Boris Johnson - Secret Weapon OR Achilles Heel?
Discussion
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?
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?
princealbert23 said:
You have perfected the art of starting a thread in a nice balanced way without any hint of bias.
Ha ha.... cheers... I don't like to nail my colours to the mast too soon.He's on the Today show now dodging the £350m question now that he's been torn a new one by Susanna Reid on GMB and Charlie Stayt on BBC on the same issue.
Won't let John Humphries ask him a question at the moment
AnotherClarkey said:
If May achieves a significant majority I wouldn't expect him to last long in cabinet.
I know... I can't work out whether TM would ask him to come out publicly or whether he does it off his own bat.Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Zac Goldsmith - all reappeared in the last week like a bad smell - three people I'd be glad never to set eyes or ears on again.
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
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.
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.
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.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?
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:
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.
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'!
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.
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.
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