DOCSLIB.ORG

D'agostino on Pearce, 'The Golden Talking-Shop: the Oxford Union Debates Empire, World War, Revolution, and Women'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
D'agostino on Pearce, 'The Golden Talking-Shop: the Oxford Union Debates Empire, World War, Revolution, and Women' H-Diplo D'Agostino on Pearce, 'The Golden Talking-Shop: The Oxford Union Debates Empire, World War, Revolution, and Women' Review published on Sunday, July 8, 2018 Edward Pearce. The Golden Talking-Shop: The Oxford Union Debates Empire, World War, Revolution, and Women. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. xiv + 674 pp. $40.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-19-871723-2. Reviewed by Anthony D'Agostino (San Francisco State University)Published on H-Diplo (July, 2018) Commissioned by Seth Offenbach (Bronx Community College, The City University of New York) Printable Version: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=51537 No sooner had Adolf Hitler come to power in Germany at the end of January 1933 than the world learned of the Oxford Union passing a resolution by 274 votes to 153 that “the House will in no circumstance fight for King and Country” (p. 389). This pacifist statement is the only mention of the Oxford Union that appears in accounts of the origins of World War II, where it is usually taken as representative of elite opinion and its tropism for the policy of appeasement. To be sure, the vote could only be meaningful when contrasted with an assumed boyish patriotism among the leaders of the nation, ever ready to report to the colors, “the whole University marching with rifle down the High,” in the words of the commander of Oxford officer training (p. 169). Pacifism among the sons of hunting and shooting men presented quite a different and shocking picture to the rest of the world. The debaters would change their minds by 1938, rounding on the Munich pact and girding for some kind of a stand against Fascism. This shift is sometimes given to mean, wrongly I think, that the King and Country vote of 1933 was taken too seriously. Perhaps one should say instead that it was a low point from which a turn began from anti-war and anti-imperialist sentiments to anti-Fascist ones, a spiritual transition moved along by the Spanish Civil War and its impact on the minds of British youth. Tracing the intellectual history of this or related questions is not the job of this volume. Instead it is a series of fragmentary transcripts of debates from bound volumes of the Oxford Magazine published between 1895 and 1956, some speakers quoted at length, others only briefly, some just paraphrased by editors who comment freely on style and substance. A debate rendered in this way can become just an ensemble of quotations or series of summaries. Even so, it does give us a kind of intellectual history. The whole package is assembled with skill by journalist and historian Edward Pearce, who wraps it in a splendid engaging essay on the political and social background of the debates, which amounts to an appraisal of the British elite sensibility from the Boer War to Suez. Pearce also adds his own comments to those of the editors of the transcripts and leaves us in no doubt about his take on most of the issues. He warns in advance that, even if we get to observe in action Hillaire Belloc, G. K. Chesterton, Philip Guedalla, Evelyn Waugh, Barbara Ward, Anthony Wedgewood-Benn, and others, alongside luminaries like David Lloyd George and Winston Churchill, we should not expect a compendium of wit, although that was clearly the end toward which all the players were striving. Citation: H-Net Reviews. D'Agostino on Pearce, 'The Golden Talking-Shop: The Oxford Union Debates Empire, World War, Revolution, and Women'. H-Diplo. 07-08-2018. https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/reviews/2024586/dagostino-pearce-golden-talking-shop-oxford-union-debates-empire Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 1 H-Diplo Some contributions wear better than others and some not so well at all. So it is notCan You Top This? Instead it is a fascinating display of opinions and prejudices on the earth-shaking issues of the era of the world wars, a glimpse through the window on political and philosophical rumblings among the officer training corps of modern history’s greatest colonial empire in the period of its greatest trials. The debaters take on subjects large and small, grave and fanciful. They do not all denounce the Levant, the Proletariat, the Bolshevik. In fact, many of them have a perfectly reasonable attitude toward trade unions, the feelings of the men, the ideas of John Maynard Keynes, the welfare state in general, and even the New Deal—not, however, toward women and the woman question. Too early for that. Philosopher A. J. Ayer asks the opinion of the House on the question “What is Happiness?” There is an inadequate response. A motion is offered that “The House Should View Nothing with Alarm” (pp. 358, 396). After due consideration, it is rejected. The center of gravity in the discussions is the empire and its foreign policy choices. Here Pearce takes a view that might be called Salisburyan. By that I refer to a certain reading of the views of Lord Salisbury, realist-minded executor of British policy in the 1880s, when he and Otto Von Bismarck set the tone with their diplomacy of Anglo-German condominium. Salisbury was in power again at the end of the 1890s, when he entertained the possibility that Britain might go it alone in splendid isolation. Pearce thinks it a grave mistake for Britain to have been pulled into the Great War, and after the war, a mistake to have gone along with the French against Germany, that is, before Hitler made it necessary to do so. Also a mistake, in the reverse direction, not to have thrown in with the French against Germany, for example, on the Rhineland in 1936. He thinks appeasement might have been a good idea, but before 1914. This amounts to saying that the British could have maintained a balance of power in the time of the world wars on strictly continental terms, without Russia or the United States. I do not think this view of things really holds up. The debates offer perspectives on these matters, although they cannot be said to pursue any consistent line of thought. Pearce introduces the discussion on the alignments leading to British commitment to war against Germany in 1914 by endorsing the historically persistent criticism of the Triple Entente and its proponents, Sir Edward Grey, Arthur Nicolson, and Foreign Office adviser Eyre Crowe. Here he follows Christopher Clark’s expansive and powerful study,The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 (2013). It was one of fourteen books on the outbreak of the Great War that I counted in a Whitehall bookstore in 2014 and certainly the one that has received the most attention. It makes, or remakes, the case against the anti-German policy line. Harvard historian Sidney B. Fay argued something similar in 1920. The first generation of Great War revisionist historians, led by Harry Elmer Barnes and William L. Langer, followed by attacking the War Guilt Clause of the Versailles Peace, focusing attention instead on French decisions, the Russian mobilization, and the follies of Grey’s policy. Pearce thinks that British policy was too Pan-Slav and anti-German, and that the House did not appreciate the drift toward war. Grey’s line balancing Germany began with the diplomatic revolution of Lord Landsdowne as foreign secretary after the Boer War, a policy that brought Britain out of splendid isolation and into the Triple Entente. On the reversal of alliances, which took Britain from a perceived role as junior partner in the Triple Alliance to its adversary, the Oxford debates were confused and inconsistent. At the time of the Boer War, opinion seemed in fact stridently militant on Citation: H-Net Reviews. D'Agostino on Pearce, 'The Golden Talking-Shop: The Oxford Union Debates Empire, World War, Revolution, and Women'. H-Diplo. 07-08-2018. https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/reviews/2024586/dagostino-pearce-golden-talking-shop-oxford-union-debates-empire Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 2 H-Diplo all azimuths. In 1903, with the Russo-Japanese War looming, the House did not at all regret the alliance with Japan, one member in fact citing a profound confluence of British and Japanese interests. Later in the year the debaters even welcomed the prospect of an entente with France. Yet by 1904 they turned on Landsdowne himself, who gave an impassioned defense of his policy in person. They cited the disadvantages of yielding Morocco to the French as part of the entente’s price. In 1911 they condemned emphatically the policy of the Triple Alliance—Germany, Austria, and for the moment, Italy. But how to balance it? In May 1914 a Cambridge guest complained that Britain’s enmeshment in the Triple Entente cannot balance the Triple Alliance and renders rapprochement with Germany impossible. This is the sentiment that Pearce prefers; he regrets that it is not general. After victory in the war, with its demoralizing cost (but not for the empire), you might think that the House would have pivoted toward sentiments critical of the Versailles Peace, such as those expressed in Keynes’s Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919). This might entail some revisionist history on German war guilt. Pearce offers the opinion that the authors of the “mined and toxic peace” of Versailles were as guilty as the appeasers for World War II (p. 281). Nevertheless, the House could not but approve of the way the peace had turned out, even while the debaters still rounded on the French.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • College Historical Society
    COLLEGE HISTORICAL SOCIETY LAWS OF THE SOCIETY Chapter I Fundamental Regulations The following shall be considered the fundamental regulations of the College Historical Society and no Law or resolution in anywise contradicting, suspending or repealing them, or any part of them, shall be valid without the consent of the Board. 1. All persons paying the capital levy shall be eligible for the ordinary Membership of the Society. 2. Topics of religious controversy and present party politics shall be prohibited at the meetings of the Society. 3. Every meeting of the Society shall terminate not later than twelve o’clock by College time. 4. No person can be elected an Officer of the Historical Society without the sanction of the Board unless he be either officially connected with the University or be a member of the Society. This law shall not apply to the election of Vice-Presidents. Chapter II Annual Members 1. The amount of the annual subscription shall be determined by the General Committee in advance of the first of October of each session. 2. All persons who are eligible shall become Annual Members immediately upon paying their annual subscription. 3. The membership of every Annual Member shall lapse at the end of the sixth week of Michaelmas Term in the session following that in which his annual subscription was last paid. Every person whose membership shall have so lapsed shall be re-admissible on payment of the annual subscription. 4. Any member who is neither indebted to the Society in any amount, nor has in his possession any book from the Society’s Library, nor has any key belonging to the Society may resign from membership of the Society on notifying in writing the Record Secretary of his wish to do so.
    [Show full text]
  • Scrutinised Long Manifestos - Tt20 (2Nd Election)
    SCRUTINISED LONG MANIFESTOS - TT20 (2ND ELECTION) CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT-ELECT Amy Gregg (Ex-Treasurer, Exeter College ) - Candidate for President-Elect - Long Manifesto The Union has had significant setbacks in the last few years. I did not intend to run this term, but it is clear that the Union needs a President who has the experience and the capability to set it back on the right course. The Union can do so much better, and the Union must do so much better. As an undergraduate, I was President of the Cambridge Union. During this time I ran a record-setting membership drive, managed a £100,000 budget, and hosted over thirty speakers including Stephen Fry, Quentin Blake and Moazzam Begg. After leaving Cambridge I was a trainee solicitor at a Magic Circle Law firm, and I now hold an offer for a pupillage to be a barrister. I have real world experience which I can use to improve our Union as well. I previously served on committee for 7 terms. In this time I arranged 5 debates, including confirming 5/6 speakers for the Comedy debate. I ran Debates, Panels and Speaker events, confirmed multiple speakers and chaired the Union’s largest committee. I also spent over 50 days of vacation working for the Union and made 3 winning paper speeches. As Treasurer I secured 29 debate Floor Prizes, 12 New Treasurer’s Treats and coordinated sponsorship from a major Scholarship fund - ensuring transparency by publishing the audited accounts on the app. This demonstrates that I have the ability to run the Union, but it also made me realise: the Union needs real change - change only an experienced President can bring.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution of the Cambridge Union Society
    The Constitution of the Cambridge Union Society THE LAWS 0) Definitions 1) The Laws and Rules The Structure of The Cambridge Union 2) Membership 3) The Standing Committee 4) Officers 5) The Responsibilities of the Officers 6) The Review Committee Elections and Appointments 7) Elections Procedure 8) Charitable Points for Elections 9) Electoral Rules 10) Electoral Investigations 11) Appointments Procedure Codes and Policies 12) Code of Conduct 13) Code of Conduct Investigation 14) Principles of the Union 15) Restrictions on Invitations 16) Expenses Policy 17) Procedure for Main Debates 18) Policy on Reciprocal Membership Page 1 of 67 THE RULES Events Policies 1) Duty Officer 2) House Rules 3) Guest Policy Competitive Debating 4) Debating Team Selection and Reimbursement 5) Management of Debating Budget 6) Convenors 7) Convenors Positions and Responsibilities Organisational Committees 8) Full Committee 9) Full Committee Departments and Responsibilities 10) Sub-Committees 11) Budget Committee 12) Competitive Debating Committee 13) Vacation Committee 14) Executive Committee Miscellaneous 15) Handover 16) Social Events Planning Procedure Page 2 of 67 Definitions THE LAWS Definitions In these Laws and Rules the following expressions have the following means unless inconsistent with the context: 1) Accounts Manager means the individual hired by the Society to run its accounts. 2) Appeals Panel means the panel appointed in accordance with Law 13 which handles disciplinary appeals. 3) Appellant means a member of the Society who is seeking an appeal to a disciplinary decision. 4) Appointee means a member of the Society appointed to a formal position. 5) Board of Trustee-Directors means the group of individual trustee directors who have ultimate responsibility for directing the affairs of the charity from time to time in accordance with the Charities Act 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • An End-Times Debate at Oxford
    Scholars Crossing Article Archives Pre-Trib Research Center May 2009 An End-Times Debate at Oxford Thomas D. Ice Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/pretrib_arch Recommended Citation Ice, Thomas D., "An End-Times Debate at Oxford" (2009). Article Archives. 8. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/pretrib_arch/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Pre-Trib Research Center at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in Article Archives by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN END-TIMES DEBATE AT OXFORD Tom's Perspectives by Thomas Ice In August, 2008 I received an e-mail from the Oxford Union Society in England wanting to know if I would participate in a debate concerning the following motion: “This house believes the end is nigh.” After consulting with some friends and colleagues, I accepted the invitation and the event was scheduled for Friday, November 21, 2008. I subsequently journeyed across the pond and attended this event hoping to provide some testimony for the cause of Christ. Thus, I am providing a report of my trip to such a prestigious environment. OXFORD Oxford is the oldest university in the English-speaking world and the second oldest in the world, next to the University of Paris.1 The name of the university is the same as the town in which it resides. Oxford is about 60 miles northwest of London. It is hard to pin down an exact date for the founding of Oxford, but it is known to have sprang- up in the late 1100s.2 Oxford, like most European Universities, began when different colleges began to be established in the town.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rules, Standing Orders, and Special Schedules of the Oxford Union Society
    THE RULES, STANDING ORDERS, AND SPECIAL SCHEDULES OF THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY James Matthews Balliol College Returning Officer 23rd May 2020 Rules of the Oxford Union Society, Trinity Term 2020 Updated 29th May 2020 THE RULES, STANDING ORDERS, AND SPECIAL SCHEDULES OF THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY THE RULES, STANDING ORDERS, AND SPECIAL SCHEDULES OF THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY 2 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS EDITION 9 NOTE TO THE RETURNING OFFICER AND THE SECRETARY 10 RULES 11 CHAPTER ONE: NAME AND OBJECTS 11 RULE 1: NAME 11 RULE 2: OBJECTS 11 CHAPTER TWO: MEMBERSHIP AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 12 RULE 3: MEMBERSHIP OF THE SOCIETY 12 RULE 4: FACILITY FEE 13 RULE 5: MEMBERSHIP RECORDS AND CARDS 14 RULE 6: FINES AND DEBTS TO THE SOCIETY 15 RULE 7: CESSATION OF MEMBERSHIP 17 RULE 8: RE-ELECTION OF EX-MEMBERS 18 RULE 9: KINDRED SOCIETIES 18 RULE 10: HONORARY MEMBERS 18 RULE 11: PRIVILEGES, STATUS, AND LIABILITY 18 CHAPTER THREE: OFFICERS 19 RULE 12: OFFICERS AND TRUSTEES 19 RULE 13: THE PRESIDENT 20 RULE 14: THE PRESIDENT-ELECT 20 RULE 15: THE LIBRARIAN 20 RULE 16: THE LIBRARIAN-ELECT 21 RULE 17: THE TREASURER 21 RULE 18: THE TREASURER-ELECT 21 RULE 19: THE SECRETARY 22 RULE 20: THE CHAIR OF CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE 23 RULE 21: THE SENIOR LIBRARIAN 24 RULE 22: THE SENIOR TREASURER 24 CHAPTER FOUR: COMMITTEES 25 RULE 23: COMMITTEES - GENERAL 25 RULE 24: STANDING COMMITTEE 31 RULE 25: FINANCE COMMITTEE 32 RULE 26: LIBRARY COMMITTEES 33 RULE 27: SECRETARY'S COMMITTEE 35 RULE 28: CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE 35 RULE 29: DEBATE SELECTION COMMITTEE 36 RULE 30: OTHER
    [Show full text]
  • Atonement, Scapegoats, and the Oxford Debating Society Joe A
    The Kentucky Review Volume 5 | Number 2 Article 3 Winter 1984 Atonement, Scapegoats, and the Oxford Debating Society Joe A. Thompson University of Kentucky Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/kentucky-review Part of the European History Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Thompson, Joe A. (1984) "Atonement, Scapegoats, and the Oxford Debating Society," The Kentucky Review: Vol. 5 : No. 2 , Article 3. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/kentucky-review/vol5/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Kentucky Libraries at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Kentucky Review by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. es. Atonement, Scapegoats, and the Oxford Debating Society :er Joe A. Thompson m e es .e "0xford Atones" read a newspaper headline after the Oxford Union Society defeated by 416 votes to 187 the motion "That this House would not fight for Queen and Country" on 9 February 1983, exactly fifty years after the union had carried by 275 votes to 153 the resolution "That this House will in no circumstances fight r for its King and Country." Most commentators welcomed the "atonement" of Oxford, where, as John Gray wrote in The Wall Street Journal, "intellectual trends are first revealed." The second y Oxford debate was therefore "encouraging and even inspiring. It showed signs that many of history's hard lessons had been learned." 1 But for what was Oxford belatedly atoning? Why did undergraduate debates receive so much attention? And what were .s the "hard lessons" of history to be learned from the Oxford episode? For Max Beloff, the celebrated political writer and academician, the second debate was occasion for personal atonement.
    [Show full text]
  • Manifesto Booklet MT18.Pdf
    ELECTORAL MALPRACTICE ELECTORAL OFFICIALS Electoral malpractice includes, but is not limited to, the following activities: Louise Kandler Making false or misleading claims intended to influence the election Lady Margaret Hall Bribery · Intimidation · Distributing physical campaign material Returning Officer Making slanderous or libellous statements about a candidate Using a vehicle to convey members to the Poll · Campaigning using any University e-mail system · Creating websites or promotional videos · Claiming to represent or be supported DEPUTY RETURNING OFFICERS by any political, racial or religious group · Candidates marking manifesto booklets Hindering the Returning Officer or their Deputies · Unauthorised access or attempted access to another’s personal electronic files To see a complete list, please consult Rule 33, www.oxford-union.org or the Returning Officer. Stanislas Lalanne, Ex-RO Jamie Lagerberg, Ex-RO Alastair Graham, Ex-RO Nebojša Jovanović, Ex-RO Alexandra Galloway, Ex-RO Merton Corpus Christi St. John's St. Peter's Magdalen Any breach of this rule or complaint regarding the conduct of a candidate in the election should be reported to the Returning Officer, at the Oxford Union. Liam Frahm Edward Peckston George Penny Joe Sisson Jesus Brasenose The Queen's St. John's If you have any queries about the election, please contact [email protected], or call 01865 241353 Dominic Brind Hayden Searle Charlie Willis Patrick Cole, Ex-CCC Magdalen St. Anne's Wadham Lady Margaret Hall OXFORD UNION ELECTIONS Poll Date: Friday, 23rd November, 2018 WHERE TO VOTE Polling takes place in the Union’s Goodman Library (the room on the ground floor, next to the marble staircase), from 9.30am to 8.30pm precisely.
    [Show full text]
  • This House Believes That Corporate Sustainability Reporting Should Be Mandated, and Standardised by FASB and IASB, for It to Be Most Useful for Investors
    This House believes that corporate sustainability reporting should be mandated, and standardised by FASB and IASB, for it to be most useful for investors. A Debate at the Oxford Union 11 December 2018 In a world of disruptive economic change, with unprecedented challenges from global warming, social inequality and corporate governance, how best can capital markets receive the information they need to function properly? Environmental, social and governance (ESG) information is increasingly important for investors to understand the sustainability of economic performance, and to make investment decisions accordingly. Yet the disclosure of this sustainability-related ‘nonfinancial’ information is neither standardised nor regulated, as is the norm for financial reporting. Our debate asks whether standard setters such as the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) should be given responsibility for setting standards for nonfinancial information, and if corporate ‘greenwash’ is otherwise inevitable. Our question is reasonable to ask, since both IASB and FASB are expert in setting standards for information on company performance used by investors. Furthermore, through legislation and regulation, almost every listed company in the world must conform to one of these sets of standards. This is a mandate that no institution has with respect to corporate nonfinancial reporting. If it were extended, it is possible that nonfinancial information would have the same credibility and utility as financial information. Or not; the question is open for debate. Doors open 5pm, Oxford Union, Frewin Court, Oxford OX1 3JB Debate 5:30pm, Union Chamber Motion This House believes that corporate sustainability reporting should be mandated, and standardised by FASB and IASB, for it to be most useful for investors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution of the Cambridge Union Society
    The Constitution of the Cambridge Union Society The Constitution of the Cambridge Union Society THE LAWS The Structure of the Cambridge Union Society 1) The Standing Committee 2) Officers and Officers-Elect 3) The Responsibilities of the Officers 4) The Review Committee 5) The Laws and Regulations Elections and Appointments 6) Elections and By Elections 7) Electoral Malpractices 8) Appointments Procedure Membership and Business 9) Membership 10) General Meetings 11) Discipline 12) Appeals THE REGULATIONS Miscellaneous 1) General Principles 2) Duty Officer 3) Procedure for Debates 4) House Rules 5) Guest Policy 6) Speaker Invitations 7) Procedure for the Selection of Debating Teams Appointed Positions 8) The Secretary 9) The Head of Event Management 10) The Head of Publicity 11) Membership Officers 12) Co-Heads of Access 13) The Head of Press 14) The Head of Audio-Visual Technology 15) The Senior Guest Liaison (Debates) 1 The Constitution of the Cambridge Union Society 16) The Senior Guest Liaison (Speakers) 17) The Chief Photographer 18) Diversity Officer 19) Women’s Officer 20) Student Webmaster 21) The Inter- Varsity Convenors 22) The Cambridge Union Schools Debating Competition Convenors 23) The ICYD Convenors 24) The Executive Committee 25) The Debates Committee 26) The Speakers Committee 27) The Ents Committee 28) Speakers Deputies 29) Management of the Debating Budget The Protocols 1) Handover 2) Social Events Procedure 3) Deloitte Provisions 4) Cambridge Union Society Policy on Reciprocal Membership 5) The CUS/CUSEL Relationship Definitions In these Laws and Regulations the following expressions have the following means unless inconsistent with the context: 1) Accounts Manager means the individual hired by the Society to run its accounts.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights Exercises for the University Classroom
