Saturday, May 3, 2025
Blog Page 881

‘Deeper than the Abyss’: Resisting the Holocaust

1

The horrors of Treblinka are well known: that the camp was put out of use by the very Jews it was designed to murder is less often mentioned.

In the most vile conditions of starvation, disease, and grief, Jewish captives at Treblinka designed a defiant plan of escape over the spring and summer of 1943. On August 2 of that year, the captives snuck into Treblinka’s arsenal storehouse, retrieved handguns and gasoline, discretely doused much of the camp and then, at the anointed time, opened fire on Nazi guards while Treblinka was lit ablaze. Between 150 and 200 Jews escaped. One Jewish resistance fighter later wrote that, “A fortress of horrible Nazism was erased from the face of the earth.”

The story of Jewish resistance at Treblinka is rarely mentioned in Holocaust histories, and Why? Explaining the Holocaust, by Northwestern University’s Peter Hayes, is no exception. What is exceptional is Hayes’ determination to prove that Jewish resistance were futile. In a book otherwise rich with historical detail, Hayes’ adamance on this point illustrates how deeply rooted the myth of Jewish passivity remains seven decades after the Holocaust.

“No camp rebellion ever really succeeded,” Hayes argues. He explains how European Jews were divided by nationality, religion, class, and political beliefs: how the desperate self-interest of collaborators facilitated the enormous bureaucratic task of Nazi annihilation, and how Jews were deceived into believing they were not really destined for death. As Hayes describes the squalor and disease of the Warsaw ghetto, where Jews persisted on less than 200 calories per day, his thesis that Jews did not resist the Holocaust seems understandable. The only problem is that it’s not historically correct.

The Treblinka Revolt was not an isolated incident. The uprising was instigated by Jews deported from Warsaw, who smuggled knives, grenades, and uplifting stories of resistance into Treblinka. At Sobibor, Jewish captives armed with hatchets, knives, and guns overcame Nazi guards to free several hundred prisoners. The camp, which had killed nearly 600,000 Jews, was closed. At Auschwitz, Jewish captives used stolen explosives to destroy one of the camp’s four moratoriums. These and dozens more cases of resistance are recounted in They Fought Back, Yuri Suhl’s groundbreaking 1967 book.

By these efforts Hayes remains unimpressed. “The breakout at Treblinka enabled only fifty to seventy inmates to survive the war,” he writes, while “the camp uprising at Sobibor led to the deaths of only eleven or twelve SS men and the survival of only forty-seven inmates.” Hayes concludes that these uprisings “had very limited consequences.” Later he insists of Jews that: “Regardless of what they chose, they ultimately came to the same end.”

This is the old and battered narrative of the first generation of Holocaust scholars. In 1961, Raul Hilberg argued that “the reaction pattern of the Jews is characterized by almost complete lack of resistance.” In 1963, Hannah Arendt wrote that Jewish resistance had been “pitifully small…incredibly weak and essentially harmless.” Hilberg’s archival sources came exclusively from the Third Reich— Arendt’s historical research relied on Hilberg’s.

It is one thing not to know about Jewish resistance, and quite another to discount it. Hayes’ untenable argument is purely statistical: Jewish resistance did not kill a significant enough number of Nazis or save a significant enough number of Jews. This is a jarring view of human dignity. That in conditions of material deprivation and cultural depravity Jews nonetheless organized resistance is far more consequential than the specific number of friends saved or enemies slayed. It feels deeply insufficient to obsess over the fruitless quantification of Jewish resistance. This is an economist’s version of history: it is no coincidence Hayes trained as one. To claim Jewish resistance insignificant is to argue that it does not matter if Sisyphus pushes his boulder to the hill’s top, or, indeed, whether he ever tried. That Jews resisted in circumstances designed to so totally destroy the human will is surely one of the most vital lessons of the Holocaust.

The tendency to see victims of mass atrocity crimes as helpless objects instead of defiant subjects is one of the deepest ironies of contemporary efforts at genocide prevention. As Frederic Megret has argued of the Responsibility to Protect, the doctrine that defines how states can intervene to stop ongoing mass atrocity crimes, “Among all the measures recommended to assist victims of atrocities, not one suggests… that ‘victims’ might have a role in averting atrocities.” As Professor Kalypso Nicolaidis and I recently argued, contemporary efforts at mass atrocity prevention could learn a great deal from the remarkable history of citizen resistance to such crimes.

