Oxford Union alumni will descend on city to try to oust president-elect

[BonfireLady]

Well, that's quite a turn up for the free speech books!

When the president-elect of the Oxford Union debating society hit the headlines with his awful celebration of a violent assassination, I hoped that he would be declared unfit to run it. Yes, I support free speech, including the right to offend. However, he is president-elect of a debating society and is simply not fit for the role if he's advocating assassination in place of debate. Charlie Kirk was killed while debating. Specifically while answering a question about trans(-identifying) people, by a young man who is/was in a romantic relationship with a (transwo)man.

It seems like this university is waking up to the idea that critical thinking is a good thing. Please keep thinking Oxford Union...... 🤞

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/14/oxford-union-alumni-descend-city-oust-president-elect/

He's written quite a lengthy statement and this was included:

When a national columnist explicitly calls for you to be shot, and your family receives threats, it creates an environment where reasoned debate cannot exist.

Obviously it's appalling that his family received threats but which national columnist explicitly called for him to be shot? Does anyone know? That sounds rather far-fetched and I would hope that this isn't what happened.

Edited for clarity.

I think it's totally valid to be discussed in FWR. It's a free speech issue and part of the ' omnicause ' that gullible idiots on the left have signed up to with absolute zero critical thinking. The same pp who declare that men are women are also in support of this man who is gleeful that a man who he has met, debated with, deserved to be shot in cold blood in front of his family.

These same people would be equally overjoyed if it was KJK, JK Rowling, Maya Forstater or any gender critical feminist who was murdered, because we would have deserved it. Just look at what happened at the Brighton Centre which hosted the recent Filia conference where activists smashed in the windows. These same pp would have been cheering this on. To me, they have lost all sight of any morality and will excuse any atrocity if it's in support of their cause. I hope right thinking people will act and kick this idiot out.

He’s out. Good.

x.com/allumbokhari/status/1980514383307715051?s=46

According to this Abaraonye has lost the VONC.

They have 48 hours to appeal (bring allegations or complaints). after that he is deemed to have resigned. The vote was 1228 in favour of no confidence and 501 against. Now for the No Confidence vote 're current President which George put forward, presumably to censure the current leadership team for having allowed proxy voting.

I read elsewhere that 1000 proxy voters had registered to vote No Confidence. Not sure how accurate (that was before the count finished so that could have,simply been number of proxies applied for.
I hope the current President wins this NC vote with an even bigger margin. Proxies will be allowed for this also. As there were 150 supporting the proposal for a NC vote in current President there are at least that many who - at that time - appear to have agreed with George. Given his behaviour and views that are now public I am hoping the NC motion gets less than 150 votes for. That would suggest that the penny may have dropped for existing on campus OU members who were giving him benefit of doubt.

As the OU seemed to have lost several decades of membership records it's possible that the vote this time would have been more decisive had the records been able to verify right to vote.

Well. There will inevitably be complaints/allegations/appeals.

But that vote looked decisive.

501 for him staying, though. A third of the voting members of the union think it's acceptable for its president to celebrate the murder of a former visiting speaker. What the hell, Oxford? And yes, of course he'll bring complaints and so on.

Edited to add "voting", to be more accurate.

500 votes is hardly a resounding statement of support from the resident student body. I don’t know what proportion of the 26,000 current students are members but unless there has been a catastrophic decline (possible) it is likely to be in the thousands.

(My post was a cross post with ThatCyanCat rather than being intended as response to it.)

I can't help but feel there's an element of people wanting to ally gender-critical feminism with the likes of Charlie Kirk - who was not a feminist in any sense, and had some pretty abhorrent views about various things. It's the exact mirror of the "are you leftwing? then you must support trans rights" mindset that got us into the trans mess, and just as damaging as it.

I was thinking that perhaps some of the 501 voters who voted for George to stay did it because of fear of being seems as pro-Charlie Kirk if they did otherwise. (I can think of other reasons too).

It's possible to agree with someone on one thing and not others. In fact it's healthy. It's especially healthy for a debating society.

That Kirk was shot while debating on a university campus does make you stop and think. He was unarmed, unprepared and a young man (recent or current student) thought himself justified in shooting and killing him, from a distance and expecting to get away with this. There is a difference in degree of harm but George was so sure he was right he could not bring himself to properly apologise for initially applauding the shooting and did not consider the harm he brought to the OU through this NC process. In fact he appears to have thought he could win the vote.

I don't think this is about seeing Kirk as a 100% GC hero. But he tried to debate in public unpopular views. He respected his opponents and provided a platform for voices (including GC ones) that were cancelled elsewhere. He may have had feet of clay up to his armpits, but he did try to listen and debate. I don 't have to agree with what he says to appreciate that. He was a GC ally but not a feminist. I can cope with that. I think.

Its entirely possible to disagree with absolutely every position of a person and still not celebrate their maiming, injury, or death.

Anyone who doesn't understand this basic point should almost definitely not be president of an organisation dedicated to free debate.

There is one very common very strong thread two the two very different contexts. Free speech. The right to make your voice heard when you disagree with something.
You say not a feminist in any sense - I think you are missing the right for women to make their voices heard, that is feminist.
The gender bullshit has been rammed down people's throats. "No debate!" was a mantra of the gender borg, and it has crumbled under the pressure of free speech to the point people who used to shout "No debate!" now disingenously lament "Why can't we have a civil conversation?". It's free speech and the effects of free speech that have kept sex based rights alive and now thriving. Without free speech gender critics would have been silenced long ago, and they tried very hard to silence and cancel anyone who wasn't fully fanatical about gender woowoo. Look at police recordiong non crime hate incidents. An attempt to shut people up using the full power of the police and state.
Free speech is very much a feminst right. Without free speech how can you even make the argument for feminist rights? You can't. I think your dismissal of Kirk as having nothing in common with feminist is myopic and evidence of thoughtlessness in that it makes no effort to understand the wider impact of core issues like free speech on all of us. Talking of core issues, you might also want to consider how much violence women and feminists have experienced in trying to use free speech to object to anti feminist polcies. Violence is something Kirk's surviving wife and childeren are very much aware of, him having been murdered standing up for your right to free speech. That's something else feminists have in common with Kirk, facing violence for standing up for their rights.
Kirk may have said things feminists very strongly disagree with, but one thing he did stand for is your right to express disagreement with his views, and to do so safely. He was killed for standing up for that right.
You may share more common ground than you realise.

One could argue the entire point of debate, in fact, is the opposite of violence.

I know fuck all about Charlie Kirk or his views; I'm completely confident that it was wrong he was shot.

(And especially wrong he was shot for expressing his views).

Great news. Scary though that two thirds of on campus votes think what he did was ok. The country might have to remember that when it comes to this lot being our potential future politicians.

No "almost". It's an absolutely untenable position for a debating society president. Even if he didn't have the decency not to realise this, how could he possibly not have the brains?

This ⬆️

Equally, one could use one's freedom of speech to argue that violence is justified as a means to an end... and then one might lose a vote of no confidence... if one was about to become president of a debating society.

It sounds like sanity is prevailing 👏👏👏👏

It'll certainly be interesting to now see how the next vote of no confidence (in the current president) plays out. I wonder if the Abaraonye support gang are regretting calling for it... and if any of the 501 who stood by him might now switch allegiance to support the current president instead.

I can't see how this no confidence vote in the current president can hold. What on earth is he supposed to have done? It just looks spiteful and vexatious.

He opened the vote to proxy pretty much sealing the no confidence in Abaraonye. Yes it looks spiteful and retaliatory.

He opened the vote to proxy pretty much sealing the no confidence in Abaraonye. Yes it looks spiteful and retaliatory.

@PronounssheRa what looks spiteful and retaliatory? Opening the votes to proxy voters to vote out George Abaraonye or having a vote of no confidence for the current president?

Times Radio says he will appeal

Times Radio says he will appeal.

He’s got Jolyon Maugham on the case so this should be interesting…….

The VONC for the current president

The VONC for the current president.

Ah, ok. Yes, I agree with you. I think George Abaraonye and his supporters will drag this out as long as they can.
I wonder if this or similar has happened before.

On what grounds?