Saturday, May 17, 2025
Blog Page 918

Revealed: Rowers in row with houseboat owners

0

Oxford rowers claim they have been the victims of homophobic abuse and numerous attempts to force them from the river as tensions between rowers and houseboat residents escalate, Cherwell can report.

Rowers from a number of different colleges allege that they have been targeted by houseboat owners who placed tacks on the towpath and thew eggs and tomatoes at them.

Rowers have further alleged that residents have driven close enough to disturb the water in an attempt to capsize them, have intentionally driven into boats, and have hospitalised an Oxford town rower.

These incidents have been brought up at the college rowing captain’s meeting, the minutes of which report that Oxford University Sabbatical Officer for Rowing Tom Coles “had been in contact with the police and the Environment Agency about the houseboats on the bottom stretch”.

Describing one incident that occurred last term, University College team captain Ben Norbury told Cherwell: “Just as we passed the houseboats, our cox heard some splashes around our boat and then a bang as an egg hit our stern. Not really realising what was going on we kept rowing.

“On the next lap, rowing up to the top again, in the same place, we saw two guys with a dog on the river bank. This time, apparently having depleted their stock of eggs, they just threw homophobic insults at us.

“They began to follow us as we rowed to the spinning area, but gave up as we sped away. After spinning and rowing past them again we got similar shouting etc.”

Norbury also claims that during one race last week a houseboat continued to sail down the middle of the river as a boat from St Catz college approached. The houseboat collided with the rowers as they turned, ripping off half the boat’s riggers.

On rowchat.org, a forum for rowing discussion, one commentator said: “Barge driver clearly not a fan of rowing, ignored a load of marshals and then carried on afterwards without bothering to stop and see if anyone was hurt.”

In a separate incident, a Wolfson college boat was intentionally rammed by a houseboat.

Norbury believes that the boat that hit the St Catherine’s boat was only in Oxford temporarily, but that the boat that hit the Wolfson crew is permanently based here.

Rowers believe that the houseboat owners hostility comes as a result of being disturbed by rowing crews, but could not understand why it had so suddenly developed this academic year.

Mack Grenfell, a rower for University College, told Cherwell: “They claim that the antipathy is generated by us scraping/touching their boats with our blades.

“I have been rowing for 3 and a half years, and I have got no idea why incidents are occurring now more than ever.

“However, this happens relatively often unfortunately, but I think much less since all these major incidents. It’s odd though as to me this would be a minor issue.

“My guess is that a lot of them hold resentment to the student population, or are just aggressive people.

“Pretty much every day you’ll see loads of them drinking on the towpath, sometimes shouting at crews. Sometimes you’ll get a boat reeking of weed.”

This was confirmed by Alastair, a houseboat owner resident on the Thames for over ten years, who said that rowers did knock into boats regularly and wake him up due to their use of megaphones to communicate, but that he accepted it as “part of life on the river”.

He claimed that while most houseboat residents were content to share the river there were a small minority of “arseholes” who didn’t share that attitude, and that recently several “raging alcoholics” had moved their houseboat into the Oxford stretch of the Thames.

Alastair alleged that they stole coal from other boats, threw beer cans around, and were regular drug users.

Grenfell claimed the police “have a fat file on all the incidents”, but that they are unable to act as the water is not within their jurisdiction. He further stated that the incidents that took place of the towpath were considered by the police to be a “nuisance” and not worthy of investigation.

Thames Valley Police have been contacted for comment.

Applicants of colour still less likely to receive an Oxford offer

0

New admissions data released by Ucas has revealed a continued racial deficit in Oxford admissions. Of the 2,555 offers made in for 2016 entry just 45 were to black applicants, compared to 2,090 to white applicants.

This represents a drop compared to the 50 offers made in 2015, but is higher than every other year since 2011.

The percentage of offers given to black and asian applicants was also significantly lower than the percentage rate for those that are white. Offers were made to 26.3 per cent of white applicants, but only 16.8 per cent of Asian and 16.7 per cent of black applicants.

Across all universities only 70 per cent of black applicants received places, compared with 73 per cent of white applicants and 73 per cent of those from Asian backgrounds.

The Ucas data also revealed continuing disparity in terms of the wealth of applicants. Oxford received over 5,000 applications from the richest fifth of teenagers but just 420 from the poorest fifth.

