The poverty of student politics

Hardly anyone seems to care about student politics nowadays. There are a few possible reasons for this, but disillusionment is probably the biggest. In 2010 we marched against raises in tuition fees and were ignored: in the face of an uncompromising government, it can often seem impossible to achieve anything. Leaders spout rhetoric but rarely follow through with their promises. Clegg failed us on fee rises.

Anyone who follows Warwick’s student politics will be familiar with empty rhetoric. At election time, paltry promises are made with pomp, while behind the scenes candidates try to ruin each other’s campaigns. It’s no coincidence that the infamous ‘unhooking the bra’ video was released just as Nick Swain ran for re-election.

It seems strange that a group of people who claim to want to represent the student body would resort to such back-stabbing tactics.

What stakes would make candidates so desperate to win? It seems strange that a group of people who claim to want to represent the student body would resort to such back-stabbing tactics. Perhaps some of the people who run for these Union positions are not doing it for the benefit of their fellow students, but for more selfish reasons. Serving as President of the Student Union must be quite the boost to your CV.

This brings me back to rhetoric. Candidates running for positions in the Union often run on uncontroversial platforms. Perhaps they want to lower the price of beer, perhaps raise the quality of local bus services. Either way, nobody objects. This is deliberate: it gives the candidate access to a much higher pool of voters than one with a more controversial position.

Unfortunately, these policies don’t inspire anything other than yawns. So candidates must be as persuasive as possible in order to gather votes – let’s say quoting Robert Kennedy. The end result? Strong language for weak policies. When student politics is populist nonsense, is it really any surprise that few students are engaged?

When student politics is populist nonsense, is it really any surprise that few students are engaged?

Another problem with the student politics at Warwick is its isolation from a broader social context. By focusing on student and academic issues, candidates neglect their responsibility to engage with other important problems. Warwick University receives funding from a number of major weapons manufacturers, and has done for several years. There’s also compelling evidence to suggest that a lot of University-branded clothing is produced in sweatshops. It’s not just the University: the Student Union currently banks with the Royal Bank of Scotland Group and Barclays. Both invest heavily in projects which cause extreme environmental damage, as well as weapons manufacturers. The Union promised to change from these banks to the Co-Operative Bank in 2010. It still hasn’t. Such complacency in the face of human suffering borders on criminality.

The Student Union has the power to have a real impact on many of these issues, but so far very little action has been taken. This isn’t because of a lack of resources or an inability to mobilise students, but a lack of political will. Representatives would rather boost their CV than take a stand – even if that means destroying the power of student politics.

When representatives would rather lower beer prices than prevent the death of innocents, they may as well say “Let them eat cake!”

[divider]