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’m sure the power and prestige is just incidental, and the desperate fight to retain it a “Fight the Power” situation. Yeah, right.

🚨🚨 VOTE TODAY by 11am🚨🚨

The vote of no confidence against the current president closes today at 11am for proxy voters.

If he loses, he will be replaced by Abaraonye (who is still President-Elect while his challenge is heard).

Members can cast a proxy vote by email in the next 2 hours, see link for info:

https://www.restorerespectoxfordunion.co.uk/

Wow, this is an interesting quirk isn't it. I wonder whether they thought that through? This is what the restore respect oxford union site has to say:

'The Union Membership votes 70% in favour of the No Confidence Motion
The result was announced on the morning 21 October 2025 following days of the Abaraonye team behaving disruptively during the count, attempting to disenfranchise Alumni voters, and making allegations that were not founded. Current Union Officers were heroic in their steadfast commitment to following the rules and their bravery in the face of sustained hostility.'

So Abaraonye alleges that there was possible interference in proxy voting during his NC vote (it was hypothetically possible). Hope that this criticism has been addressed this time, otherwise I assume he can appeal again the use of proxy votes for this voting too. Catch 22 - if they do address it this time then are they admitting there is a problem with the first vote (or at least could be until investigated?) The website above is making allegations re actual activity (not they could have done this, but that they did do it). He claimed earlier that his representatives did not behave badly (which made me wonder whether it was he who behaved badly, or that others who were not formally his reps did so). Every stage deepens my suspicion about him.

I sincerely hope that all those who voted for George on the first NC vote on a #bekind basis (he is young, black and a current student who has 'apologised' and presents as victimized + anti-Kirk) will think deeply about their vote this time and that the current president is voted in by a landslide.

It's just posh kids arguing with each other though. Funny how much attention this has got, storm in a teacup really.

Yes, it is a storm in a teacup but I don’t think George will go down without a fight and it may run and run.
A bit like 30 years later Swampy is still living up a tree protesting the Newbury by-pass.

I assume he can appeal again the use of proxy votes for this voting too. Catch 22 - if they do address it this time then are they admitting there is a problem with the first vote (or at least could be until investigated?)

If this any of this goes to appeal and then ends up in the courts, with perhaps Jolyon Maugham's involvement, any allegations of tampering with online votes will need to be proven. For example, event logs from the email server would need to be shown to prove that email votes had been deleted or otherwise manipulated.

At the moment it just feels like a game of chicken and posturing on Abaraonye's part, fueled by his ego. However, if he genuinely believes he's right that there has been tampering, he should contest it all the way to court and prove it.

I disagree (as someone who used to agree). These organisations wield considerable cultural power: the National Trust, National Library of Scotland, the council managing Hampstead Heath swimming ponds and council control of public spaces generally, CIPD, universities themselves, local pride boards, etc.

None of these captured organizations in themselves are terribly important - transportation, national security and public health don't directly depend on them. But, they are clients of the big LGBT advocacy organizations and support each other in an interlocking system of consultations, board membership, training content and staff a revolving door of activists - essentially operating as a distributed quango industrial complex of captured organizations. When one extravagantly crosses the line as Oxford Debating Society you can see the inner workings of how the capture operates.

This isn’t a dyslexia thing imo. My partners severely dyslexic. You should see the clangers he has produced which he nor spellcheck can see 😂

’If you have any queers please get in touch’ was a particular highlight 😭

But no this isn’t dyslexia. ‘Me and my colleagues’ is just bad bad English full stop.

Well.... That seems definitive (I think 😬)

The current president remains in his role, after the no confidence vote failed:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/24/oxford-union-fresh-turmoil-after-second-no-confidence-vote/

Archive version:

https://archive.ph/9gdWV

Hopefully this means that common sense is returning. It sounds like it's been quite the journey getting there though.

I was just coming on here to post that too!

Those who are interested in how George got a place with ABB...Oxford does seem to be prioritising black applicants over white and other ethnicities.

I've been doing some digging. Black students get in with lower grades and even controlling for other factors there's a sizeable attainment gap in results.