Of those that did apply 20.2 per cent of the poorest received offers compared to 26.2 per cent of the richest.

The data follows David Lammy’s critique of Oxford’s “unconscious bias” that he claimed systematically disadvantages applicants from ethnic minority backgrounds. The Labour MP, speaking at a symposium at Lady Margaret Hall, said that “we all tend to recruit in our own image”.

Dr Samina Khan, Director of Undergraduate Admissions and Outreach at the University of Oxford, told Cherwell: “The number of offers given to students from Black, Asian and mixed-heritage backgrounds has risen significantly over the past five years, which is encouraging.

“However, we are aware that there is still work to be done, particularly in terms of offer rates to Black and Asian students.

“We have therefore introduced a number of tailored outreach programmes aimed at high-achieving students from under-represented groups, which we hope will pay dividends in the coming years and help make Oxford an even more diverse community.”

In terms of gender the picture is more balanced, with young women and men securing Oxford offers at exactly the same rate. 1,275 applicants of each gender were made offers, however 30 fewer women applied than men.

This meant that for the second time ever a higher proportion of female 18 year olds were given offers than male 18 year olds, as there are fewer female 18 year olds in the population.

Dr Wendy Piatt, Russell Group director general, said: “The root causes of under-representation are complex and a wide range of factors need to be taken into account to fully understand them.

“Our universities are working tirelessly to encourage bright candidates to apply as we want talented, able students from all backgrounds to know that a place at our universities is well within reach.”

Pink Week in Oxford

0

It’s Pink Week in Oxford! This initiative has been run by students to raise money and awareness for breast cancer treatment in the UK. Cherwell Broadcasting went along to one event to talk to a leading figure in breast cancer medicine, Professor Stephen Johnston, and talk to the organisers about why the initiative is so important.

Think Pink

0

Styled by: Anoushka Kavanagh

Models: Isabel Nield, MollyCarlin, Jojo Dieffenbacher

Make-up by: Angelica Wolanska

Cocktail of the week: negroni sbagliato

0

Normally a drink that involves replacing gin for another type of alcohol is totally off the cards for me, but I’ll make an exception in the case of the Negroni Sbagliato. The decadence of this drink makes it not only acceptable, but totally worth it. Traditionally, a Negroni is made from Campari, a sweet vermouth, and gin. ‘Sbagliato’ is the Italian word for ‘mistaken’—the drink was created, supposedly as a fortunate accident, when a bartender used prosecco rather than the intended gin. As such, it makes for a good celebratory aperitivo or an exciting brunch drink, if you want to switch up your mimosa.

There are lots of variations on the ratios in a Negroni, but I like to make it 1:1:1.

Ingredients:

Campari
Sweet Vermouth
Prosecco

Method:

1. Pour your Campari and Vermouth into your mixer with ice to chill, before straining it into your champagne flute.

2. Top up your glass with Prosecco.

3. To garnish, cut a circular slice of an orange; detach the peel from the pulp and cut one part of the peel such that you have a strip of peel. Twist the peel into a spiral (it will hold the shape), and place it in the glass.

Salute!

Disney princesses and ‘Lolita’: the danger of men writing women

0

Having been born in the 1990s, I recall watching the ‘old’ Disney. Those hand-drawn cartoons were Vermeer in comparison to the three-dimensional blobs that pervade the flat-screens of today. We wore velvet trackies, scrunchies and those hideously sequined baseball caps, and my Disney princesses were blonde and beautiful, of course.

My room was pink and my prince was always Charming, white, on his white horse. Now, my sister and I, we both loved those princesses and Disney, and the little toys that came with it all, but we are mixed race: even though our nursery classroom was a rainbow of races, and my first loves Indian and Chinese, these weren’t the days of your (one) black princess.

Disney’s version of Sleeping Beauty is a dangerous woman. I ask you: what would the world have looked like if the prince who tries to awaken Sleeping Beauty from her sleep was black, and if she was Mongol. If the princess had been gender neutral, or if there had been black, mixed-race, size 16 dolls by my bedside, the world would have been a very different place.

If I had seen a commercialised version of myself lining the shelves of Toys R Us, I may never have bothered buying a pair of straighteners—wearing your afro high may not have been solely reserved for the ‘New Style’ pages of fashion magazines and ‘normal’ may not have been hair hanging straight down to our shoulders. There is danger in the staples of childhood being so distant from what I was, and what many of us are.

From the scripture of the early Church, which condemned a sinning Eve, to the glorified images of a modern day domestic goddess, our society has a prominent and undeniable history of the ‘ideal’ woman, with any ‘other’ a dangerous divergence. Why would I ever need Prince Charming to save me? Yet, lo and behold, while Disney churned out its films in the 1950s, another breed of woman was born in the Paris of 1955: “Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins” in Vladimir Nabokov’s infamous novel. He subverts our expectations, drawing us closer even as we are repulsed.

Lolita, unlike a Disney princess, is hurt not by a wicked stepmother, but instead, by Humbert Humbert, a middle-aged man. The tale of her rape and perverted prostitution was so dire that it almost went untold, and yet she is sexual, and leaves a trail of broken men behind her—quite literally, in the case of protagonist Humbert Humbert, who dies “in legal captivity, of coronary thrombosis”.

However, as Craig Raine put it, it is because Lolita “hasn’t a shred of self-pity”, that “she survives—by not recognising she is a victim.” Lolita is a tragic tale. Yet, just as it is Nabokov who fashions Lolita, Disney’s Aurora was scripted by a man, and it perhaps because of this that these bastions of femininity are dangerous. The little girls dancing to ‘When You Wish Upon a Star’ are dancing to the tune written for them by a man, who in turn draws his ideal of the princess, in the image of what he believes ‘woman’ should be.

Lolita ends up married, pregnant, and still dependent on Humbert Humbert for money. And it is Prince Philip who saves Aurora. One could say that all it takes is a critical eye for us to sit quiet, watch those blonde Disney classics and still wear our ‘afro’ hair higher than ever. But we’re women, we’re female, and we are dangerous—the right kind of dangerous.

So, though I’ll have to settle for the good old 90s, hopefully we can start painting our women in all kinds of beautiful, so that one day, a mixed-race boy, girl, or none of the above can have their princess too.

Head to Head: All-Time World XI

0

Karl’s XI

I have chosen a 4-2-3-1 formation, which I believe accommodates the quality in my team best.

Goalkeeper: Lev Yashin

The Soviet Russian is regarded by many people the best goalkeeper of all time. I have chosen Yashin, because he is the only keeper to have ever won the Ballon d’Or (1963).

Right Back: Cafú

I am a very big fan of offensive full-backs, and Brazilian legend Cafú definitely is the best. He is the most-capped Brazilian player of all time, with 142 senior international appearances. He captained Brazil to the 2002 World Cup title in South Korea and Japan.

Centre Backs: Paolo Maldini and Alessandro Nesta

100 per cent Italian Chemistry. Paolo Maldini and Alessandro Nesta are regarded by many as two of the greatest defenders of all time. Maldini, who is eight years older than his colleague, acted as Nesta’s mentor during the closing years of his career at AC Milan. Maldini made a total of 647 first team appearances for the Italian giants. Nesta made 224 apps and is currently working as the current coach at Miami FC.

Left Back: Roberto Carlos

The full back is famous for his powerful left boot, which has added some absolute screamers to Real Madrid’s and the Brazilian team’s scoresheets. Roberto Carlos has won 3 Champions Leagues and one World Cup and is essential in my All Time XI.

Holding Midfielder: Franz Beckenbauer

‘Der Kaiser’ (the emperor) spent the majority of his career at Bayern Munich as a centre-back or holding midfielder, scoring 64 goals in 439 official games played. Beckenbauer is one of two men (with Mario Zagallo) to have won the World Cup as team captain as well as manager, both for West Germany.

Central Midfielder: Zinedine Zidane

Zidane is one of the most complete players in football. The Frenchman scored the famous winning volley with his weaker left foot for Real Madrid in a 2-1 victory against Bayer Leverkusen in the 2002/03 UEFA Champions league final. In the 2015/16 season, Zinedine won the trophy in his first season as a Real Madrid manager.

Right Wing: Lionel Messi

Lionel Messi is a five-time Ballon d’Or winner. He has scored 489 goals in a total of 585 career appearances for Barcelona and the Argentine national team. He has won four Champions League titles (including two trebles). In my opinion there has never been a better player in this sport.

Attacking Midfielder: Diego Maradona
The Iglesia Maradona is a religion, created by fans of retired Argentine footballer, who they believe is the best player of all time. The no.10 jersey  was retired from Napoli in his honour. In 1999 he came runner up for the title of Football Player of the century (behind Pele). Before 1995, only european footballers were eligible to win the Ballon d’Or award. In 1996, Maradona received an honorary Ballon d’Or for services to football.

Left Wing: Ronaldinho Gaúcho

In the summer of 2003, Ronaldinho signed for FC Barcelona in a €30 million deal from PSG. ‘Ronni’s’ arrival marked the start of what would become one of the greatest football teams in the history of the sport. The Brazilian won the 2005 Ballon d’Or and shortly after the 2005/06 UEFA Champions League for Barcelona.

Striker: Ronaldo Nazario

Also know as ‘fat Ronaldo’ or ‘Brazilian Ronaldo’ – but to me he is just Ronaldo. And he’s the best one. His career was marked by controversies; he enjoyed spells at rivals Barcelona and Real Madrid, as well as AC Milan and Inter Milan. He is a two time Ballon d’Or winner (1997 and 2002) and won two world cups with Brazil (1994 and 2002—with possibly the worst haircut ever seen in sport).

Sam’s XI

I have opted for a 4-3-3 formation, which enables me to accommodate a pivot midfielder, Xavi Hernandez, who will control the pace of my midfield.

Goalkeeper: Lev Yashin

I have chosen Yashin, because he is the only keeper ever to have won the Ballon d’Or (1963). In 1998, he was selected for the world’s team of the century and in 2013 for the world soccer greatest XI of all time. Right Back: Cafú Cafú is the most capped Brazilian player of all time. The wing back captained Brazil to the 2002 world cup title in South Korea and Japan and was also part of the winning squad of 1994.

Centre Backs: Franz Beckenbauer and Bobby Moore

Beckenbauer started his career as a holding midfielder, but became famous for his performances at centre-back. Despite his strong defensive attributes, ‘The emperor’ still managed to score 64 goals in 439 official games. Bobby Moore captained West Ham United for more than ten years and was captain of the England team that won the 1966 World Cup. He is widely regarded as one of the greatest defenders of all time, and was cited by Pelé as the greatest defender that he had ever played against.

Holding Midfielder: Xavi Hernandez

Since Xavi’s debut at FCBarcelona he has played 700 matches, scored 82 goals and made more than 180 assists for over 50 players. Xavi is the first player in Barcelona’s history to play 150 international matches.

Central Midfielder: Andre Iniesta

Iniesta’s 32 trophies make him the most decorated Spanish footballer of all time. He has won 2 trebles with FC Barcelona and now serves as team captain. Iniesta’s famous extra time goal against Netherlands earned Spain the 2010 South Africa World Cup. Central Midfielder: Zinedine Zidane Zidane can cover the role or a roaming midfielder or play as a number 10. Zizou’s left foot volley earned Real Madrid the 2003 Champions League. He has now also won the trophy as Real Madrid manager, in that famous victory against Atletico.

Right Wing: Lionel Messi

Many say that Messi’s trophy-less senior international career has stopped him from becoming the best ever player in football. I disagree. Messi assumed Argentine captaincy in 2011 in accord with then-captain and Barcelona team mate Javier Mascherano. Messi’s Argentina lost the 2014 Brazil World Cup final to Germany and the 2016 Copa America final to Chile.

Left Wing: Cristiano Ronaldo

CR7 received his fourth Ballon d’Or in 2016, the most for a European player in the history of the award, and the inaugural Best FIFA Men’s Player. In 2015, Ronaldo scored his 500th senior career goal for club and country. Striker: Pelé The name says it all. In 1999, Pelé was voted World Player of the Century. That year, Time named him in their list of 100 most influential people of the 20th century. In 2013 he received the FIFA Ballon d’Or Prix d’Honneur in recognition of his career and achievements as a global icon of football.

The Price is right: Margo’s musings

0

Understandably so, Margo Price is still in awe of Meryl Streep’s extraordinary Golden Globes speech. “The idea that actors and musicians have a role to convey emotions and experiences is something I agree with”, she says on a crackling phone line from Nashville, “and country music is a template for real life problems”.

Price released her debut solo album Midwest Farmer’s Daughter in March 2016. The album garnered widespread critical acclaim, featuring in the year’s best album lists of NME, Rolling Stone, and the Guardian.

