landesman deplores the systematic targeting of the police in the States, explaining that this tendency only overshadows other, arguably more pressing problems, like gang culture and black-on-black crime, both of which cause more deaths than the rarer (though non-negligible) shooting of black youths by policemen.

Gang crime is not just an issue which anti-police and anti-establishment protests unwittingly overshadow: it’s something they make more easily possible. Tom Gash, author of Criminal: The Truth About Why People Do Bad Things, analyses the ways in which legitimate protests are being used as a cover for a very small minority of people, out to cause trouble.

Rather than being a particularly vocal expression of democracy and free speech, riots mark the end of democracy. Rather than helping protestors achieve legitimate responses to their grievances, protests widen the rift between the public and police, representatives of an establishment keen to close ranks and cancel public enquiries.

So don’t indulge in protests. They have become a young adult fad with little, if no, effect. If you want to let your hair down in public with a mob of cool youths, just wait for Notting Hill Carnival.

A little creativity can change a lot about the way we protest

0

Kreuzberg, Berlin, 1 May 2012. The tension is tangible as 15,000 protesters defiantly face 7,000 menacing police, heavily armed and shielded. The protesters have been warned that a new water cannon, with a 10,000-litre capacity, will be tested on them today. But they remain unarmed. That is, until several inflatable foil cobblestones float into the crowd.

Security forces, only minutes ago ferociously formidable, are thrown into disarray as the drifting decoys are blithely bounced through the throngs of marchers. A scene of comic confusion quickly unfolds. Troopers scratch their heads before sprinting after the strange shapes, and taking a stab at them. The shiny surfaces are slippery though, and they struggle to deflate the spectacle. As the sun sets, the stones are still gliding through the crowds, glistening in the twilight. The squad of riot cops has been defeated by a bunch of balloons.

The objects in question were created for the demonstration by the art-activist collective ‘Eclectic Electric Collective’ (e.e.c) – and are effectively what it says on the tin: five feet tall inflatable silver sculptures, mimicking conventional cobblestones. A reinterpretation of an age-old weapon of antiauthoritarian struggle, these tools of intervention were intended to do what the collective does best: innovate enduring protest strategies.

Cobblestones have long been tools of protest. In both the Paris Commune of 1871 and the 1968 demonstrations, paving was used as weapon. Not only is it an easily accessible medium, but it’s also symbolic of dissent: by removing part of a city’s pavement, you are refusing to consent to the authorities. Yet where real cobblestones cause casualties, the inflatables are harmless. Instead, they are simultaneously playful and protective: while designer
Artur Van Balen (now a member of the artivist collective, Tools for Action) has labelled them “weapons of tactical frivolity” – making protest an interactive, engaging experience for opposing participants – the inflatables also act as a physical fence to police batons.

This interactive element was key to the cobblestone’s conception – for the objects necessitate consideration in a way that more traditional weapons do not. Van Balen says that the shapes truly reach their full potential when they succeed in creating a situation in which “your opponent needs to decide what to do”. The opponent, in this case the cops, must now engage with the rioter in order to quell the disobedience. Security forces cannot simply open fi re or whip out batons, because brutally battering a harmless floating sculpture is somewhat challenging, not to mention ineffective. The comic nature of the situation then strips the authorities of much of their power, in much the same way as protest theatre. As such, these artivists are attempting to close the rift between police and protesters, via playful visual language.

While the cobbles were initially deployed individually at marches, in more recent years they have been compiled collectively into sculptures, that further challenge the nature of protest. The units are arranged into linear or grid formations, then secured by Velcro to one another, so that they resemble walls. Together, they hinder movement in much the same way traditional barricades would. Again, this plays on another historic device of discontent.

Barricades are now almost a cliché of civil unrest, thanks in part to Les Misérables’ iconic scenes. But their origins lie in the religious conflicts of 16th century south-west France. By the 19th century, the structures were indeed highly visible at major riots across Paris, including the July Days and the 1848 revolution. Typically, barricades were fashioned from hollow barrels, stuffed and secured by stones: arduous to construct, immoveable, and relatively permanent.

The inflatables by contrast, can be folded compactly and transported transnationally. Significantly, the lightweight shapes facilitate rapid creation and elimination. During the 2015 UN Climate Summit in Paris, Tools for Action sent packages to activist groups as far afield as New York, Portland, and London. Inside, were instructions describing “how to block a street in 20 seconds and just as easily disappear again”. Not only does that suggest the cobblestones enable greater spontaneity, but it indicates the transportable tools are effective in uniting protesters globally, through shared spectacles.

Drawing from these instructions and inspirations, inflatable blockades have been employed in Portland, outside the US Forest Service offices in protest of logging; in Westchester, New York, in protest of fracking; and in Lausitz, Germany, at the Welzow Sud Lignite Coal Mine, in protest of the continued burning of the dirtiest form of coal. The latter protest had a particularly international dimension to it, as 60 inflatables – made in the Netherlands, UK, France, Denmark, and Sweden – were amalgamated outside the mine.

These collected cobblestones were the product of the ‘training for trainers’ programme, launched in 2016 by Tools for Action and the Laboratory of Insurrectionary Imagination. Under this initiative, activists came together to learn about organisational tactics and creative direction, before heading home to instruct a new generation of activists.

But this was not the first time that the artivist collective had expanded their horizons into creative education: in 2015, the ‘inflatable barricade training’ project was established in Paris, educating climate activists in new methods of demonstration in the run up to the COP21 Conference. Nor was it the last.

Recently, Tools for Action teamed up with Respekt Buro to launch their most ambitious, comprehensive programme to date, using the floating foil cobblestones: ‘Barricade Ballet’. Named after the unique demonstration choreography which demonstrators and artists created together, the project sought not merely to change ideas about strategies of protest, but to change ideas about the matters at the heart of the protest themselves. The protest for which the programme prepared was a reactionary demonstration, against a forthcoming neo-Nazi march in Dortmund, June 2016. In the preceding months, the collective worked within schools to create open, inclusive environments in which to address the issues facing the city. High-schools are thought to be a common recruiting ground for neo-Nazis in Germany, so project organisers believed it important for discussions to be held about xenophobia, discrimination, and Neo-Nazi ideology here. Of course concurrently, students were given the opportunity to engage in artistic forms of direct action – creating the cobblestones to be brought to the forthcoming protests, and constructing barricade choreography.

4 June 2016, Dortmund, Germany. 900 neo-Nazis flood onto the city’s streets for their “A Day of the German Future” rally. 5,000 counterdemonstrators are also rallying. They connect their cobblestones and construct the barricades. At BlockaDO, the demonstration against the alt-right is confined by police, as neo-Nazis approach.

Unrest unfolds, and the foil inflatables protect protesters from police as planned. Unlike in Berlin though, the cops in Dortmund are better prepared: they cut the sculptures to shreds. But before they can do this, the counter-demonstrators are able to realise the full potential of their plan: their metallic barricade acts as a literal mirror held up to the alt-right, forcing marchers to reflect upon the city’s society.

Germany may not yet have won the fight against the alt-right, but it appears pioneering paths in direct action are helping to tackle problems peacefully and playfully. Instead of alienating, Tools for Action are engaging. Entertainment and aesthetics can replace animosity and aggression. A little creativity can change a lot about the way we protest.