Probably the most shocking statistics is only 81% of black students get a 2.1 compared to 95% of white students. Obviously isn't good for those 19% either!

It bugs me. Me and many others spent a lot of voluntary time encouraging and supporting diverse applicants. But on merit.

It seems to me partly because they have to set and meet diversity targets. I just can't see how this is helping anyone long term...

Sorry, rant over. And disclaimer I'm mixed race...

It's a big deal for Oxford and it's reputation worldwide. Their standing has been so damaged that it's impacting financial viability of the Union.

GA could have gone gracefully after offering a genuine apology and stating his commitment to tolerance of opinions.

Who would now hire him as he has shown himself to be a troublemaker.

Black students get in with lower grades and even controlling for other factors there's a sizeable attainment gap in results.

If this is the case, that's disappointing.

I feel the same way about women-only shortlists for MP candidates and jobs on boards specifically reserved for women (which I appreciate puts me at odds with many people on MN.. and I also appreciate the irony relating to the court judgements in 2022 and 2025 re the definition of the word "woman").

I think I understand what Kirk's position was on this and if I do, it would be the same as mine. IMO "affirmative action" to create groups specifically for people with a particular projected characteristic is a great idea e.g. the Black Leadership Summit that Kirk set up, or women's conferences/awards in industries where they are underrepresented in the workplace.

But what I don't agree with is the affirmative action of dropping standards for entry to a position or ring-fencing a certain number of positions for someone who is black/female.

I wonder if that view is what Abaraonye would consider to be racist? I'm also still none the wiser as to which columnist apparently called for him to be shot (as per the question in my OP).

Oh, and for the avoidance of doubt: no, I do not support the notion on the baseball cap in the article image to "make America Charlie Kirk". Certainly not without caveats anyway.

If it refers to making any country somewhere where people can freely debate each other, even when they disagree on difficult and polarising issues.... Yes, absolutely.

If it refers to making any country fall in line with religious doctrine on abortion or the supposed role of women (to primarily be child raisers) in society.... No.

I'm aware that CK wanted the law/state to be free from religious influence and that he fought his abortion principles on the idea that US law sees the murder of a pregnant woman as a double homicide as well as his religious beliefs on the subject. Whilst I admire him for drawing a line during his open debates, it wouldn't been been a very good line if he had (hypothetically) brought the religious side of his argument into a political discussion as well.

https://afcomm.org.uk/2025/11/25/oxford-union-george-abaraonye-resignation-disciplinary-committee/ the title is misleading. Having lost the vote of no confidence that he himself called George was deemed by union rules to have resigned. He called for an inquiry into the poll and that has now reported back that there is no reason to do a recount or re-poll. So he is out and cannot enter the President's office. It's over and although a distraction for this board it's a small sign of change. (Went looking for this after reading comments in judgement in Glinner case. To me there are parallels. People are being called to account and when out of order expected to apologise, or at least not rewarded with protections.)

"....insisted that he remained president-elect and that he had “the support of well in excess of a majority of students at Oxford, who voted to have a safe election and resist attempts to subvert democracy”.

Glad it's been resolvedvas it was so damaging for Oxford's reputation. However his statements reflect a person who should never have been elected President and I struggle to see understand h9w he was offered a place at the University, over other candidates. If DEI quotas was the focus then it needs to be changed ASAP.

Oxbridge had a positive image worldwide but I can't see how that will maintained if they continue to offer places to candidates who are academically weak.

Jolyon, Stonewall, Amnesty, Your Party... I doubt he'll lack for offers from people who rate superficial appearance far above ethics or competence

Have you got any evidence at all for your assertion or are you just another mad racist radicalised by Xitter?

Have you got any evidence at all for your assertion or are you just another mad racist radicalised by Xitter

I assume you are aware of his A-level grades and statements which highlight his academic unsuitability to study at Oxford. I can't think of another reason why he was offered a place..I am mixed race with a black DC so reject your assertions. I simply care about UK academic institutions and their reputations.

Perhaps you are on too many radical sites and need to get a more balanced view., maybe check your own bias before commenting and name calling