Much of the album’s appeal comes from its raw, rootsy feel which hints at elements of honky tonk, blues, funk, and pure rock & roll. Price recalls absorbing a “wide range of music” throughout her childhood: “The top 40 from my mum’s radio, classic rock from my father and country music from my grandmas”.

As we talk, she reels off names of musical influences from Patsy Cline to Bob Dylan, and of course Loretta Lynn—her album title respectfully riffing off Lynn’s Coal Miner’s Daughter.

Album opener, ‘Hands of Time’, with its poetic journey through memory and lush instrumentation, sounds so vintage that you could almost believe it came from any decade. You find yourself agreeing with the bold declaration of her label, Third Man Records: “Hard work, stick-to-it-ivness, grit, and pristine musicality drenched in real life experience from the school of hard knocks… that’s Nashville. That’s country music.”

I can’t help but think that her spunky attitude comes from the difficult times revealed in poignant detail throughout her record. The album closes with “I’ll be desperate and depressed until I die”, and I ask whether that was reflective of her state of mind during the writing process. She reveals that the song was originally written at a time when she and her husband were “really struggling”—she was interviewed by Rolling Stone, but didn’t yet have a finished album—and conveys a personal realisation that “maybe success doesn’t cure depression”.

‘Your Town Gets Around’ is a no-holds barred critique of the country music industry, Nashville being the notorious town in question. In one of the most cutting lines, “maybe I’d be smarter if I played dumb”, she lays bare the dinosaur sexism she has encountered in country music. “There’s not a lot of space for women… it’s shoved down our throats that women should be the objects of songs, be objectified,” she says. She expands about double standards: “men are called ‘natural born leaders’ if they speak out, while women are told ‘would you stop bitchin’?’” Nevertheless, Price cites Loretta Lynn “singing about the Pill” as an inspiration for her own music which counters stereotypes with stories of resilience and determination.

Finally, I quote songwriter Bobby Braddock, who recently remarked “country music has become publicly apolitical.” Price agrees: “I do think country musicians over a longer period have become less political and more scared to voice their opinion”. She cites Johnny Cash’s Bitter Tears, with its focus on the history and plight of Native Americans, as a “great political album” which has been overlooked (Price herself has been vocal in her support for Native American tribes resisting the controversial Dakota pipeline).

Inevitably, our discussion then turns to Trump, an especially knotty issue for current country artists. While Loretta Lynn has expressed her support for the president-elect, and most have remained silent, Price has been a rare vocal voice in opposition. She famously wore an ‘Icky Trump’ T-shirt at a live radio session the day after the election, for which she “was threatened that her name would be passed on to his team”. Why did she? “As musicians, we have to use our voices, voice our opinions… it’s all we have”, she replies. And with that, we are back to Streep’s speech: “Quoting Streep quoting Carrie Fisher—take your broken heart, make it into art”.

Life Divided: bops

Pro (Eloise)

Amidst a swirling tempest of internal turmoil, Shakespeare’s Hamlet poses the head-scratcher: “to be or not to be”. If only he would ask us: ”to bop or not to bop”. “Hamlet mate” I would say, “that is not the fucking question. The question is, in fact, bop juice—orange or Red Bull?” Remembering what the lads at Wittenberg used to say—that “there is nothing either good or bad, but drinking makes it so”—he’d probably down a few there and then. Instead of feigned insanity, Hamlet would go on a “legit mad one”.

There would be nothing rotten in the state of Denmark, and Denmark, like everyone else, would be an absolute state. At midnight, the Dane would slur into the ear of a baffled porter a lovesick eulogy. And, come the morning, Hamlet and Ophelia would linger in bed to catch up on Stranger Things and ‘deliveroo’ some noodles.

Cannot we learn from this cautionary tale of what might have been? The start of term has potential for some serious Hamlet-style ‘Oxistential crisis-ing’. For a start, you’ve just realised that your vac reading list was not intended as a hilarious joke. And, whilst you may not be the monarch of Denmark who’s been visited by the ghost of his murdered father, you’ve still got a lot on your plate.

Bops are the answer to this stress. Being required to only deploy two phrases throughout the entire night—”Who did you come as?” and “Well, I’m off to get another drink”—you don’t have to fret about small talk. You’ll sweat out all your toxins, Gwyneth Paltrow style, attempting to breakdance and by running around avoiding people you’ve just been rude to. The headspace and endorphins will combine, catapulting you to new levels of clarity.

Post-bop, you will deem life to be generally okay, and consider it amazing if some cheesy chips and a Rubicon are thrown into the bargain, which they duly will be. “Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t” (Hamlet, Act II Scene ii)

Con (Charles)

I love dancing. I love partying. I love to boogie. I worked hard to attain my BNOC status by being an absolute legend in first year. And yet, despite my party proclivities, I hate bops.

Firstly, the age-old conundrum of timing. Do you rock up fashionably late, like the cool kid you are, when the bop is Certified Live™? Or, do you arrive early, join the freshers, and awkwardly stand under the harsh light of a single coloured globe in the middle of an empty dance floor?

It’s true, you never want to be too early to a bop, and yet, most bops end so early that by the time you’ve had a few drinks in someone’s room and perfected your costume, the whole thing is already winding down. Result: you arrive ready to slay, with the last round bell already rung.

This brings us to problem number two: post-bop indecision. Or, as I like to call it, ‘the-disintegration-of-social-relations-as-you-realise-that-all-your-friends-are-snakes’.

You’ve somehow managed to concoct a runway-worthy look out of all the junk in your room, and just reached a good level (because, as always, the bop juice ran out too early), and now, finally, you’re ready to party! You frantically stagger about the room and at last find some faces that you recognise.

“Cellar?” you shout confidently around the room. Your ‘friends’, however, drearily respond with the likes of: “Sorry mate, I’ve got an essay”, “No way, I’ve got finals” and “I’m the literal snake who convinced Eve to eat the apple and release sin into the world”, as they disappear faster than the aforementioned bop juice.

You are struck by indecision, paralysed by the dilemma of whether to drag your sweaty corpse to a club. Like the trolls in The Hobbit, your friends bicker and argue about the logistics of clubbing until the the bright lights of the bar come on. Inevitably, you’re all turned into stone, and perish.

Not Wong: Eternal vigilance guarantees no freedom

0

Eternal vigilance guarantees no freedom, but to abandon our duties of vigilance is to abandon the last barrier that stands between us and the curtailing of important moral and political values that we have held so dear to us, as liberals and conservatives alike. Donald Trump’s inauguration on 20 January 2017 was a moment of farce, anger, shock, and—above all—a wake-up call from reality that we ought not ignore.

I was in London the day the Women’s March happened. On my Facebook newsfeed I saw hundreds of slogans, signs, banners, and posters that called for the defiance of Trump. Sadly, I was unable to physically attend. The march itself was beautiful, and epitomised contentious politics at its very best: dynamic, vibrant, performatively defiant, and united in difference. It gave a voice to those in the American subaltern fighting back against a new reincarnation of an old Establishment who has sought to and will continually seek to dismiss their voices through championing a privileged conception of “free speech”. It was testimony to the power of psychological solidarity in an age of contentious politics, by subverting the precarity of millions of women living under a “pussy-grabbing”, “locker-room-talk” President and reclaiming the rhetoric of sexual violence historically used to endorse pernicious assaults upon women’s dignity and honour. Above all, it provided psychological comfort and much needed catharsis to both the thousands who attended marches all across the world, and the many millions more who observed in mournful silence.

But beyond the warm glow I felt as I parsed images of individuals defiantly calling out the nefarious hypocrisy of the Trump administration, beyond the moderate reassurance that the cause for egalitarianism and feminism has not been lost—yet—I was deeply troubled by an underlying sense of paranoia and deep-rooted fear. I was struck by the fact that if we were to hold the Trump administration to account, the Women’s March was nothing but a mere first step amongst the many hundreds and thousands more we have yet to make in fighting the good fight for the upcoming four to eight years. No doubt it is essential to maintain a strong, feel-good factor as a morale boost—sharing, commenting, and liking on social media; shouting chants in the March; performing Queerness outside Pence’s mansion—these actions are necessary in sustaining both the normative purpose and motivational solidarity that structure our ongoing fight.

But against a regime that is seeking to overthrow past Executive Orders and legislative decisions concerning protecting ethnic minorities and the Queer populace; that deems Climate Change a “hoax” and prioritises asserting its “Alternative Facts” whilst shutting down dissenting media views—activism that prioritises our short-term gratification and immediate consumption could only get us so far. If we were to believe that expressive demonstrations alone are “enough” in “expressing our solidarity” and “showing that we are not afraid of Trump”, then the future could never be any more bleak for the liberal movement. Don’t get me wrong—we must keep marching on. But marching alone would ultimately achieve nothing.

