What do AU students think of our No Platform policy?

The No Platform policy is a motion is place that outlines the AUSA’s stance on controversial speakers coming to our campus and sharing views. But what some current students think about it?

Edgar Oganesjan

Do you regularly vote in AUSA elections?

Yes

Do you feel involved in the democratic process that defines the AUSA?

Not per say. I know a lot of people in the AUSA and i also that it’s very close niche circle. I think it’s hard to be involved in it.

What do you consider the role of the AUSA to be?

It should be a representation of student voice on campus and what we as a student body think. They should take action as a collective, but what it has turned out to be is niche group of people who often use it to propel themselves into either the NUS or other places.

They pursue policies that are really only relevant to their group of people. It really leaves a lot of people uninvolved, that can be testified by tremendously low voting turnouts every year.

Do you think the AUSA should have the power to decide whether a speaker is invited or not?

Definitely not. I think that kind of idea is completely contrary to university traditions and to university free speech on campus. They should be standing for individuals in an intellectual role. As I said before, they’re in their own little world and create an echo chamber of their own opinions. Through “safe space” policies, through “no platform” policies they help create these echos.

Do you think that all ideas on a university campus are up for debate?

Should everything be questioned? Yes. I mean, there is a brilliant self regulatory way people will react so if you somebody who is an obvious hate speech provocateur, or somebody who obviously is out of line, then people simply won’t listen to him.

The other one concerning the “No Platform” policy is that often these speakers are not so clear on whom is provocative and who is not. The Israeli speaker is a clear example of that, regardless of your stance on the issue. There’s a lot of people on both sides of the debate and the AUSA saying that certain speakers shouldn’t be allowed here is obviously wrong because it just creates this entrenchment of opinion.

It creates tensions that shouldn’t be there. Nobody is being forced to listen to anyone. If you don’t like a speaker, you don’t have to go. Shutting down things doesn’t solve the problem, you’re just putting a plaster on it.

but do you think all ideas are CURRENTLY up for debate?

No. I don’t think they are.

Sandra Noureddine

Do you regularly vote in AUSA elections?

No, I don’t. I should do, but i don’t.

Do you feel involved in the democratic process?

Not really because they’re not very out there.

Do you think that all ideas on a university campus are up for debate?

Yeah, i think so. I was actually reading up on the “no platform” policy before I came here. Well, I can see what they mean about the right to feel safe, but I definitely think it would be better to allow people to debate whatever they like and and have the opportunity to challenge that.

Kirstie Maddison

Do you regularly vote in AUSA elections?

No. Unfortunately not.

Do you feel involved in the democratic process?

No, not really. I don’t really know what process goes on.

What do you think is the limit of their power?

I’m not really aware of how much power they have at the moment. I don’t know what kind of decisions they make in terms of how that impacts on university and student life. I’ve never really seen what their work does, in a way. I guess they’re quite limited in what they can do. Maybe they should have more power.

Do you think the AUSA should have the power to decide whether a speaker is invited to campus?

I think they should because i think they play quite an important role in student life and if they have this “no platform” policy set up already, they should have more of a role and more power to decide.

Do you think you have the right to feel safe on campus?

Yes, of course. Everyone should feel safe on campus. It’s already a safe place to be and I think there have been a couple of events where they ask how we can feel safer and things.

“Clued up” is being implemented, I’m not sure whether it was by the AUSA or not ,but I remember going to one of their stands and asking how they can make us feel safer and asked what I felt scared about. Everyone should have the right to feel safe.

Dalmar Namazi

Do you regularly vote in AUSA elections?

Nope.

Do you feel involved in the democratic process?

Not particularly.

Would you consider racism, sexism, and ableism to still be “rife” in our society?

To an extent, it’s a hard line to draw of what is racist and what is not. You get far-right groups on the rise and the lines of what is racist or prejudiced is very blurry. It really depends on who’s assessing people for what’s racist and what’s not.

Should racist, sexists, or ableists be allowed to express their views on the university campus?

I think these terms are very destructive because no one is going to publicly call themselves a racist or a sexist. It really comes down to which definition you are using. I think it’s a very hard decision to make and it depends on whether the person assessing these opinions hold rational views.

Do you agree with the definitions outlined at the bottom of the motion? (referring to the definitions on the motion)

Yes, I agree with them.

Finlay Rowden

Do you regularly vote in AUSA elections?

Never have. It’s my first year, but I never have.

Do you feel involved in the democratic process?

Not particularly, but I think if I made an effort to get involved, I think, it would be easy enough.

What do you consider the role of the AUSA to be?

It should represent the students and it should have a diverse range of views, for the students. There’s obviously a broad range of people that come to university. I think they should really represent them.

Do you think that all ideas on a university campus are up for debate?

Yes, I do. I’m on the politics society committee and obviously we had that Israeli spokesperson coming and I think we need allow all range of views. I think obviously once people insight hatred and violence that’s a limit we shouldn’t allow. There are those extreme views, but there should be a broad variety.

Would you consider racism, sexism, and Ableism to still be “rife” in our society?

Yes, in a certain way. I think it’s very hard to measure it. I do think there are still some elements of society that are sexist. I think it’s getting better as people are getting more educated.

Klaudia Kucel

Do you regularly vote in AUSA elections?

No

Do you feel involved in the democratic process?

Kind of, yes because of my society (MUN), I’m involved in a society that is involved with AUSA, so in that way I am involved.

What do you think is the limit of their power?

They can’t impose stuff on students, they can only do things as long as we elect them and we tell them our grievances and they can look into that.

Do you think the AUSA should have the power to decide whether a speaker is invited or not?

No, I don’t think so. I was aware of what happened when the Israeli speaker was invited here and I think it was very unprofessional how AUSA and the student left reacted. I think not allowing to show one side of the conflict does spur debate forward, it just stops it.

People should be aware that there will always be controversial views on each side of the conflict so, if there’s an Israeli speaker invited, he has the potential to, as stated by the student left, preach propaganda, then that people should be aware that there are always extremist views on each side of the conflict. By not allowing those views to come to our campus, students won’t be able to cope in the real world.

Should racist, sexists, or ableists be allowed to express their views on the university campus?

I think so, it’s really important to stir debate and as a feminist myself, when i defend my views with my male friends because we have differing views and it’s not like we kill each other. Debate only moves forward if you understand the view of the other person. Sexism has grounding in something, fascism has grounding in something and all is up to debate. These concepts are very fluid. There isn’t anything stable and we shouldn’t say “this is bad, disregard this”.