Boris Johnson - Secret Weapon OR Achilles Heel?
Discussion
footnote said:
footnote said:
sidicks said:
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!
The rest of us just get on with working hard and trying to better ourselves. You should try it!
sidicks said:
footnote said:
Do you have any statistical evidence to back that up?
Just my experience of people like you on PH. Maybe the correlation is pure coincidence (admittedly a relatively small sample size).Edited by sidicks on Thursday 27th April 21:37
Whereas on the other side of the argument... http://www.suttontrust.com/research/ And that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Edited by footnote on Friday 28th April 07:50
sidicks said:
footnote said:
So that'll be No then? No statistical evidence whatsoever?
No, just (very) limited experience, as explained above - you do understand the difference?!?
It's useful for me and other readers to have an appropriate context in which to judge the value of your contributions.
sidicks said:
footnote said:
Yes, I understand you make sweeping generalisations based on your own very limited experience?
It's useful for me and other readers to have an appropriate context in which to judge the value of your contributions.
Just out of interest, is the chip on your shoulder about anyone that's bettter educated than you or purely Tory politicians?!It's useful for me and other readers to have an appropriate context in which to judge the value of your contributions.
Edited by sidicks on Friday 28th April 17:28
What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
Many Tories (and most other politicians) would acknowledge that expanding access to Oxbridge and other top universities is a good thing in achieving a more representative democracy.
This can't be done as easily at primary/secondary level because people pay for public schools in order to gain an educational and social advantage which results in public school pupils being over-represented at the best universities.
It doesn't automatically mean that the education is 'better' per se, but it is certainly more effective at preparing pupils for Oxbridge entrance.
I'm not saying anything new here, most people, including Tory and Labour politicians, would acknowledge this to be true.
But you are making the argument that because I, and many others, think it is unjust that the privileged few have access to the best opportunities and will continue to control the destinies and life chances of the underprivileged and everybody else .... that I have a 'chip on my shoulder', that I am 'jealous'!
footnote said:
Resorting to personal insults is not a sign of a winning argument.
What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
Many Tories (and most other politicians) would acknowledge that expanding access to Oxbridge and other top universities is a good thing in achieving a more representative democracy.
This can't be done as easily at primary/secondary level because people pay for public schools in order to gain an educational and social advantage which results in public school pupils being over-represented at the best universities.
It doesn't automatically mean that the education is 'better' per se, but it is certainly more effective at preparing pupils for Oxbridge entrance.
I'm not saying anything new here, most people, including Tory and Labour politicians, would acknowledge this to be true.
But you are making the argument that because I, and many others, think it is unjust that the privileged few have access to the best opportunities and will continue to control the destinies and life chances of the underprivileged and everybody else .... that I have a 'chip on my shoulder', that I am 'jealous'!
I think you make a fair point regarding social injustice.What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
Many Tories (and most other politicians) would acknowledge that expanding access to Oxbridge and other top universities is a good thing in achieving a more representative democracy.
This can't be done as easily at primary/secondary level because people pay for public schools in order to gain an educational and social advantage which results in public school pupils being over-represented at the best universities.
It doesn't automatically mean that the education is 'better' per se, but it is certainly more effective at preparing pupils for Oxbridge entrance.
I'm not saying anything new here, most people, including Tory and Labour politicians, would acknowledge this to be true.
But you are making the argument that because I, and many others, think it is unjust that the privileged few have access to the best opportunities and will continue to control the destinies and life chances of the underprivileged and everybody else .... that I have a 'chip on my shoulder', that I am 'jealous'!
Either one can take a pragmatic approach to that or one can try hard to change it.
The assertion that you have a chip on your shoulder ,taken purely from the context of the above comment,is unreasonable but I haven't read other of your posts that might suggest otherwise.
Like many I feel that when posters play the player and not the ball it degrades the debate.
avinalarf said:
I agree with you on that but obviously discussing on this NPand E forum is almost always going to be more contentious than having a chat about our motors.
You have clearly never stood/sat in on a group of TVR owners club discussing the merits of binning their RV8 in favour of a Chevy smallblock in a Chimaera or Griffith.Or a group of vintage Ford owners arguing over the use of a 'modern' coil and high timer versus the original rotor and cap on an early Model T.
Feathers fly I promise you
footnote said:
Resorting to personal insults is not a sign of a winning argument.
What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
I've made no comment, I've simply said that criticising someone based on where they went to school is moronic and the sign of someone with an ignorant prejudice.What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
footnote said:
Many Tories (and most other politicians) would acknowledge that expanding access to Oxbridge and other top universities is a good thing in achieving a more representative democracy.