While Hayes’ treatment of Jewish resistance is frustrating, there is much to admire in his book. Hayes’ descriptions of Jewish life in the ghettos and camps is itself reason to read his book. Hayes is at his most human when describing Jewish disbelief of mass slaughter. He quotes a Polish Jew who hears of a nearby massacre: “Is it possible to believe such a thing? To shoot women, innocent children in full daylight? It is probably not true…” The man concludes that, “Those Jews were killed because they were Soviet citizens, but we are citizens of the government; such a thing cannot happen here.”

It is this careful attention to psychological detail that is missing from Hayes’ treatment of Jewish resistance. Writing on behalf of a Jew who collaborated with Nazi crimes and later stood trial in the Soviet Union, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion asked that nobody judge those who had lived through the camps, for their tragedy “is deeper than the abyss.” It is the depth and darkness of the Holocaust’s abyss that makes Jewish resistance miraculous; not the number of Nazis killed or Jews saved. This resistance, under conditions designed to so completely destroy the human spirit, is a monumental testament to human creativity and will, and deserves a more central place in Holocaust studies and remembrance, and, indeed, in contemporary thinking on genocide prevention.

A word from the stalls

What were you expecting from this production?

Honestly, I don’t know. I saw Narkissos and it was very good, and then I got drunk at a college event and my friend asked if I wanted to see a very funny play. So I said yes, and then she said it was about Communists and I thought that kind of negated the fact she’d just told me it was funny. But I came anyway.

Highlight of the production?

The masterful work of actually carrying one of the cast members around for half the play whilst she was in a curtain. I liked the attention to detail, especially as they were quite small men and it added an air of real tension (were they going to drop her? Exciting!)

Describe the production in 3 words.

Communism is funny.

What would you change?

The only thing I would change is that I want to see it again, so please make it happen.

Fittest cast member?

I would like to nominate the co-director, his hair is a thing of magnificent beauty. However if that’s against the rules I will specifically say the guy who played Sergei’s accent (John Livesey). As in, the accent was fit. Maybe that’s also against the rules?

Marks out of 10

9.475, or whatever the marshmallow joke was. Communist humour! Fairness for all.

Recipe: Mediterranean baked sweet potatoes

0

This dish is the ultimate homemade comfort food, as who doesn’t love a good sweet potato? They’re incredibly versatile and so easy to make and personalise to your own tastes—whether you want it spicy, cheesy or just with a load of beans over the top. They’re also very healthy, but don’t hesitate to ruin this by topping them to your heart’s desire—just don’t add marshmallows: sorry to all the Americans out there, but that’s just wrong. This is one of my favourite dishes to make at home when I can’t be bothered to spend hours slaving away in the kitchen—you just pop the sweet potato in the oven and it’s pretty much done.

Ingredients:

1 medium sweet potato per person
1 425 g can chickpeas, rinsed and drained
1/2 tbsp olive oil
1/2 tsp each cumin, coriander, cinnamon, paprika
Pinch of sea salt (optional)
Lemon juice (optional)

Garlic herb sauce:

60 g hummus
1 tbsp lemon juice
3/4 – 1 tsp dried dill (or substitute 2-3 tsp fresh)
3 cloves garlic, minced (1 1/2 Tbsp or 9 g)
Water or unsweetened almond milk to thin
Sea salt to taste

Topping suggestions:

45 g cherry tomatoes, diced 15 g chopped parsley, minced Chilli garlic sauce

Additional side ideas might include hummus, pita chips, baba ganoush, or Persian eggplant dip.

Method:

1. Preheat oven to 220 degrees and line a large baking sheet with foil.

2. Rinse and scrub potatoes and cut in halflength wise. This will speed cooking time.

3. Toss rinsed and drained chickpeas with olive oil and spices and place on a foil-lined baking sheet.

4. Rub the sweet potatoes with a bit of olive oil and place face down on the same baking sheet.

5. While the sweet potatoes and chickpeas are roasting, prepare your sauce by adding all ingredients to a mixing bowl and whisking to combine, only adding enough water or almond milk to thin so it’s pourable.

6. Taste and adjust seasonings as needed. Add more garlic for more zing, salt for savouriness, lemon juice for freshness, and dill for a more intense herb flavour.

7. Also prepare the parsley-tomato topping by tossing tomato and parsley with lemon juice and setting aside to marinate.

8. Once sweet potatoes are tender all the way through when pierced with a knife. The chickpeas should also be golden brown. This takes roughly around 25 minutes.

