Boris Johnson - Secret Weapon OR Achilles Heel?
Discussion
iphonedyou 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 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
iphonedyou said:
And this is why strong drugs, taken to excess, are bad.
Well, you need to stop taking them then, don't you?
iphonedyou said:
And this is why strong drugs, taken to excess, are bad.
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.
Considering that of the thousands of schools up & down the land, Eton has produced 19 out of 54 Prime ministers, he has a point, however class war it's written down.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
It's an entirely legitimate point for debate, but you know, accusing him of being a druggy is good too.
I watched an episode of Call my Bluff back in 1987-ish when 'mugwump' was the word up for debate.
At the reveal, Robert Robinson said the meaning was 'fence-sitter.'
Yes, I need to get out more. There's just some things one remembers, sometimes.
Jesus, I'm metamorphosing into Eric Mc.
As you were.
At the reveal, Robert Robinson said the meaning was 'fence-sitter.'
Yes, I need to get out more. There's just some things one remembers, sometimes.
Jesus, I'm metamorphosing into Eric Mc.
As you were.
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
Randy Winkman said:
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
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
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?!footnote said:
Whereas on the other side of the argument... http://www.suttontrust.com/research/ And that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Website claims:"...while education opportunities remain overwhelmingly dominated by children from the most privileged homes."
If only we could have more grammar schools to give those children the best opportunities, eh?
All our children deserve the very best education we can give them.
It might well be a better to drop the terms of Comprehensive and Grammar schools when debating this subject as this only amplifies entrenched opinions.
All our schools should offer the very best opportunities to enable our kids to exploit their abilities.
Those kids from homes of a higher socio economic type and a stable home environment have an inbuilt advantage over the others.
Please note that this is a generalisation.
Our children have different talents so it is necessary at some stage in their schooling to decide which type of school is best suited for them.
If we had three types of schools that specialised in say academia,technology and the arts,all offering a high standard of education and acknowledged as equal but different that might be the way to go.
It is unfortunate, but a fact of life,that private schooling often offers a higher level of education and opens the door to more life chances.
Those children whose come from the "very top echelon" and go to the top colleges such as Eton have the very best opportunities.
Of course the above are generalisations and there are, as always, exceptions to the rules.
It would be great if all our children were born with the talents and then abilities to have a wonderful life and had the same opportunities but I'm afraid that is not where we are nor will be unless there is a very big change in our philosophical outlook of life.
It might well be a better to drop the terms of Comprehensive and Grammar schools when debating this subject as this only amplifies entrenched opinions.
All our schools should offer the very best opportunities to enable our kids to exploit their abilities.
Those kids from homes of a higher socio economic type and a stable home environment have an inbuilt advantage over the others.
Please note that this is a generalisation.
Our children have different talents so it is necessary at some stage in their schooling to decide which type of school is best suited for them.
If we had three types of schools that specialised in say academia,technology and the arts,all offering a high standard of education and acknowledged as equal but different that might be the way to go.
It is unfortunate, but a fact of life,that private schooling often offers a higher level of education and opens the door to more life chances.
Those children whose come from the "very top echelon" and go to the top colleges such as Eton have the very best opportunities.
Of course the above are generalisations and there are, as always, exceptions to the rules.
It would be great if all our children were born with the talents and then abilities to have a wonderful life and had the same opportunities but I'm afraid that is not where we are nor will be unless there is a very big change in our philosophical outlook of life.
sidicks said:
vonuber said:
And? It's the correct decision, that bridge is pointless.
I don't really know the detail, but it does seem a lot of money that could be better spent elsewhere.If there was a Sadiq Khan Top Boy or Useless Lump thread...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff