Bristol SU should encourage debate, not demand conformity

By Benjamin Smith, First Year English

Bristol SU risks alienating students and stifling debate by presenting one viewpoint as the only acceptable choice.

With the march of 700,000 protestors demanding a second Brexit referendum on the 20th October this year, it would be no surprise if there was an increase in public political awareness at present – particularly in Bristol, with the Student’s Union marching alongside in support of a “People’s Vote”.

Bristol SU’s support for a People’s Vote might also be explained given that YouGov estimated 86 per cent of those under 25 year old in the South West would vote to Remain, if given the opportunity.

But is this very public display of support for one political position something commendable, or potentially problematic?

It seems clear to me that any organisation proclaiming its sincere support for ‘representation, equality and diversity’ - as the Bristol Student’s Union does - would extend such values to political opinions.

However, this is where the SU has gone wrong. By all means, encourage political discourse through Student Union channels, but don’t adopt an official stance and claim to represent everyone here when doing so.

There is a very real danger that when adopting political stances such as these, you create a situation where one answer or narrative is deemed ‘correct’, or at least difficult to argue against. After all, who would want to be the one who goes against the grain and contradicts what seems to be the beliefs of all their flatmates, course mates and friends? I certainly wouldn’t.

We must remember that university is a place to learn.

We do not have all the answers yet, and therefore the body that represents students should not pretend to have them for us. By marking a line in the sand and saying, ‘We as a student body think this’, you run the risk of alienating opposing points of view by making them seem unacceptable to hold, intentionally or otherwise.

I don’t think that would be beneficial to a diversity of opinions, nor would it be pleasant to those dissenters who think differently to the perceived collective.

It won’t be productive, either. If you create an atmosphere – the dreaded ‘echo chamber’ – where a single narrative is fought for, repeated and conditioned again and again, you discourage actual discussion on important topics and prevent anyone from hearing both sides in equal weight. And what better way could there be to figure out what you think than to hear every fact, every argument and every opinion there is to be had?

encourage political discourse through Student Union channels, but don’t adopt an official stance and claim to represent everyone here when doing so.

I’m not saying we should shelter ourselves, and have the SU shelter us, from anything political which may cause controversy. Doing so would be insulting and frankly naïve in the increasingly tense political Britain we live in today. But the key is to be impartial.

The Students’ Union should refrain from taking an overt political position; it should not have endorsed the People’s Vote. That way, every side gets a fair hearing, without stigma. Everyone can feel free to express their views without fear of collective judgement and without feeling like they are alone against their entire community. In this way, the SU would epitomise the ’diversity’ and ‘representation’ it claims to strive for, in a much better way than by adopting a of firm political stance.

Featured Image: Epigram/Laura Reid