First, we must recognise the intersectionality of oppression that would only become more prevalent as the rise of the far right persists. There is Trump—but there’s also Farage (UK), Petry (Germany), Wilders (the Netherlands), Salvini (Italy), and more. Intersectionality—contrary to popular belief amongst certain circles—is not the glib belief that ‘all minorities should come together and sing Kumbaya, hand-in-hand’.

Instead, it is the recognition that whilst white women are clearly victims of far-right authoritarianism—which has sought to strip them of their basic healthcare (cf. Planned Parenthood), deny them their rights to access equal economic opportunities (cf. Trump’s plans to scrap legislation designed to facilitate better female representation in corporations), and transform their reproductive rights into subjects of masculine fetishisation and monopoly (cf. abortion), women of colour are additionally affected by problems such as the re-institutionalisation of the school-to-prison pipeline and explicitly racialised policing methods under Trump; it is the acknowledgment that female immigrants and refugees would be faced with increasingly harsh threats of cruel repatriation into warzones, as well as violent abuse in camps without due processes; it is the realisation that the particularly pernicious means in which the purging of gender-neutral facilities and gender reassignment surgery will be systemically attacking non-cis women who do not fit comfortably within the gender binary or the heteronormative order of relations.

The Women’s March was a march for the Woman, but for whom does this Woman speak? And who will speak for those who will be living under constant fear of Trump’s authoritarianism, as he seeks to cut down on Section 8 housing (council housing) and obliterate medical safety nets with an alternative that has little beyond being “bigly” and “the best plan ever”? And who will march for those who face increasing racialised profiling and abuse, who find themselves walking down a street being told to “f*ck back to where they’re from”; told that a nation with which they have identified for no longer has any space for their presence; and coerced into apologising for their sexual orientations, gender identities, ethnicities, and races?

Let’s be very clear here. To recognise that oppression operates in an intersectional manner does not—under any circumstance—entail that we dismiss the experiences of suffering of one minority or another. We could oppose racism without being sexists; sexism without being racists; classism without queerphobia; queerphobia without classism. Justice is not a zero-sum game. It is a collective effort.

Second, we must mobilise capital for political change. This is where the global nature of contentious politics kicks in. Social movements are crucial—but they could often only succeed when they successfully map themselves onto the political opportunity structures of countries (as Tarrow and Tilley prophetically noted). Keep protesting—but let’s target the protests at those individuals who must truly be held accountable. Keep calling for reforms and justices—but let’s replace the often vacuous, idealistically vague slogans with focused visions and specific demands. Keep mocking the figures that have, and will continue to make our lives miserable—but let’s not squander our credibility and moral capital by bizarrely abusing the likes of a 10-year-old son and a woman whom we seem to mock because of their associations with an authoritarian villain (how misogynistic, ironically, is the trope that wives somehow deserve to be blamed, attacked, or vilified on the basis of their husbands’ characters?). Keep signing online petitions—but also reach out to your Senators and MPs, your local politicians and party leaders. When 2018 comes around, vote for those who could genuinely defend the rights of the 99 per cent; when 2020 comes around, vote in the good faith that you could expel the impostor who—four years ago—claimed to be able to help those that he will have done very little for by 2020.

Some say we ought to give him the benefit of the doubt. And we did—from 2015 to that fateful November night, and from 9 November to 20 January, and today: we have given this incompetent mess of a man far too much benefit of the doubt, and I dare say it’s high time we abandoned any deluded possibilities that Trump would somehow magically ‘pivot’ back to making moderate compromises—this man would not pivot back to pragmatism and commonsense, let alone compromise. So why dream on?

Above all, we must remain vigilant. Vigilant, in recognising that the most pernicious forms of oppression often come not from the State, but the civil society; vigilant, in giving a voice to our brothers and sisters, comrades and fellow human beings where they could not be heard. Vigilant against mendacious ‘Alternative Facts’; against the post-truth conceit in the post-modern era; against the damned lies told to us again and again by blatantly wrong politicians—and against the tides of darkness that threaten to undermine our most fundamental values of decency and common respect for each other as human beings.

Eternal vigilance guarantees no freedom.

But all it takes for Evil to prevail is that good men do nothing.