9. Remove these from oven.

10. To serve, flip potatoes flesh-side up and smash the insides a little bit to soften up.

12. Then top with chickpeas, sauce and parsley-tomato garnish.

13. Serve immediately.

Review: The Eagle and Child

0

Oxford is home to so many obvious pieces of history that after a while you grow impervious to it all—you know you’ve reached this stage when you no longer admire the beauty of the Rad Cam, but focus on locating the easiest route through the tour groups. But luckily, many of Oxford’s historic pubs fly under the radar, quietly carrying on their day-to-day business and (just) staying off the main tourist tracks.

The Eagle and Child is one such institution, the celebrated literary home of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis and their society, the Inklings. Not much appears to have changed since then—the wood panels, stained windows and accumulation of memorabilia testify to over four hundred years of history. The pub wears its reputation on its sleeve, with C.S. Lewis quotes painted on the beams and portraits of its famous patrons, but avoids verging on kitsch.

Unknowingly, my co-editor and I were following in the footsteps of the Inklings by grabbing lunch on a Tuesday lunchtime, although in a much less erudite manner. No literary readings, but grumbling about tutors instead. Both in need of comfort food, I had a simple but warming macaroni cheese with garlic ciabatta, while my co-editor sampled the goat’s cheese, hummus and red pepper sandwich with gorgeously cooked sweet potato fries. It was refreshing to see that the management hadn’t cynically used the pub’s history to raise prices—most of the mains are under a tenner and the sandwiches range from around six pounds.

But it is the drinks menu that is the crowning glory, with something to suit everyone (and probably the reason why it is such a popular first date location). There are dedicated sections to real ales (which they helpfully match to specials on the board), gins, ciders and whiskeys. Restricting ourselves—it was a weekday after all—we tried the rhubarb gin, which was intriguingly strange but probably quite an acquired taste.

Even though it was obviously not the busiest time of day, there was still a quiet buzz about the place which was perfect for procrastination chat. As Frodo Baggins says, “Short cuts make delays but inns make longer ones.” But if it’s the Eagle and Child, is that such a bad thing?

The Eagle and Child, 49 St Giles, Oxford OX1 3LU

Representing sex in young adult fiction

0

Everyone remembers being finally allowed to move on to the young adult section of the library. You drink in the pages, fantasising about being like the sixteen-year-old heroes whose reckless lives are so different to yours. You tilt the book slightly closer to your chest as you read the inevitable kissing, or even sex, scene, trying to keep it from the view of intruding parents. Although relationships and sex are almost omnipresent on television and in films, the personal experience of reading makes these moments even more influential. Young adult novels have a duty to present these experiences in a certain way, to make them realistic, focusing on consent and trust.

The Noughts and Crosses series by Malorie Blackman sent waves through my generation of young teens. It challenged race issues in society in such a way that thousands of young adults now cannot look at ‘skin-coloured’ plasters without realising the privileges that are ongoing in our culture. The novel goes much further than being another easy-to-read, trashy teen book. It moulds and influences our perceptions of society. And this applies to everything that is published as young adult.

Double Cross, the fourth novel in this series, has a sex scene. The way Blackman uses it, however, dispels expectations set up by other young adult novels (think brooding, power-struggling vampires). The two protagonists have sex but the description is realistic and focuses on consent, without losing its romance—“It was awkward and fumbling but it did not matter.”

Blackman presents the first relations between these teenagers in a way that is believable and yet in no way vulgar. Pain and pleasure are depicted and yet this does not feel inappropriate for its target readership. Teenagers are active and engaged readers and presenting them with fallacy is not only dangerous but also unappealing. Clearly Blackman acknowledges her role as educator and influencer and it is this awareness that crafts a useful book. This is no Kamasutra sex guide, but rather a representation of what mutual respect and compassion can look like in a teenage relationship.

In 2015, John Green’s Looking for Alaska was the most disputed book in American school libraries and has since been banned from many. This is due to its ‘sexually explicit’ content. However, as Green himself has admitted, the scene in question is written in a dry, cold manner with a single adjective, “nervous”. Far from trying to incite sexual promiscuity in young teenagers, Green’s novel is a rebuttal of the way that sex and relationships in young adult fiction are often idealised or romanticised to the point of being destructive. Attempting to hide such matters from teenagers is ignorant and harmful—it is called young adult fiction for a reason. In a world irrevocably influenced by social media, by films, and by gossip, and in which sex education is undoubtedly lacking, young adult fiction plays an important role and so has a critical responsibility.

