Madam – I must say I was shocked, confused, and quite frankly offended to read the sentiments described in a comment piece in last week’s paper (Broken dreams of student politics).
The author, who ran the colourful campaign of Ashwin Desai for anti-Racism officer, made sweeping (and incorrect) statements on Islam and Judaism (which he describes as ‘political affiliations’), and on the LSE Islamic Society, whose members apparently cannot think for themselves and instead vote exactly in line with the endorsement email (which incidentally implores them to read the manifestos of the candidate prior to voting). I understand his friend lost the campaign, and that is unfortunate, but this is no excuse to make bitter statements which belittle two major world faiths and the intelligence of LSE ISOC members.
Ladan Shiek Mohammed
BSc International Relations and History ’11
Madam – Looking at the front page article of the Beaver last week: ‘Sizeable disparity in diversity profile…at LSE’ I couldn’t help but assume that April Fool’s Day must have arrived early.
In the article, we were told that 42.7 per cent of the School’s student population is white, and are encouraged to interpret this as evidence for a huge disparity in the LSE’s diveristy profile. Though the article is very well written, this does not prevent its conclusion from being laughable. The percentage of white students at LSE points to anything but a lack of diversity. Given that the UK population as a whole is 92.1 per cent white, having only 42.7 per cent white students is a sure sign that the school has succeeded in diversifying its student population; at least 57.3 per cent must be from ethnic minority backgrounds! If anything, given the statistics we are provided with, it would just as easy to conclude that white students are underrepresented on campus and in this sense, perhaps the author would have done better arguing that the LSE doesn’t adequately reflect the UK demographic make-up, rather than that it underrepresents students from ethnic minority backgrounds.
The LSE prides itself on its international, multi-ethnic and varied community. By putting a sensationalist story about an imagined ‘absence of diversity’ amongst the student population on the front page of the Beaver, the author have merely prevented a more worthy story from making the headlines. Anyone who has walked down Houghton Street will understand why.
Sam Williams
BSc Politics and Philosophy ’12
Madam – In reference to Treasurer George Wetz’ letter of March 13 I must say I am proud to be so relevant to George’s tenure a full year on from my graduation.
While he did indeed win his election fair and square, I must take issue with his figures. He claims to have won a majority of “around double.” Of the 1,557 votes cast in our race, George won 54 per cent (845 votes) to my 37 per cent (584 votes), which is a fine victory to be sure, however, in order to have won by anything like 2-1 he would have needed an extra 323 votes or there abouts. With his clear lack of mathematical flair, I wonder if it is such a surprise George spent so much of the Union’s money on a frankly tacky refurbishment of the bars, or lost so much in legal costs.
As if that isn’t enough he claimed it would be “bold” to dare attack his credibility or even “derived by a fictional mind”. So what of the student body’s overwhelming rejection of the ‘Media Group Fee’ and ‘External Trustees’ – both of which Wetz pushed so hard for in his own referendum? Likewise, his many failed attempts to take over this paper would be equally laughable if they weren’t so serious. Or how about the fact he will leave the Union more divided and angry than when he arrived, primarily because of his disregard for the constitution, enunciated in a UGM motion passed last week. Embarrassingly, if unsurprisingly, the student body also voted to banish him to an ‘Etiquette and Interpersonal Skills Refresher.’ All this is to say nothing of the official complaints leveled against him by fellow students, which will probably be seen to by the school. All in all, I’d say his whingeing in last week’s paper is the sign of a sabbatical officer with a very tarnished record indeed.
But not to worry George! No less than 12 months ago, you beat me in an election…
In Solidarity with a fantastic paper,
Seph Brown
BSc International Relations ‘09
LSESU Anti-Racism Officer 08-09
Related posts:
- 16th March 2010 – Editorial
- Letters to the Editor – 3
- Letters to the Editor – 1
- Letters to the Editor MT8
- Letters to the Editor – 4
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 08:44 and is filed under Comment.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Letters to the Editor – 16th March 2010
on 16 Mar 2010 in Comment
Madam – I must say I was shocked, confused, and quite frankly offended to read the sentiments described in a comment piece in last week’s paper (Broken dreams of student politics).
