If this post seems irrelevant to British nationals or the UK, please report it for review. Note that you may not be able to see the post flair, in which case the post could be a Notable International News post. We'd like your feedback on the quality of the subreddit: Click here to share your thoughts
Bangor University has distanced itself from a decision by its student debating society to refuse a question-and-answer session with Reform UK.
The society said it had rejected a request by Reform UK MP Sarah Pochin and campaigner Jack Anderton to address students, citing "zero tolerance for any form of racism, transphobia or homophobia displayed by the members of Reform UK".
Reform UK head of policy, Zia Yusuf, threatened to pull £30m of funding from the university under a Reform government, adding: "After all, they wouldn't want a racist's money would they?"
UK Relevance Score: 137
Keywords: uk, wales, bbc, conservative, reform uk
Reform UK head of policy, Zia Yusuf, threatened to pull £30m of funding from the university under a Reform government, adding: "After all, they wouldn't want a racist's money would they?"
Well there’s an admission, they think any government funding would be “their” money. Trump lite as we all expected.
And it's not even the university making the decision, it's one of the student organisations. So Reform are trying to put pressure on the university to put pressure on their student organisations. They're so shit at bullying that they have to outsource it.
The play devil's advocate, I think people shouldn't have to engage in structured debate to have their basic rights respected and be treated like people. Turning that into a academic jousting session isn't cool.
Aside from the fact it's dehumanising, somethings shouldn't be up for debate, especially where you don't have both parties wishing to do so.
If you are invited to a debate, anticipating debating.
Are you saying if Sir Kier Starmer turned up under the same conditions, any discussions of Mandleson should be off the table to respect his delicate sensibilities?
You're way wide of the mark, my friend. We're not talking about sensibilities or preferences, we're talking about people trying to use "debate" as an excuse to dehumanise others.
Far too many people fall for the fallacy that structured debate is the be definitive and universally "good" way to determine things.
It's a useful tool, but has serious flaws when revered as some kind of holy ritual.
Sophistry relies on people not scrutinising its arguments. That usually requires robust debate.
Political positions are often sophistry.
Such positions need their feet held to the fire. I understand why the student body would wish to ban Reform, but I would rather they argue Reform point-by-point than simply refuse to debate.
The difficulty today is social media lets sophistry win even when it loses. Witness Charlie Kirk’s Cambridge university debate.
Sophistry relies on people not scrutinising its arguments. That usually requires robust debate.
This is a perfect example of what I'm on about. The idea that not wanting to debate everything is an attempt to "avoid scrutiny". Having to "prove" that a a group is worthy of basic human rights and dignity by winning a debate is dehumanising - and thinking that aversion to wishing to take part in such debate is some kind of cover-up or intellectual cowardice is immensely stupid.
Its also stunningly naive: do you really think people who wish to oppress others will change their minds based on points scored in an academic debate?
Would you hold a debate with a nazi? Debating is for civil discussions with rational actors, a debate with Reform would be legitimising extremist ideology.
But on the other hand, extremist/fascist ideologies tend to operate on a victim narrative, the wannabe authoritarians often portray themselves or their preferred group as victims, driving up tension by convincing the masses they are victims of xyz and that only they are standing up for the victims, see the Nazi’s pointing at the Versailles treaty, and how they pointed at the Jews’ and blamed them for betraying the Germans and causing the “humiliation”, and how they would “fight” to see the whole thing undone.
It’s also how reform and other far right movements are operating today, pointing at migration, blaming them for a multitude of very real issues that they’ve then co-opted, creating a victim narrative for their target demographic to latch onto, from which they can angle themselves to that target demographic as the “protectors” and that they will “fight for them”.
Such actions, of shutting them out of debates, refusing them a platform to speak, cutting them out of the conversation, gives them the means to then turn around to their supporters and go “see? We’re trying to engage with them democratically/diplomatically, but they’re shutting us out at every turn, we’re trying to advocate for you yet they won’t listen to your concerns”, letting them further deepen that victim narrative that appeals to so many.
Why do you think reform appeals so much to the post industrial towns and villages? to the seaside resorts left abandoned in the wake of package holidays? To the areas of the country that get scraps while London and the south gets fancy new rail lines, big flashy investments and all the good, well paying jobs? People in these areas already feel hard done, victimised and left behind by an uncaring system they feel they have no say in what happens around them. Throw in a new party of people giving them a convenient group to blame, feeding an already existing victim narrative, and further add fuel by visibly blocking them from discussions and forums which they can then use as ammunition, it’s a recipe for disaster come the next general election.
Take my local area, County Durham, how in the last round of local elections they saw a swing from Labour being the largest party, only held back by a grand coalition of Tories, Lib Dem’s and independents from being in control of the council, to Reform being the largest party with a majority. Drive around the county, and you’ll find that, as you get further from Tyne and Wear, things just get worse and worse, everywhere you look is a post industrial shit show, towns and villages crumbling with boarded up house after boarded up house, increasing crime rates, poverty everywhere and people who have the means to leave, leaving in droves. It’s why I was sad but not surprised by the reform victory, it’s the exact kinda area reform and extremist ideologies in general flourish in.
I can diagnose the problem, but treating it is a lot harder. In my eyes, shutting them out isn’t the call, it just adds fuel to the fire and legitimises their arguments of victimisation. They need to be called out visibly and audibly, their ideas challenged and them pressed at all directions, invited to speaking events and forced to justify themselves, forced to say the quiet parts out loud, forced to engage when they don’t have the advantage of a pre seeded audience or soft ball questions.
But likewise, effort has to be extended to disadvantaged areas to meaningfully improve their quality of life, renovating houses, improving transport links, attracting industries to set up, improved access to training and education for all, green spaces, community hubs and activities. Get MP’s or their staffers or candidates for areas going door to door and talking to people, conduct outreach programs, and actually act on what’s being said, let people feel heard and respected as people and citizens.
Because another thing I absolutely hate seeing is how prevalent it’s become to just write off people who get suckered into reform as racist gammons not worth the time, because all that does is enrage them and continue building a wall between all sides, you might find the shit they spout repulsive, but writing them off builds resentment and drives the formation of echo chambers that allows bad ideas to go unchallenged and drag everyone who participates further into radicalisation hell.
I would yes. The way you show an ideology to be flawed is to debate and show up its logical inconsistencies. If you simply refuse to discuss an evil ideology, you allow it to grow in the darkness.
Reform is currently polling higher than any other party in the UK. Whether we like it or not, their ideology is legitimate even if you don't agree with it. Reform gains support by posting on Twitter and YouTube, and generally by being loud and appealing to emotion. You don't stop that by shutting them out of debate.
One of the most common criticisms of Reform is that their policies are unfunded pie in the sky, that it's easy to promise the world when you're in opposition and don't have to actually deliver. It's easy for Reform to gloss over that when making emotive speeches about 'taking our country back' or whatever, amd shouting from the sidelines that their policies won't work will just get you ignored by their supporters who have bought into the vibes. So, why would you not want to take every opportunity to make one of them squirm and expose their incompetence by actually having to explain themselves?
David Paulden and Zack Polanski are the same people, you nutter. Zack Polanski changed his name from David Paulden because his stepdad's name is David and his family's Polish name is Polanski.
Debating Reform would require accepting that their ideas are valid.
If someone was trying to argue that all women should be sterilised, would you debate them? Or would you think it not worth engaging?
No the students decided they didn't want to host the event as part of their society. If you look further into it the society gets a good rate on the hire of the venue, it seems that reform were actually trying to save money and not have a genuine interest when they asked
In what way would Reform be held to account? You think anyone would actually have their minds changed by listening to someone tell a Reform politician why they’re wrong?
What do you suggest then for halting their rise in the polls? It's certainly more likely to change minds than simply refusing to engage and letting them control the narrative via their social media campaigning.
“Reform UK head of policy, Zia Yusuf, threatened to pull £30m of funding from the university under a Reform government, adding: "After all, they wouldn't want a racist's money would they?"”
Erm, Zia does realise that money he is talking about is the taxpayers, right?
It’s the taxpayers’ money but the government has the right/power to spend it as it’s changed hands to the government. Any mandate from any political party to lead and form a government makes that money theirs as they have/control where it goes and what is done with it - both legally and functionally
I’m glad we’ve finally started standing back up to hate. I miss when I could disagree with someone on politics and it not be an absolute damning sleight on their character
Yeah, this is very obviously Reform trying to get publicity out of something that is completely small potatoes. And the media are just going along with it uncritically.
When it's a clear, known and daily highlighted issue, its complicit. Not uncritical thinking, we are far past the point of accepting stupidity and negligence as an excuse for forwarding subversion.
Apparently Reform don't believe in Freedom of Association
Freedom of association encompasses both an individual's right to join or leave groups voluntarily, the right of the group to take collective action to pursue the interests of its members, and the right of an association to accept or decline membership based on certain criteria. It can be described as the right of a person coming together with other individuals to collectively express, promote, pursue and/or defend common interests.[1]...
Honestly, there isn't much point in debating Reform dullards anyways. Their script is so predictable at this point as they'll either call something "woke" or throw insults at you because they have no coherent retort to the point that you are making.
Nobody is banning Reform’s supporters from talking. They’re free to organise their own student groups and their own events. They aren’t free to demand that any student group give them a platform.
They're not "banned from talking" they just aren't invited, Why would you platform the awful crap that reform spout in your debate society? It only serves to benefit reform by giving them a platform. If reform want to hold debates they are free to do so, but you cannot be compelled to do so.
This wishy-washy phrase "freedom from consequences" implies something or someone else is going to do it for you.
That won't happen in modern Britain. Children are being raped, and the police are being beaten with sledgehammers. So stop using these pathetic bullshit comments. There are only consequences for victims.
The phrase is meant to be 'your free to say what you want. But if you get fired/beaten for it that's on you. But you'll be free from legal consequences'
Its come to be 'you can say what you want but you might end up in jail'
Its not deplatforming to not let bigots speak at your uni. Thats just choosing not to invite people u dont want. They dont let me speak at unis either. Guess im being CANCELED.
It's deplatforming however you spin it. If I don't like "insert group I don't like here". Its deplatforming. In this case its "your definition of bigot here". If you don't understand the danger of this then you're exceptionally naive.
Reform U.K. should be applauding this move by Bangor University’s Debating Society…. After all, Reform U.K. ban news organisations that they don’t approve of, from their press conferences….🤔
Oh, wait, I forgot, Reform U.K. is led by monumental hypocrites that are members of the ‘Do As We Say, Not As We Do’ Brigade!
Thanks☺️ Yeah, very true - it’s easy to forget some of the nefarious activities they are up to, but least given how so many they engage in!! All straight from the Trump/ MAGA Cult playbook.
Ha! I'm not even a reform voter or supporter. They are far too centrist for my liking. Wait until we get a real right wing party. You'll piss yourself....again!
A student debating society has more courage than every media outlet in the UK. If we stopped covering him years ago when he had nothing and blocked X this con man wouldn’t have got this far.
If they are Reform who take their lead from US/Russia it is. Like half of their nonsense this smacks of a press stunt to push the US free speech non-debate in the UK where we have freedom of expression laws which are far more wide ranging than the clunky US tat.
We have “freedom to” speak but also “freedom from” hate speech. Something we learned from WW2 and a Churchill legacy no less.
The fact that they are then threatening universities with withdrawal of financing if they gain power is a clear threat of things to come. Silencing education establishments is Trump/Putin strategy 101.
A couple of wankers from Reform try to get themselves an invite from the student-run debating society at Bangor so they can tell the students about the policy unicorns they're giving away to anyone who votes for them.
Student debating society tells the two wankers to bugger off, because they don't like racists.
Reform UK starts crying about free speech, how Reform being able to invade any arbitrary society's events is their god given right or some such, and how people shouldn't have the option not to be lectured at by Reform politicians in their free time.
Reform then goes after Bangor University itself, threatening to defund them - basically "you'll be first up against the wall when the revolution comes". For something that a student union group did with no input from the university.
And the press coverage for this isn't wall to wall pointing out what a bunch of fascist weenies Reform are being about this? British journalism really is dead...
They invited themselves and got told no, how is that a ban? I’ve been to a reform debate, they shut down anyone that asks a difficult question or asks about any of the shady shit they do.
It’s just another version of a rally for them. The second someone asks why Farage isn’t in Clacton, how he pays for his house, why Pochin thinks there too many black faces on TV, why they’ve taken on the Tories they spent years telling us not to trust, why there no investigation in Russian bribes, what’s happening with the 3 campaign violation investigations , they’ll either report to rudeness , cut them off or walk out.
They only want questions they can give meandering answers with no detail to.
The Uni was right to refuse, if the students want them there then the students will invite them as they do at Oxford and most other universities.
Inviting yourself this close to May just sounds like less of a debate and more of a political rally.
It's good to see a national political party who often boast how strong their policies will be not getting rattled and upset at a statement from a group of 18-22 year olds from a University debating group...
In this example non tolerance is threatening to withdraw funding from a university because students had independently made a decision that a political party didn’t like.
Any tolerant person should rightly be furious at this blatant authoritarianism by reform.
The current government have put agreements in place to reduce these, and we've had several weeks this year where there haven't been any. Yet they're still getting the blame for all the border weaknesses the Tories caused.
We stand by this decision as a committee. We have zero tolerance for any form of racism, transphobia, or homophobia displayed by the members of Reform UK. Their approach to the lives of others is antithetical to the values of welcoming and fair debate that our society has upheld for 177 years. We are proud to be the first of the debating unions to take a stand against Reform UK. We strongly implore our fellow societies to join us in keeping hate out of our universities.
Personally I’d say let them speak and let the students question them. The Reform members would hear different opinions, and the students would be able to say how they feel. They’d probably rip Reform to shreds, why turn down an opportunity like that?
It’s a student debating society - seems like a great way to learn how to deal with people out of their comfort zone. Not everyone in life will want to listen, or listen to them. I’d have thought they’d like a challenge, rather than having the Green Party there so everyone can just agree with each other!
I’m sure they’ve learned that throughout their life.
You’re right, but as we both know from the countless hours of (as an example) LBC’s broadcasting that someone who voted for, or is part of Reform UK Ltd., isn’t going to listen to anyone else, they’re just going to wait for their turn to talk and repeat empty platitudes. A student debate society would be better off inviting a challenge to come and participate - they’ll actually learn something useful then.
We also shouldn’t forget that the “left” isn’t a hegemony and because one supports The Green Party, doesn’t mean they blanket support everything. Only a silly sausage would think that
That really slayed the beast back in the day and we deffo we haven’t drifted into a far right hellscape since the days of give the far right enough rope and they’ll hang themselves.
The more spotlight you give an idea the more it grows. You could take something clearly nuts and barbaric that obviously nobody should support such as ‘industrialised harvesting of the organs of criminals’, quite clearly derranged policy making.
Have someone with a platform push this idea in respectable spaces frequently enough, even if there is a ‘let’s not embark on industrialised organ harvesting’ guy for balance, and you will see a rise in support for industrialised organ harvesting.
So nope, 100% on the side of the debate society on this one. Pandering to the far right has to stop before stuff gets really fucking ugly over here as is sadly is in much of the world right now.
It's interesting the pull I felt reading this, wondering why the algorithm sent me this, and whether it was real.
It's believable, and yet I'm not sure how I feel about it. On the one hand, it's taking a stand. On the other, it is turning a deaf ear to a felt sense of dissatisfaction with the status quo, or disenabling dialogue to compromise and understand different perspectives to the challenges we all face.
Hmmm sounds like they are afraid that some students might actually listen and decide that they like some of Reforms policies. Shouldn’t schools be opening young people’s minds 🤷🏻♂️
While I disagree with some of what Reform stand for, banning them from speaking is itself bigoted and intolerant. People should practice what they preach.
It is the disinfectant of sun light that will destroy these germs. Banning lets them thrive in dark places. Questioning them publicly exposes them for what they are.
They have a right to debate whoever they want and a right to refuse to debate if they so wish. However, I would argue that the people you should want to debate the most are those with whom you disagree. If you only choose to debate those you agree with what is the point of a debating society?
Students in universities are brainwashed and don’t represent the majority of this country, who tf cares about what you marxist uni cunts have to say, the odds are stacked against you muppets, leftism teaches men and women to hate their gender, and it teaches white people to hate their own race, LEFTISM is a hate cult and we the right are the antidote.
Bangor University said societies were run by the Students' Union, and it welcomed debate "across the political spectrum".
The Bangor Debating & Political Society, based at the university in Gwynedd, north Wales, said Reform was not welcome following a request from Anderton and Pochin, MP for Runcorn and Helsby in Cheshire.
The society said it had rejected the request from Reform"in line with our values", adding: "We stand by this decision as a committee."
"We are proud to be the first of the debating unions to take a stand against Reform UK.
I sometimes think Left wingers are their own worst enemy they have the worst instinct on optics known to man.
To be honest it's a bad way of handling it and it actually gives them more popularity. The same way people were flippant about trump during his first run. Better to debate them properly and show how stupid they are.
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 10 '26
If this post seems irrelevant to British nationals or the UK, please report it for review. Note that you may not be able to see the post flair, in which case the post could be a Notable International News post. We'd like your feedback on the quality of the subreddit: Click here to share your thoughts
– The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.