It is easy to turn our noses up at the awkward silences of Twilight or John Green’s novels that can seem like bound print outs of Tumblr quotes, but, like it or not, these books shape our lives and our expectations and at a particularly influential age. Writers should be aware of the way in which their work could influence a young person, and schools and parents have a responsibility to ensure that their children’s expectations are realistic, healthy, and safe.

Imagination and immediacy in travel writing

Glancing along a bookshelf at home, names of countries and cities jump out from the spines of various travel guides. Rome, London, and Japan neatly wrapped and bound in a small volume. But rather than prioritising information, or constraining a sense of a place, a good travel guide, in the view of Rough Guides’ Senior Editor Neil McQuillian, “is distilled by author and editor from reams of research, both online, and most importantly, on the ground.”

The very title of Rough Guides’ compendium for first-time travellers, Rough Guide to First-Time Around The World, admits both the hugeness of the world and the exciting possibility of its navigation. By distilling information and experience, in “seeking to get to grips with a place,” good travel writing perhaps combines a tangible expression of that place’s atmosphere whilst allowing every experience to be personal, spontaneous, and new.

As McQuillian explains, during his research for articles, “I focus on in-the-moment observations and, crucially, interactions with people. You can write some of what will prove to be your article’s best bits right there and then.” Although Google news alerts and Twitter searches are an important kickstarter, the “cardinal travel writing sin is attempting to define a place without engaging the people who live there.”

More impersonal or objective tips are an important part of travel guides, but what really prepares a reader for the place then is this sense of personal experience and its interpretation. McQuillian suggests that “it’s all about imagination to the extent that you’re telling a tale. Hold your ‘real’ experiences lightly in your mind and let imagination do its work, pulling those experiences into a form that others will respond to.” The philosophy of travel publishers like Rough Guides is this: to write adventure, but never fiction, constantly aware that a well-written adventure can let readers’ minds wander anyway.

Indeed, travel writing is a form that has a long and rich history, perhaps peaking in what McQuillian describes as a “travel writing golden age” the 1970s and 1980s, with writers like Paul Theroux and Bruce Chatwin. But more traditional printed forms have suffered a decline since then. The primacy of “on the ground” research remains vital, but just as online research acts as another well of knowledge for printed guides, the internet represents in itself a major medium for travel writing. It is diverse—www.roughguides.com alone contains about ten articles on solo travel, including particularly insightful approaches such as ‘Go it alone: a guide to solo travel for introverts.’ The prolific rise of travel blogs and Instagram accounts also reflect how travel writing has become more democratic and accessible.

Might we see the role of the internet enabling a new kind of golden age? It some ways it would seem not—McQuillian notes how readers are tiring of unreliable reports and biased reviews that may help to explain a recent rise in the sale of printed guides after a diffi cult decade. Interestingly, he points out that print travel sections tend to be longer than online articles, often based on the assumption that online audiences have a shorter concentration span (take the example, ‘17 places to take your pug in Peru’). And while the internet does still off er a wealth of concise, useful articles and snapshots of themes and places, a reviving trend of longform journalism also encompasses quality travel writing, again returning to the narratives of travel, of storytelling and immediate detail.

McQuillian suggests that the decline of more traditional travel writing like that characterised by Theroux and Chatwin can be attributed to a sense of the world getting smaller, travel getting easier. As he reminds us however, “that hasn’t stopped small-mindedness—it hardly needs saying that now there is an urgent need for cultural understanding.” Where cultural relations become defined by statistics and stereotypes, informed and nuanced travel writing can play a unique role in fostering that understanding.

Classic travel ideas still take a hold on people’s imagination—The Rough Guide to Europe on a Budget is available from the 1 March (£17.99) in its fifth edition, for example. At the same time, both in print and online, countless niche approaches to travel are catered for. But as a genre that depends on a sense of freedom and particularity for its raw materials, there is no need to favour one way of seeing—McQuillian suggests that during writing, “your subconscious will see to the thematic choreography.” Travel writing may have evolved, but celebrating cultural engagement in a multitude of ways remains as important a message as ever.

How to make the best Oxford pub crawl route

A recent (and also imaginary) poll conducted on a sample size of at least five students revealed some interesting results. When asked to identify the keys to success at Oxford, nearly all the correspondents—apart from the two who collapsed from the stress of even hearing the word ‘succeed’—ranked ‘good grades’ at a paltry sixth position. The answer ‘battlehardened liver’ maintained its monopoly on the first position. This is, of course, unsurprising: apart from rowing, rugby, and rowers complaining about rugby, Oxford’s favourite pastime is drinking. The 139 pubs dotted across the town are a testament to this fact.

So if you’re the type of student who only emerges from the shadows of the Bodleian past sun down, wanting to procrastinate and complain about your impending doom—sorry, deadlines—over a pint or two, look no further.  Here I guide you through how to calculate the most efficient pub crawl route through Oxford, with the help of graph theory.

First, we need to define the nodes or vertices of our graph: the pubs. Using TripAdvisor and cross referencing those results with authorities—*cough* crewdaters *cough*—we find that the best pubs for a pub crawl in Oxford are: The Old Bookbinders Ale House; The White Rabbit; The White Horse; Head of the River; and the Turf Tavern. Collating the distances between all pairs of pubs on the graph, we get Table 1.

In the course of this article, we will refer to the connection between any two nodes—pubs—as an edge. The distance between any two pubs will be called the weight of the edge. Therefore, the weight of the edge between the White Horse and the Turf Tavern is 0.1 miles. Furthermore, a ‘path’ between any two nodes refers not to the physical path between the pubs, but the sequence of intermediate pubs from the pub at the source to the pub at the final destination.

We will also be applying the condition that we will visit each edge and each pub only once, without returning to the source. While this may seem frivolous, it prevents our problem from morphing into the infamous Travelling Salesman Problem, to which there is no efficient solution.

The most obvious, brute-force approach of finding the shortest path through each of these pubs requires checking and comparing all possible routes from start to finish. However, with the use of some assumptions and sophisticated algorithms, we can whittle down these possibilities to just five, in other words a shortest path starting at each node.

To perform this magical reduction in possibilities it would be easiest to first look at a method of tracing a path through a graph known as a ‘breadth first search’. Essentially this involves hitting the nodes adjacent to the starting pub, then the nodes adjacent to these nodes and so on. Dijkstra’s Shortest Path Algorithm does exactly the same, but with an additional distance counter that notes the shortest path to each node in the graph from the source.

While this may reduce the possibilities to just five, Dijkstra’s Algorithm is also a ‘greedy’ algorithm, meaning that it will always choose the next step with greatest immediate benefit and, much like a PPE-ist in an argument, will never backtrack when wrong. Therefore, rather than making progress to the endpoint, it will meander on trying to find the next edge with the shortest weight. Thus, we need to consider an alternate algorithm known as the Floyd-Warshall Algorithm that checks whether a node lies on the shortest path between the source and target and gives the length of this shortest path. We will run this with the small modification that all of the pubs need to be present on this path. We get the results presented in Table 2.

Hence, we see that the shortest pub crawl between the five chosen pubs is of length 1.7 miles. But is it really the most efficient? Through the use of a ‘brute force approach’, we can check that the aforementioned path is, in fact, the most efficient path through all the pubs. Given that the average length of a pub crawl through these pubs is 2.68 miles with a maximum distance of 3.4 miles, we get that the chosen path is 37 per cent shorter than most paths. The downside? How many of us would have the strength or willpower to walk 0.7 miles after having visited four pubs?

Returning British countryside to its roots

The noble sight of the red kite soaring above Oxford’s spires and fields is now commonplace, but these graceful birds of prey have had a troubled past in Great Britain. Despite a golden age in the fifteenth century as valued scavengers keeping city streets clean, they were driven to complete extinction in the nineteenth century in Scotland and Wales following persecution and labelling as vermin. Only the collected and continued effort of environmentalists has reinstated this great bird to British skies. This is one of the success stories in a greater quest to return Britain to its more natural state.

The organisation Rewilding Britain is a group dedicated to just this. Imagine a countryside bursting with life, filled with trees, birdsong, and a plethora of awe-inspiring animals: wolves, bison, elk, and wild boar to name but a few.

It is no secret that our country’s biodiversity is not what it used to be. We’ve lost more of our large mammals than any other European country, bar Ireland. Our expanding towns and cities and wasting of resources have pushed our native species out of their natural environments. Many of these are ‘keystone’ species, occupying the centre of our complex intertwined ecosystems. Like vital pillars supporting the weight of a building, removing these fundamental species destabilises the habitat, threatening its collapse.

One such keystone species at the forefront of Rewilding Britain’s attention is the beaver, not seen in Britain for nearly 500 years until their recent successful reintroduction into Scotland and the trail pair introduced to Devon. This is one of Rewilding Britain’s success stories, but beavers are still a long way from being a common site in our countryside. Much more work is needed.

Beavers fundamentally change the landscape through their construction of river dams, slowing water flow by creating staggered, calm pools. These pools provide ideal habitats for many precious species such as otters, water voles, and birds, by forming a safe haven for their young. What’s more, beavers carry with them great economic benefits. The dams that they build act like massive sponges, holding rain water and releasing it slowly after heavy rain, significantly reducing the risk of flooding. They also create many small reservoirs, preserving water supplies in the dry months and thereby reducing the risk of harmful droughts.

Wolves—another keystone species—used to rule the forest as the top predators historically reigning across the British wildlands. But this wasn’t to last, their reign cut short when they were hunted to extinction in the eighteenth century. Although many purport that their introduction would pose a significant risk to humans, wolves actually tend to stay far away from human activity. The proposed sites of reintroduction in Scotland, despite being very remote, are never far from farmers and their livestock, some of which would inevitably be taken. The issue that must be discussed is whether the health of the ecosystem is worth risking the livelihood of the farmers.

The presence of wolves provides massive benefits to the ecosystem, most obviously through preventing the over-grazing of delicate saplings by keeping herds of wild deer on the move. This allows time for trees to grow where previously only open grassland existed, providing a home for plants, ground living mammals, and a multitude of birds. The presence of trees even reduces flood risk by releasing water after rains much slower than open grassland.

These are just a few of the species which Rewilding Britain are working to return to our pleasant shores. Further plans have been proposed for the return and spread of the lynx, wild boar, bison, and elk, along with numerous birds and fish. For these plans to work they need careful planning and testing, like that occurring with a pair of beavers in Devon, to minimise unanticipated effects, but the possibility of seeing these wonderful creatures throughout the British countryside makes it worth the risk.

Oxford University gives squatters five days to vacate temporary homeless shelter

0

A group of around 20 homeless people and volunteers who have been occupying an old power station owned by Oxford University have been given five days to leave the building, after a possession order was served at court this morning.

The group—Osney Open House—had moved to the power station after being ordered to leave an old VW garage owned by Wadham College, so that it could start pre-demolition work in order to build student accommodation. They have been living in the new site for around 10 days.

The court granted Oxford University an Interim Possession Order (IPO), which ordered the squatters to leave the former power station by Sunday 12 March.

In court, a representative for Osney Open House called for the IPO to be deferred to Monday 14 March.

“Deferring the IPO would prevent the unnecessary and involuntary criminalisation of 21 people, many of whom are beginning to find their feet again following periods of extreme instability.

“These 21 individuals have evidently already experienced circumstances of great difficulty and complexity. We hope that you agree it would be hugely detrimental to the interests of these individuals and indeed the local Oxford community for them to be made homeless tomorrow,” they said.

The squatters say that the part of the building being occupied has been “unoccupied for seven years.” Oxford University have previously stated that the old power station is used by staff for storage purposes, and have raised concern over the safety of the building.

Miranda Shaw, a local resident and Osney Open House volunteer, said: “It’s ridiculous that people are still on the streets in one of the richest cities in the world with so many empty buildings. The University owns so much of the city centre. It would be incredible if the University could show leadership in the face of corrosive cuts at both a national and city level. We are facing a social emergency and this is now the second time that Oxford University has closed its doors. We hope that this will change in the future.”

A University of Oxford spokesperson said: “We requested the court to extend the time for serving the order so that the occupiers are given a few days to pack up their belongings without compromising our right to reclaim the property. The court agreed that this was “appropriate and proportionate” and extended the order until Sunday (12 March). We have been given to understand that the occupiers will be vacating over the weekend.

“Homelessness is a serious issue in Oxford, and we will continue to work with local stakeholders on this matter. Osney Open House have made a serious point by drawing attention to this issue, and we hope to continue working with them. In particular, we would like to see how we can work with and support local homeless charities in the future.”

Lord Hennessy on British politics and the rise of populism

Cherwell Broadcasting Editor Theo Davies-Lewis speaks to Lord Peter John Hennessy, Baron Hennessy of Nympsfield, FBA. A notable English historian and academic specialising in the history of government, since 1992 he has been Attlee Professor of Contemporary British History at Queen Mary University of London. Lord Hennessy was invited by St Antony’s College to speak on the issue of ‘Traditional Parties and the Populist Challenge’ in March 2017.