The author, who ran the colourful campaign of Ashwin Desai for anti-Racism officer, made sweeping (and incorrect) statements on Islam and Judaism (which he describes as ‘political affiliations’), and on the LSE Islamic Society, whose members apparently cannot think for themselves and instead vote exactly in line with the endorsement email (which incidentally implores them to read the manifestos of the candidate prior to voting). I understand his friend lost the campaign, and that is unfortunate, but this is no excuse to make bitter statements which belittle two major world faiths and the intelligence of LSE ISOC members.
Ladan Shiek Mohammed
BSc International Relations and History ’11
Madam – Looking at the front page article of the Beaver last week: ‘Sizeable disparity in diversity profile…at LSE’ I couldn’t help but assume that April Fool’s Day must have arrived early.
In the article, we were told that 42.7 per cent of the School’s student population is white, and are encouraged to interpret this as evidence for a huge disparity in the LSE’s diveristy profile. Though the article is very well written, this does not prevent its conclusion from being laughable. The percentage of white students at LSE points to anything but a lack of diversity. Given that the UK population as a whole is 92.1 per cent white, having only 42.7 per cent white students is a sure sign that the school has succeeded in diversifying its student population; at least 57.3 per cent must be from ethnic minority backgrounds! If anything, given the statistics we are provided with, it would just as easy to conclude that white students are underrepresented on campus and in this sense, perhaps the author would have done better arguing that the LSE doesn’t adequately reflect the UK demographic make-up, rather than that it underrepresents students from ethnic minority backgrounds.
The LSE prides itself on its international, multi-ethnic and varied community. By putting a sensationalist story about an imagined ‘absence of diversity’ amongst the student population on the front page of the Beaver, the author have merely prevented a more worthy story from making the headlines. Anyone who has walked down Houghton Street will understand why.
Sam Williams
BSc Politics and Philosophy ’12
Madam – In reference to Treasurer George Wetz’ letter of March 13 I must say I am proud to be so relevant to George’s tenure a full year on from my graduation.
While he did indeed win his election fair and square, I must take issue with his figures. He claims to have won a majority of “around double.” Of the 1,557 votes cast in our race, George won 54 per cent (845 votes) to my 37 per cent (584 votes), which is a fine victory to be sure, however, in order to have won by anything like 2-1 he would have needed an extra 323 votes or there abouts. With his clear lack of mathematical flair, I wonder if it is such a surprise George spent so much of the Union’s money on a frankly tacky refurbishment of the bars, or lost so much in legal costs.
As if that isn’t enough he claimed it would be “bold” to dare attack his credibility or even “derived by a fictional mind”. So what of the student body’s overwhelming rejection of the ‘Media Group Fee’ and ‘External Trustees’ – both of which Wetz pushed so hard for in his own referendum? Likewise, his many failed attempts to take over this paper would be equally laughable if they weren’t so serious. Or how about the fact he will leave the Union more divided and angry than when he arrived, primarily because of his disregard for the constitution, enunciated in a UGM motion passed last week. Embarrassingly, if unsurprisingly, the student body also voted to banish him to an ‘Etiquette and Interpersonal Skills Refresher.’ All this is to say nothing of the official complaints leveled against him by fellow students, which will probably be seen to by the school. All in all, I’d say his whingeing in last week’s paper is the sign of a sabbatical officer with a very tarnished record indeed.
But not to worry George! No less than 12 months ago, you beat me in an election…
In Solidarity with a fantastic paper,
Seph Brown
BSc International Relations ‘09
LSESU Anti-Racism Officer 08-09
Related posts:
This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 08:44 and is filed under Comment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.