I've not said otherwise.footnote said:
This can't be done as easily at primary/secondary level because people pay for public schools in order to gain an educational and social advantage which results in public school pupils being over-represented at the best universities.
It doesn't automatically mean that the education is 'better' per se, but it is certainly more effective at preparing pupils for Oxbridge entrance.
I'm not saying anything new here, most people, including Tory and Labour politicians, would acknowledge this to be true.
Hence we need more grammar schools.It doesn't automatically mean that the education is 'better' per se, but it is certainly more effective at preparing pupils for Oxbridge entrance.
I'm not saying anything new here, most people, including Tory and Labour politicians, would acknowledge this to be true.
footnote said:
But you are making the argument that because I, and many others, think it is unjust that the privileged few have access to the best opportunities and will continue to control the destinies and life chances of the underprivileged and everybody else .... that I have a 'chip on my shoulder', that I am 'jealous'!
No, I said that by repeatedly focussing on someone's schooling rather than what they've said / done / not done then it appears to be a sign of someone with a chip on their shoulder IMO.footnote said:
...the privileged few have access to the best opportunities...
Who can say for sure based on internet chat, but perhaps this offers a glimpse as to why somebody might supect a chip.Within reasonable limits, everyone has access to the best opportunities. There will be cases at both ends of the social spectrum where it's not perfect but equality of opportunity is out there these days. Not all are prepared to put in the effort however.
University access including Oxbridge is now biased towards students from under-privileged homes due to admissions tutors applying "social factors" to make lower grade offers than they would consider for a sixth-former at Eton. Seventh term type entrance/exhibition/scholarship exams, where state school students couldn't match the level of preparation from independent schools, were replaced long ago.
Surely any genuine interpretation of 'fairness' would say that having wealthy parents who can afford an independent education shouldn't be held against the children from such families, who have little or no say in what happens to them in the sausage machine from prep school onwards. Having taught undergraduates from state and independent sectors there is if anything an advantage to 'making it' from a state school background as a student with that provenance will in general have had to teach themselves at times and make the running against a certain type of teacher who won't encourage applications to the top unis.
In any jobs market at any particular qualification or skill level, there's a wealth of equality and employment legislation to ensure that, again within reasonable limits, all applicants get a fair shout. There will always be instances of nepotism and the like, but gererally the opportunities are there. Focusing on the exceptions doesn't alter the reality that for most applicants, appointment is on merit.
What there isn't, and shouldn't be, is forced equality of outcome (as yet). That would be totalitarianism at work.
Just my state educated 2p.
Goaty Bill 2 said:
avinalarf said:
I agree with you on that but obviously discussing on this NPand E forum is almost always going to be more contentious than having a chat about our motors.
You have clearly never stood/sat in on a group of TVR owners club discussing the merits of binning their RV8 in favour of a Chevy smallblock in a Chimaera or Griffith.Or a group of vintage Ford owners arguing over the use of a 'modern' coil and high timer versus the original rotor and cap on an early Model T.
Feathers fly I promise you
However I have usually bought my cars on their aesthetic appeal to me and whether they would up my chances of pulling a tasty bit of totty/titty.
avinalarf said:
I think you make a fair point regarding social injustice.
Either one can take a pragmatic approach to that or one can try hard to change it.
The assertion that you have a chip on your shoulder ,taken purely from the context of the above comment,is unreasonable but I haven't read other of your posts that might suggest otherwise.
Like many I feel that when posters play the player and not the ball it degrades the debate.
You mean like when posters criticise the person's schooling rather than the person's actions, for example...?Either one can take a pragmatic approach to that or one can try hard to change it.
The assertion that you have a chip on your shoulder ,taken purely from the context of the above comment,is unreasonable but I haven't read other of your posts that might suggest otherwise.
Like many I feel that when posters play the player and not the ball it degrades the debate.
Jimboka said:
For someone who is supposedly so brilliant, he seems to be lacking common sense..
I found him repulsive on the interview on Radio 4 this morning. He was clearly trying to muscle his way through the interview, almost refusing to allow questions, belittling the interviewer and spouting several lies. Not mistruths. Outright lies.It was fantastic that the first part of More Or Less this evening was spent tearing his bollucks apart.
How's that for balance on the BBC?
sidicks said:
footnote said:
Resorting to personal insults is not a sign of a winning argument.
What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
I've made no comment, I've simply said that criticising someone based on where they went to school is moronic and the sign of someone with an ignorant prejudice.What I find most interesting is how and why you are so willing to make the argument that there is no obvious injustice in a select minority being able to exercise exceptional influence over the affairs of a nation when membership of that select minority is available in the main to those who have inherited wealth and privilege from existing members of that select minority.
I said that by repeatedly focussing on someone's schooling rather than what they've said / done / not done then it appears to be a sign of someone with a chip on their shoulder IMO.
sidicks said:
Your subsequent posts confirm that this is about envy / jealousy and ignorance and the 'chip on the shoulder' accusation fits well.
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!
Just out of interest, is the chip on your shoulder about anyone that's bettter educated than you or purely Tory politicians?!
If you actually paid attention to what people are saying in their posts as opposed to trying to think up 'clever' retorts, you might eventually realise that, despite your repeated assertions, I've not mentioned grammar schools.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!
Just out of interest, is the chip on your shoulder about anyone that's bettter educated than you or purely Tory politicians?!
I think it might be interesting and add to the 'discussion' if you were to enlighten everybody on your opinions, set out your grand plan, instead of just picking holes in the views of others.
footnote said:
If you actually paid attention to what people are saying in their posts as opposed to trying to think up 'clever' retorts, you might eventually realise that, despite your repeated assertions, I've not mentioned grammar schools.
At no point did I say you had - perhaps if you paid attention to what people are saying....etcfootnote said:
I think it might be interesting and add to the 'discussion' if you were to enlighten everybody on your opinions, set out your grand plan, instead of just picking holes in the views of others.
More grammar schools to support the more able kids and avoid the postcode lottery which currently favours richer parents. That said, there is still a lot of opportunity for people to better themselves and we should encourage them to do that, rather than try to drag others down, which is the Labour way. I think it would be interesting if you commented on what people did / did not do, rather than being unduly concerned with where they went to school...
footnote said:
...Etonite Jabba the Hut...
footnote said:
...watching the etonite Johnson...
footnote said:
...but it is fascinating reading people defending the rights of Etonites to rule over them...
footnote said:
...believe that Etonites and their kind are actually, fundamentally better/worthier...
footnote said:
...sheep-like deference to their betters (Etonites)...
Nothing to see here...!!Edited by sidicks on Saturday 29th April 10:43
sidicks said:
footnote said:
I think it might be interesting and add to the 'discussion' if you were to enlighten everybody on your opinions, set out your grand plan, instead of just picking holes in the views of others.
More grammar schools to support the more able kids and avoid the postcode lottery which currently favours richer parents. That said, there is still a lot of opportunity for people to better themselves and we should encourage them to do that, rather than try to drag others down, which is the Labour way. If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
Accepting that others hold an alternative point of view to you, without resorting to personal insults, is not a sign of weakness.
Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
footnote said:
There, that wasn't so hard was it? All it took was repeated poking.
If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
Only considered posts deserve considered responses, hence yours receiving a different sort of response.If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
footnote said:
Accepting that others hold an alternative point of view to you, without resorting to personal insults, is not a sign of weakness.
Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
See above.Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
sidicks said:
footnote said:
There, that wasn't so hard was it? All it took was repeated poking.
If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
Only considered posts deserve considered responses, hence yours receiving a different sort of response.If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
footnote said:
Accepting that others hold an alternative point of view to you, without resorting to personal insults, is not a sign of weakness.
Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
See above.Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
footnote said:
sidicks said:
footnote said:
There, that wasn't so hard was it? All it took was repeated poking.
If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
Only considered posts deserve considered responses, hence yours receiving a different sort of response.If you were able to indulge your readers with more considered responses like that in future, I'm sure we'd all be happier.
footnote said:
Accepting that others hold an alternative point of view to you, without resorting to personal insults, is not a sign of weakness.
Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
See above.Now, if you can resist the temptation to knock out curt replies, we could have the basis of an ongoing relationship.
Well, alluring as Etonite Boris is in his cycling finery, and I would humbly request that it is never claimed or inferred that I am hinting at any connection between where the old Etonite Boris Johnson was educated and his subsequent success in life, or indeed denigrating his achievements while at said school or indeed holding him in any way responsible for his attendance there (that was all his parents' fault)* I merely refer to it as a matter of record, but I suspect he's more of the Achilles Heel than secret weapon.
- Even the Daily Mail, that much revered organ have written about how birth, privilege and Eton have never mattered...
Justayellowbadge said:
Why do you keep using the non-existent term 'etonite'?
I cannot believe anyone could be so ill informed not to know the correct 'Etonian' so what is it you are trying to deliberately convey, if not ignorance?
Are there only two states which conveyors would wish to convey? Ignorance or non-ignorance, there are no other states?I cannot believe anyone could be so ill informed not to know the correct 'Etonian' so what is it you are trying to deliberately convey, if not ignorance?
What do you think about Boris? Secret weapon or achilles heel?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff