‘Their hands were tied legally’: Students react to ratification of Restore Britain society by University of York
Source: PomeloTraditional971
‘Their hands were tied legally’: Students react to ratification of Restore Britain society by University of York
Source: PomeloTraditional971
16 Comments
[removed]
>The York Tab launched an independent inquiry into student opinions on the ratification.
>The general consensus from the inquiry was that none of the students who responded were happy or in agreement with the decision to ratify the Restore Britain Society … [A student] offered a more sympathetic response, explaining “Their hands were tied legally”.
As for the statement on the ratification itself:
>In reaching this decision, the Board had to balance several complex factors and had to act in line with York SU’s legal and regulatory obligations. This includes the University’s duty to uphold legislation on freedom of speech, which by extension applies to the SU, as well as complying with the SU’s charitable objects, guidance from the Charity Commission on political activity and campaigning, and guidance from the Office for Students on free speech.
>We are legally required to consider all society applications on the same basis, regardless of their politics. Refusing to ratify a society purely because of its lawful views would expose York SU to serious legal risk and ultimately harm our ability to serve you.
>Ratifying a society is not an endorsement. It does not mean the SU supports Restore Britain’s views. It does not mean your officers support them. It means we are legally bound to apply the same process to every group that meets our requirements.
God, isn’t freedom of expression a menace? It’s so inconvenient that there are some laws protecting it. We should honestly do away with it.
The detain and deport pub golf social sounds interesting.
> One shared that they believe the ratification “makes an unsafe environment for international students at a **uni that prides itself on diversity**”.
We love diversity, as long as everyone thinks the same way
Correct me if im wrong but isnt this a good thing? Academia can hash out the pitfalls of Restore’s idea’s logically, outside of what we consider moral in today’s world?
[removed]
[removed]
If its actually students who want to form it then I don’t necessarily think you should stop them.
Neither should you stop the other students from calling them wankers, as is their right.
It’s a different situation to far right people being invited in from outside to speak to a student body who largely don’t want shit to do with them.
I had initially thought a hyperbolic scenario but realised I can draw from experience. SUs do reject or ban certain politically motivated societies. I remember vividly an anarchist group being explicitly banned from being allowed their own society at Uni of Sheff, I suspect more to do with their repeated occupations of university buildings…
Depending on what the ‘conditions’ posed on the society in response to concerns are, there still might be an element of unfairness where the Restore Britain society is held to a higher standard than others.
Sounds like a considerable portion of staff might actually be of the view it shouldn’t have been allowed but don’t want the legal hassle. Surely the line should be ‘hands were tied morally/ethically’ not “legally”. The amount of people who have a wonky, hypocritical morality is shocking.
It’s concerning that so few students at a leading UK university support freedom of assembly and open debate. What happens when these students grow up and are in positions of power? Left wing totalitarianism?
History is full of attempts to ban or suppress groups and ideas, and it rarely works – just drives them underground and isolated from challenge. It also depends on giving someone the authority to decide which views are acceptable. Perhaps we should be teaching this in schools.
Universities once excluded atheists, women, gays political dissidents, and many others.
Yeah, not a huge issue tbh. I give it about a week before the Restore Britain society say or do something that gets them banned.
But yeah, uh … York uni students in the Restore Britain society, you need a better hobby.
Unpopular opinion: All (non-violent) societies at university should be allowed. Communist, conservative, libertarian, neoliberal, socialist. Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist. Feminism, LGBT, pro-abortion, anti-abortion, anti-vax. Pro-Palestine and pro-Israel, environmentalists and climate change deniers.
(reason I didn’t include Nazis here is because Nazism inherently advocates for violence, while communism as envisioned by Marx was never put into place)
Now, if the society commits (or advocates to commit) a hate crime against someone, e.g. if the right-wing society storms a mosque or the Palestine Society harasses Israeli students on the basis of being Israeli, then the society should be shut down and its members expelled and prosecuted if neccessary.
You could argue letting them spread their viewpoints is dangerous, but who decides what viewpoints are dangerous? My Uni has a communist society and communism killed millions, however because Marx himself wasn’t the one implementing it, it isn’t technically a violent ideology. Many people believe the “pro-life” (anti-abortion) society shouldn’t exist because they don’t agree with it.
If they don’t want it to function, they should join it to have a majority, elect themselves to the committee, and then not bother arranging any activities or meetings. The university won’t allow a second Restore Britain society to form, and usually won’t allow a similar but differently named society either. Neuter them via democracy and bureaucracy.
Silly easy to go about it. Allow them to stand and make their arguments, then annihilate them on the podium/platform.
Restore are great at provoking lazy and morally corrupt low iq people. Plenty of them at university.