    Rita Maran TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents p. 2 Introduction p. 3 Exercise 1: Civil and Political Rights p. 4 Exercise 2: Racial Discrimination p. 5 Exercise 3: Torture p. 6 Exercise 4: The Daily Newspaper p. 7 Exercise 5: Right of Persons with Disabilities p. 8 Exercise 6: Open Book/Mock Exam p. 9 Open Book/Mock Exam Sample Questions p. 10 Exercise 7: Non-governmental Organizations p. 11 Exercise 8: Debate (Oxford Union format) p. 12 Bibliography p. 13 INTRODUCTION Efforts have been expended in these Exercises to offer University Classroom Exercises have been designed to instructors a substantive, stand-alone, one-page Exercise that can assist instructors of human rights by supplying a week’s worth of be carried out in the human rights classroom in approximately an time-tested one-day curricula for the classroom. The Exercises hour and a half, with a minimum of preparation. Every Exercise serve as practical supplements to instructors’ current course develops students' grasp in some way of principles, methodologies, syllabus, and may assist as well in generating new courses on and realpolitik that are of direct use to the students. Every Exercise Human Rights where none presently exists in the college or enhances students’ ability to grasp essentials of the field in a university classroom. cognitively-useful way, whether they plan a career in human rights, are interested in learning about human rights for reasons of good The Exercises virtually wrote themselves during years of citizenship, or because the course answers requirements for teaching interdisciplinary undergraduate courses in human rights graduation.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Edinburgh Postgraduate Journal of Culture and the Arts Issue 29 | Autumn 2019
    University of Edinburgh Postgraduate Journal of Culture and the Arts Issue 29 | Autumn 2019 Title Figs and kippers: why we need to question the language of politics Author Paul Chilton Publication FORUM: University of Edinburgh Postgraduate Journal of Culture & the Arts Issue Number 29 Issue Date Autumn 2019 Publication Date 13/12/2019 Editor Dorothy Lawrenson FORUM claims non-exclusive rights to reproduce this article electronically (in full or in part) and to publish this work in any such media current or later developed. The author retains all rights, including the right to be identified as the author wherever and whenever this article is published, and the right to use all or part of the article and abstracts, with or without revision or modification in compilations or other publications. Any latter publication shall recognise FORUM as the original publisher. 1 FORUM I ISSUE 29 Figs and kippers: why we need to question the language of politics Paul Chilton Lancaster University This article aims to connect three topics: Brexit, Boris and the decay of democracy. What connects this trio is talk, talk, talk. Language and politics are tightly and necessarily intertwined. Indeed, as the Greeks thought, language is intertwined with democracy itself. The twenty-first century has brought unprecedented complexity to human ways of communication, and yet the old rhetorical tricks and oratorical stunts, first described and practised in the ancient world, are still capable of turning heads. As we learn more about how human language works in social and political settings, we can see even more clearly a few of the factors that enable lying politicians to acquire power.
    [Show full text]
  • With the Chapters
    The Gavel of Delta Sigma Rho Volume 30 Article 8 Issue 3 March 1948 3-1948 With the Chapters... Follow this and additional works at: https://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/gavel Part of the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Delta Sigma Rho. (1948). With the Chapters... The aG vel of Delta Sigma Rho, 30(3), 54-59. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. It has been accepted for inclusion in The aG vel of Delta Sigma Rho by an authorized editor of Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. THE GAVEL Witli tke Ckapters . HATES The University has over 30 active de During the sabbatical leave of absence bate teams competing for varsity posi of Prof. Brooks Quiniby, Norman Temple, tions. The schedule for the month of February includes meets with Mundelein, Bates '46, has been Director of Foren- Northwestern, University of Pennsyl sics at Bates. During the first semester, the Bates vania. University of .Miami, the Indiana University Tournament, and the North debating team resumed its international western Universitv Tournament. debates with the University of New —/ Brunswick. The series was interrupted shortly after the debate on Nov. 27. 1941, COLORADO on the entrance of the United States into Speakers Congress is now engaged in the war. the most active year in the forensic his ■ / tory of the University of Colorado. Over CARLETOX a hundred students are engaged in at In addition to its usual custom of spon least one and usually more of the Con soring the cantpus oratory and extempore gress' varied activities.
    [Show full text]