By Iman Shaikh
From the day one first steps foot on campus, encountering a particular facet of student life is inevitable: the LSESU society. A smorgasbord of societies present themselves during Welcome Week — from sports and culture to academics and art, each society offers something unique, and mostly expects nothing in return.
Having founded and led a society of my own during my undergrad years, I know that organising a mass of students under one common interest can be tricky. But the last two years especially have coincided with events that have created unity and division in equal part across the student body: the genocide in Gaza and the encampment, divestment campaigns, the Israel-Iran War, UK & US General Elections, to name a few. Relevant societies will then often release position statements on these issues, and I was curious as to why making explicit the political stance of the group feels necessary to society leadership. After a Palestinian peer privately expressed disapproval in the then-named Palestinian Society’s decision to platform, and thereby endorse (in her opinion), a particular political leader, I decided it was time to investigate further. Should a cultural society always be representative of its members’ politics? Indeed, should it be political at all?
Bridging Backgrounds: The Purpose of a Cultural Society
I split this investigation over both of my year-long postgraduate degrees at LSE, speaking with over half a dozen committee members from societies that are either wholly or partially cultural.
The primary motivation expressed towards joining and leading these societies was a desire to connect with one’s heritage and culture, feeling closer to home and more settled in an academic environment that can be hostile and high-pressure, with one interviewee stating, “I moved to London not knowing anyone, with my family and friends in Wales or pursuing their dreams elsewhere … I needed a sense of community, and particularly the unique community of being with your people.”
As another interviewee suggested, this “shared background or interest” can create a more fulfilling experience for the individual.
Many students also seek to join societies in the higher ranks of leadership for instrumental purposes, such as “gaining work experience and connections that are crucial for our career development”, as a third interviewee revealed.
To this end, several cultural societies host major conferences or events (e.g. Italian and German Symposiums or the Polish Economic Forum) which offer students an attractive quasi-professional experience to involve themselves in, and were cited by interviewees as the highlight of their time within the society. So, the motivation is twofold: a desire for connection and the need to bolster one’s CV.
The Roles and Responsibilities of Society Leadership
Leaders of cultural societies carry within them a sense of responsibility through acting as representatives of their nationality or background on campus, suggesting that effective cultural representation is a key pillar behind being able to, according to one interviewee, “cater to members’ needs — whether that means facilitating professional networking, organising cultural events, or simply creating a space to enjoy traditional food and good company”.
One interviewee explained that her participation was motivated by disappointment in previous iterations of the society, stating: “The Committee not doing a good job at representing us or building a community reflects badly on us as a culture on campus.”
This marks the inherent point of conflict that cultural societies may face: in the pursuit of representation, how political should they become?
Unsurprisingly, there was no consensus. Half of the committee members I spoke with thought that cultural societies should not take active political stances and should remain neutral and open, affirming that their societies act as a “platform for discussion rather than advocacy […] taking a strong position on political issues risks alienating members with differing views, which goes against the inclusive nature of a student society”.
Alluding to the difficulty in maintaining a political stance when organising large-scale events and conferences, another interviewee observed that societies are seldom in a position where they can “reject much-needed sponsorship” or — though they may have preferences regarding who attends — decline a particular guest speaker based on ideology.
One interviewee also described a “clique behaviour” on campus, where students of a particular culture or political leaning tend to flock together as is, feeling that fostering diversity across backgrounds is more important, particularly when “other societies exist which enable people to express their opinions”.
Conversely, others were firm in their belief that cultural societies “often carry inherently political dimensions, simply by representing identities and communities affected by politics […] cultural identity and politics of course intersect”. A member of the Pakistan Society highlighted the ongoing and unlawful imprisonment of former PM Imran Khan as an instance where the effect on the community was simply too large to ignore.
Another interviewee expressed that taking a political stance “should not just be for the sake of it, but if a society feels strongly about a political issue, it has the right to take a stand as ignoring it can feel like neglecting part of the community’s experience”, citing decisions taken as the committee of MENA Society to vocalise their stance on Palestine.
Although interviewees were split regarding the political affiliation of their own societies, politics was a significant influence in their own decisions to join or abstain from another society. One interviewee stated that, “as a British-Ukrainian, I don’t go to Russian Society events”, and another that, “if a society’s leadership or agenda does not align with my values and views or promotes divisive politics, I would not participate.”
All interviewees agreed that a society should strive to be representative of its members and seek “inclusivity and open dialogue”, challenging as it may be to “represent everyone”. One in particular stated that, “any action a society ultimately takes will be mostly representative of the committee, and since the committee was elected democratically, we can assume that their views are representative of the society members that voted for them […] students at LSE are often a small sample of the culture at large.”
No cultural community “will be a monolith […] everyone has different visions for the society itself”, and if one seeks to ensure the representation of diverse opinion through direct engagement and meaningful effort, remaining neutral will prove to be difficult.
It should be noted here that all of the committee members who expressed an explicit willingness towards taking political stances were representing countries that are currently experiencing some sort of domestic turmoil or conflict. Invariably, there is an element of privilege that is embedded in the decision to stay neutral, be it as an individual or a student society, but indeed also as a culture at large.
So where does this leave us? Cultural societies offer a tangible avenue for joy and togetherness. They enable students to, as an interviewee noted, “unite to achieve a common goal and connection to [their] country”.
But they do not occur in a vacuum.
While such discussions might seem trivial given the fleeting nature of our engagement with student groups, these forums are a microcosm of society at large. The issue of representativeness cannot be solved overnight, but it is clear that committee members are sensitive and aware of the issues facing the communities they represent. Crucially, culture — how we dress, what we eat, the language we speak — is intrinsically political, as is the decision to remain apolitical itself. Students deeply cherish and value their time in societies: we owe it to them to ensure this time is as honest, reflective, and meaningful as possible.
