Boris Johnson - Secret Weapon OR Achilles Heel?
Discussion
It was enlightening watching the etonite Johnson stumble and fluster when asked direct questions by Charlie Stayt (BBC) on whether he thought Britain would/should join in with a US attack on North Korea - having mocked Corbyn for his prevarication on similar questions.
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
Edited by footnote on Thursday 27th April 13:48
footnote said:
It was enlightening watching the etonite Johnson stumble and fluster when asked direct questions by Charlie Stayt (BBC) on whether he thought Britain would/should join in with a US attack on North Korea - having mocked Corbyn for his prevarication on similar questions.
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilige and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
Drivel. I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilige and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
Justayellowbadge said:
footnote said:
It was enlightening watching the etonite Johnson stumble and fluster when asked direct questions by Charlie Stayt (BBC) on whether he thought Britain would/should join in with a US attack on North Korea - having mocked Corbyn for his prevarication on similar questions.
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilige and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
Drivel. I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilige and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
johnxjsc1985 said:
thank goodness there are people who lighten up the day by being different. I learned a new insult today although it does appear to be factually correct and as someone rightly posted it is a lot better than being called a t
t.
True - when you put it like that, I think I could be coming round to the man t.
And it does show that a public school education gives you an intellectual edge as well as social and political advantage.
footnote said:
It was enlightening watching the etonite Johnson stumble and fluster when asked direct questions by Charlie Stayt (BBC) on whether he thought Britain would/should join in with a US attack on North Korea - having mocked Corbyn for his prevarication on similar questions.
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that [b] Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people[;b] who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
What absolute nonsense from you. Again.I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that [b] Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people[;b] who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
No one has suggested that people from Eton (or similar) are in any way superior or better-place to govern us. All that we are saying is that to be prejudiced against someone purely because they have had a 'better' education is nonsensical.
Your subsequent posts confirm that this is about envy / jealousy and ignorance and the 'chip on the shoulder' accusation fits well.
footnote said:
Boris Johnson on Good Morning Britain a few minutes ago - flustering and blustering as usual, repeating known lies about £350m for NHS. Susanna Reid tore into him for it and he tried to shout her down, while he wobbled on his chair like an Etonite Jabba the Hut.
He thinks his blonde bluster is boyish and charming, to me he just seems like a boy in man's clothing.
Is he a strength or weakness?
It sounds to me that even if he was the cure for cancer, you would find an issue with him.He thinks his blonde bluster is boyish and charming, to me he just seems like a boy in man's clothing.
Is he a strength or weakness?
MarshPhantom said:
C0ffin D0dger said:
I just like the fact that he called Corbyn a "mutton-headed, old mugwump", fine quality insult that.
Everyone else just thinks he's a
Mugwump means some who remains independent. If Boris was clever he'd have known that.Everyone else just thinks he's a
Hardly the world's greatest insult.
esxste said:
sidicks said:
That seems very much like a Labour approach - please can you explain how 'Boris and his ilk' do 3)?
Is it exclusively a Labour approach, or are you just trying to attach a loaded label in preparation for an ad hominem attack?A specific example might be the Royal Mail. Owned by the public through the Government, and funded via the taxpayer. Sold off for a bargain price to wealthy and connected investors, who promptly re-sold the shares on the open market for an inflated price, pocketing a nice tidy profit at the expense of the tax payer.
sidicks said:
footnote said:
It was enlightening watching the etonite Johnson stumble and fluster when asked direct questions by Charlie Stayt (BBC) on whether he thought Britain would/should join in with a US attack on North Korea - having mocked Corbyn for his prevarication on similar questions.
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that [b] Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people[;b] who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
What absolute nonsense from you. Again.I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that [b] Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people[;b] who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
No one has suggested that people from Eton (or similar) are in any way superior or better-place to govern us. All that we are saying is that to be prejudiced against someone purely because they have had a 'better' education is nonsensical.
Your subsequent posts confirm that this is about envy / jealousy and ignorance and the 'chip on the shoulder' accusation fits well.
footnote said:
It would serve you better to do a bit more work on understanding the class system and a bit less on what you believe to be witty ripostes.
Claims about the class system are usually made by those with chips on their shoulders, harking back to the past and making excuses for what they've not achieved.The rest of us just get on with working hard and trying to better ourselves. You should try it!
Meanwhile, Rachel Johnson joins the Lib Dems and may stand as an MP.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/27/rachel-johnson...
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/27/rachel-johnson...
footnote said:
It was enlightening watching the etonite Johnson stumble and fluster when asked direct questions by Charlie Stayt (BBC) on whether he thought Britain would/should join in with a US attack on North Korea - having mocked Corbyn for his prevarication on similar questions.
I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
And this is why strong drugs, taken to excess, are bad.I won't labour on 'false consiousness' here because none of the proletariat are present - obviously, this being PH - but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them, and their children, until the end of time simply because they are born to greater privilege.
Or, is it that many PH'ers fundamentally believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier people who are thus entitled to privilege and wealth by dint of their genetic and capital inheritance?
Lots of foreign people think the English have an in-bred tendency to sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites) but I wouldn't suggest that for a moment lest I be thought to have a chip on my shoulder and heaven knows there's nothing worse than having a chip on ones shoulder - shows one up not to be a proper well-brought up chap and not sportsmanlike in accepting ones place in the world and bally well putting up with it - and I wouldn't want people to think that about me.
Marshall I. Pomer have argued that members of the proletariat disregard the true nature of class relations because of their belief in the probability or possibility of upward mobility. Such a belief or something like it is said to be required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage laborers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.
Marshall I. Pomer (October 1984). "Upward Mobility of Low-Paid Workers: A Multivariate Model for Occupational Changers". Sociological Perspectives. 27 (4): 427–442. ISSN 0731-1214
Edited by footnote on Thursday 27th April 13:48
That you can conflate an objection to insulting somebody based on where they went to school with an inbuilt acceptance of alumni of that school ruling simply by dint of having went there is bad enough. To base the subsequent treatise thereon is, to be honest, mental.
Edited by iphonedyou on Thursday 27th April 18:36
sidicks said:
footnote said:
It would serve you better to do a bit more work on understanding the class system and a bit less on what you believe to be witty ripostes.
Claims about the class system are usually made by those with chips on their shoulders, harking back to the past and making excuses for what they've not achieved.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff