[Closed] Posh and Posher: Why Public School Boys Run Britain

Kneecapping is the answer

Retreating to orbit and nuking from space is the answer. Or just let them carry on as they are and eventually the diminishing gene pool will screw them right up - ah this might have already happened.

I found James Blunt's mum's defence of her son hilarious.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12308068 ]My son James Blunt, who is hugely appreciated worldwide, receives harsh criticism here and we have, rather sadly, been aware that it is because of his background.[/url]

No, it's not cos of his background, [i]it's because he's rubbish![/i] 😆

Public Schools serve only to perpetuate the Class System, and have no place in a truly democratic egalitarian society.

These public school posh prats run Britain because we let them!

VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE.................please!

Vote for who? They've [i]all[/i] bin to Public School, near enough!

Aye - you could be right there! Sad state of affairs running the affairs of state.

When we say public school do we mean any fee paying schools? I didn't go to one of the top ones but we did play Eton Fives. I left at 16 as didn't really fit in however looking back I like the fact we live in a free enough society for them to exist.

I like the fact we live in a [b]free[/b] enough society for them to exist.

It's not 'free' though is it. You have to pay to go to public school...

The main issue I have with public schools is that the standard of education offered by many of them is somewhat higher than the vast majority of state schools. I'd like to see kids from all backgrounds enjoy the level of education they deserve, rather than the highest standards being limited to those with the means to pay for them. That is an exclusive and socially divisive system which prevents many people from getting the education they deserve, and subsequently the higher positions within their respective careers.

Level the playing field, then we'll see who's boss....

Sicily has it's Cosa Nostra..

We Brits.. another small island nation.. have the 'old boys' system and the Eton Mafia with their OxBridge underlings..

It's just an organised crime synidicate.. however deeply ingrained and more socially acceptable it may seem to our brainwashed society.. and we are simply the unfortunate victims of it's crimes..

Whilst I'd like education standards at state schools to be better I certainly don't think the answer is to ban fee paying schools - impossible anyway without a revolution.

Whilst I'd like education standards at state schools to be better I certainly don't think the answer is to ban fee paying schools - impossible anyway without a revolution.

That'll start them off....

I would agree, though. The standard of state education needs to be improved and this won't come about by reactionary banning and dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Drag everyone up, not down.

Grammar schools, or an equivalent is (was) the solution. I understand the objection to them, but unless you ban fee paying schools you end up where we are now, which is a lot worse than where we were.

We Brits.. another small island nation.. have the 'old boys' system and the Eton Mafia with their OxBridge underlings..

Maybe in some areas (and I suspect that politics might be one) but it's not what it was 50 years ago and frankly I've never benefitted from it in the real world.

No doubt though this thread will bring up plenty of stupid stereotypes of braying toffs which frankly are just as stupid and I'll informed as those held by the section of public school educated people who believe that anyone else is a poor oik.

I'm all for grammar schools btw. Basically there needs to be a fair system that means academically bright kids don't have to go to a sh!tty comp where they're bored out of their brains.

Drag everyone up, not down.

I agree. Allowing those from the poorest of backgrounds equal access to the likes of Harrow and Eton would be the way forward. But the current system doesn't allow for this, and those with wealth and power want to keep things the way they are; God forbid a prole should ever be in a position to oust them from their cosy existence at the top end of society, eh?

I understand that in Norway, there are a few 'private' schools, yet these offer little or no academic advantages over the state schools. They seem to exist mainly for rich Norwegians to feel they enjoy some sort of exclusivity. Norwegian society struck me as one of the most egalitarian and 'classless' I've ever seen.

In France, private schools are seen as being for slightly thick rich kids who need help to get decent grades but that works because the state schools are good.

Norwegian society struck me as one of the most egalitarian and 'classless' I've ever seen.

they also make cracking movies

[i]I'd like to see kids from all backgrounds enjoy the level of education they deserve, rather than the highest standards being limited to those with the means to pay for them.[/i]

Could say the same about healthcare or indeed any of the nicer trappings of life - cars, houses etc, the best is available to the ones with the most money.
Isn't that an incentive to drive standards up rather than the other way round? There are plenty of people who didn't go to public school who are doing very well for themselves, self-made millionaires etc.

Near where I grew up were three excellent private schools, regularly near the top of the league tables which offered opportunities such as Combined Cadet Force, Duke of Edinburgh, field trips, excellent sports facilities (I played Fives too, great game!).
There were also two shit comprehensives offering none of the above...

Force the comprehensives to improve standards and the demand for fee-paying schools will diminish, a self-levelling playing field if you like.

I work at one of the institutions featured in that programme. Hmm...

Force the comprehensives to improve standards

LOLOL... you WILL improve standards or it will be six of the best and running laps of the fives field before supper!

Isn't that an incentive to drive standards up rather than the other way round?

Er, not if you don't have the money to access such high quality services it isn't, no. Such economic exclusivity actually leaves people feeling disillusioned and demotivated, as they can't see how they can ever afford the best services for their kids and their families.

There are plenty of people who didn't go to public school who are doing very well for themselves

And there are undoubtedly many, many times more who deserved the best educational opportunities, because of their own abilities, who were deprived of such a fair slice of the pie.

There aren't many people occupying the top jobs in our society who din't go to public school. This is a fact. Which shows that an elite continue to operate a closed cartel on such positions of power and influence, excluding all others. Which kind of makes a mockery of such ideas of democracy and equality, quite frankly.

Force the comprehensives to improve standards

Without the incentives offered in the private sector (top wages and privileges etc), and without massive investment in the state education system, how do you propose to achieve such a thing?

running laps of the fives field

*Chuckles*

Vote for who? They've all bin to Public School, near enough!

You really are as daft as a brush Elfinman ........I see why you had to be sent to a private school.

If tiggs is saying vote for someone else, then he means "vote for someone else" .........get it ? IE, not someone who went to public school.

Every ballot paper in any election will include someone who didn't go to public school, so it won't present itself as a problem at all.

Now of course, if you don't like candidates that didn't go to public school, then that's a completely different issue altogether.

no chuckling at the back or you'll be down to see the housemaster for extra prep..

A comprehensive need not be crap. The one I went to had the best facilities of any school in Glasgow including the fee paying schools and a very high standard of teaching. Most of its intake came from Darnley Arden and Carnwdrick - some of the most deprived estates around

True comprehensives is the only way to go to produce an egalitarian equality of opportunity. A hybrid system with "parental choice" will allways work against this. Selection will always work against this. My old schools was destroyed when the bogus "choice" agenda was introduced as most of the interested parents sent their kids to the rival school which was not nearly so good but had been the old grammar. Flight of teachers followed and one of the best schools soon became a sink school with a falling roll and no 6th form.

No one won from this - everyone including the most able kids had their education diminished.

Yeah, well "force" was the wrong word to use but you get the gist of it...

/makes note not to multi-task while trying to argue on the internet.

running laps of the fives field

Mostly concrete - watch out for the step though.

Relatively small private sector in Ireland, yet, on average we're more intelligent and better educated than Brits. Go figure.

I think any right minded person can agree that at least on some level education should be a level playing field. But it isnt, so was the programme right to suggest that grammar schools helped to improve social mobility? I think not, the narative of the programme was confused. Even Neil said that the welsh and scottish assemblies are less "posh schoolboy" dominated than the Governemnt and there are no grammar schools in Scotland or Wales whereas England still has many. Also as mentioned in the programme the problem of posh ploiticians dominating seems to me to be due to it now being a Career rahter than a calling.

I think any right minded person can agree that at least on some level we can all agree that education should be a level [s]playing field[/s] [b]fives court[/b]

HTH

If tiggs is saying vote for someone else, then he means "vote for someone else" .........get it ? IE, not someone who went to public school.

My point was, as you well know Ernie, that the majority of our MPs tend to have been educated at fee-paying schools, rather than at state comprehensives. People tend to vote who they feel will best represent them in Parliament. More often than not, those with the best education will rise to the top in local politics. This reflects the fact that private education is often better than state education. And that money buys you privilege.

So, instead of having a snidey snipe at me, just because you're jealous that I live in London and not Croydon, why not use your extensive knowledge of politics and stuff to present a coherent argument as to how our education system could be improved?

Although quite why I'm arguing with an uneducated scrote like yourself is something I keep asking myself...

education should be a level [s]playing field[/s] fives court

Rugby Fives uses a level court, Eton Fives doesn't.

HTH. 😉

education should be a level playing field fives court

Rugby Fives uses a level court, Eton Fives doesn't.

HTH.

you can tell I'm common as I have no idea what the hell you are talking about 🙄

I think any right minded person can agree that at least on some level we can all agree that education should be a level playing field.

There's no need for negative connotations either. Selection for academic, engineering or practical streams would actually let kids do things that engage them. Much better to be a successful builder than a failed academic. The baccalaureate they're pushing now embodies all that is wrong with education. Half of it is utterly pointless, yet it's being held up as the ideal.

Eton Fives seems to b a game involving slapping balls with one's bare hands... 😯

Drag everyone up, not down.

The baccalaureate they're pushing now

the few people I have met who studied the baccalaureate (albeit in European schools) have more common sense than all the fives, rugby and footie playing school leavers that I've met put together..

FWIW

Eton Fives seems to b a game involving slapping balls with one's bare hands

Don't worry, there are gloves involved.

My point was, as you well know Ernie, that the majority of our MPs tend to have been educated at fee-paying schools, rather than at state comprehensives.

And tiggs point was, as you well know Elfinman, that MPs are only there by the grace of the electorate.

So despite what you're saying, people are not forced to vote for public school educated MPs.

You clearly have no time for politicians who didn't go to public school, and wouldn't consider voting for them .......posh git.

And btw the northern part of Croydon is in the county of London, all of Croydon is in Greater London, so don't come the, "I'm posh 'cause I live in the capital next to the arty-farty docklands" bollox with me.

The baccalaureate

Couple of comments, you can shoot me down in flames if you want (and I'm sure the usual suspects will)

To get into Eton (which selects on academic ability) and then into Oxbridge (which has very high academic selection standards) probably means you are pretty bright. Pretty bright people often go on to do wll in life. It's not entirely down to the old boys network although I've seen it action so it does play a part.

You can get into fee paying schools if you are poor. You have to be exceptional though to get a scholorship.

I generally agree with CFH. The ideal solution would be increase the standards of other schools so that people didn't have to pay and therefore anyone could go. You'd still need selection though otherwise I can't see it working.

Whats needed is not a dismantlement of public schools but a through shake up of state schools and the parents taking their responsibility for their children.

There are too many state schools who do not push their students and many teachers,heads,deputys etc who are just going through the motions they claim to be professionals but arnt instead they just do enough.

Some staff in schools are superb and are worth everything they get paid.

Parents need to be made aware that they also need to help educating their offspring and that the resposibility does not rest with the school alone.

So despite what you're saying, people are not forced to vote for public school educated MPs.

I din't say that. I merely pointed out that there doesn't seem to be a great deal of choice.

And btw the northern part of Croydon is in the county of London, all of Croydon is in Greater London, so don't come the, "I'm posh 'cause I live in the capital next to the arty-farty docklands" bollox with me.

😆

Croydon; ah, what delights await the unenlightened traveller. Glories such as the Whitgift centre, Travelodge and IKEA.

[img] [/img]

The local state school outperforms a number of local 'independent' schools so it can be done. I've been appalled by the weak intellects of a number of privately educated individuals I've met; they did, however, demonstrate arrogance and presumption to impressive levels - I suspect that's what you're paying as you move down the private school league tables, away from the good ones.

I went to a middling rural comp but have worked will quite a few people with a public school education and I would say it's not necessarily just the standard of education but also the networking and confidence (read arrogance if you want) if gives the pupils.
The grammar school system should be brought back but stopping public school is just stupid and drags people down to 'equalise' instead of lifting others up.
Maybe there should be a public school tax to fund the grammar schools?

You can get into fee paying schools if you are poor. You have to be exceptional though to get a scholorship.

Hmmm, used to have Assisted Places which I benefited from, not sure what the criteria was for getting one of those though.

[i]You can get into fee paying schools if you are poor. You have to be exceptional though to get a scholorship. [/i]

Yep, I had the Assisted Places scheme as well. It was the incentive for me to work/study as best I could to ensure I got a place at a school that, as I mentioned in my first post, gave the most opportunities and the best education. Demand for the limited Assisted Places and Scholarships on offer was incredible so the school naturally selected on ability.

Also, +1 for what Mikeypies says ^^, there's a lot more to this than just comp vs public.

Elfinsafety

Rather than pick on private schools why not put your efforts into ensuring that the state school system is improved - and its not more money - as has been seen, its more a appropriate education.

In the small town that I grew up in we had the Grammar School for those that past their 11+ and the Modern School for those that didn't. The Modern included the usual subjects plus had extensive workshops and 'technical' lessons, while the Grammar still taught Latin.

This enabled the bright kids to climb the ladder get to Oxbridge etc and at the other end of the spectrum, gave the kids a chance to get a decent education and life-long skills.

There wasn't a private school nearby, and why did we need one?

Now go forward 30-40 years... depressing isn't it?

Oh, and the only one who has a 'choice' is the one paying the bill.

Surely the issue isn't that they are 'posh' or went to public school, it's the fact they are crap! Any decent alternatives to be voted for?

Can't help thinking this obsession with people perceived as 'posh' is unhealthy and a red herring.

I don't see any sense in abolishing the private schools. Why would you do that ? Why abolish a system that produces fantastic education.The problem lies with access to it. I went to an inner city comp after taking and passing the entrance exam for the King Edwards public school in B'ham. Sadly for me I got a more than good enough score to enter but not quite good enough to win one of the few scholarship places. I left that comp five years later without a single CSE let alone an O' level. Comps drag down - not pull up. A few ( 6 IIRC )of my contemporaries in the class of 81 made it to uni. ALL of them came from middle class homes with proffesional parents who had also been to uni. The rest of us, shafted by Labour's disasterous education policy, left to join the Tory dole queues. Marvelous.
Grammar schools and the meritocracy they create are clearly the way forward along with more funding for a massive increase in scholarships at the top public schools.

There are too many state schools who do not push their students and many teachers,heads,deputys etc who are just going through the motions they claim to be professionals but arnt instead they just do enough.

Some staff in schools are superb and are worth everything they get paid.

Not saying this isnt the case somewhere but what evidence do you have for this?

Those talking about Grammar schools and secondary moderns seem to me to not understand how streaming works in schools or have a handle on the wide range of subjects and courses taught in most comps, I teach 3 different courses to 3 different types of kids of GCSE age and thats just in science. How would a Grammar school be better unless of course its able to be better funded which implies the secondary moderns would suffer?

I left that comp five years later without a single CSE let alone an O' level. Comps drag down - not pull up.

Its a fact that as everyone has been to school everyone thinks they are an expert. Your experience may just be a tad out of date!!

Can't help thinking this obsession with people perceived as 'posh' is unhealthy and a red herring.

I agree. Unfortunately most of the electorate has a predisposition to prefer their politicians to have received privileged education.

Someone who has received private education is much more likely to be selected as a Labour candidate than someone who hasn't. The reason for this is quite simple - people are more likely to elect a Labour MP if he or she has been privately educated. I have no doubt that Tony Blair would have been less popular had he not sounded like what he was - the product of a highly privileged boarding school education. A Scottish comprehensive educated Tony Blair would have stood zero chance imo.

Of course people are then bewildered as to why their politicians appear to be so out of touch with them.

Its a fact that as everyone has been to school everyone thinks they are an expert.

no, just relating my experience, is that OK Sir ?

Hope you're not that condascending with the kids.

Unfortunately most of the electorate has a predisposition to prefer their politicians to have received [s]privileged[/s] education.

A well educated politician is always a preference.

Hope you're not that condascending with the kids.

Nope I've taught them to think logically, or if not I treat their views as those of kids, not an adult.

Oh right, just condascending on here then.

[u]condescending[/u]

point proven

No Flasheart. Someone who had achieved exactly the same academic qualifications as Tony Blair, but had gone to a Scottish comprehensive school, would have stood no chance, as far as the electorate is concerned.

Besides, educational achievement is no guarantee of political competence, as STW illustrates spectacularly on a daily basis.

.

.

😉

Besides, educational achievement is no guarantee of agreeing with my own political beliefs, as STW illustrates spectacularly on a daily basis.

FTFY

😉

Not saying this isnt the case somewhere but what evidence do you have for this?

Simple having lived with 2 teachers for 6 years and thus been exposed to all the moans and the politics esp about shocking management and poor teachers who manage to stay on. Also I spend time every week in numerous schools, state schools from nursery to six form and public schools as well.

Obviously I'm not proffessionaly qualified just a layman but it was quite an eye opener going into schools after a 18 year gap and seeing what gos on.

Without doubt if I had children and the cash they would go to a public school or a Catholic school and I'm an atheist. I would rather they went to a state school but most are shockingly poor

I think the point is being missed here. It's not the education of these people, it's the fact that they have risen to the top of the political parties.

Someone who had achieved exactly the same academic qualifications as Tony Blair, but had gone to a Scottish comprehensive school, would have stood no chance, as far as the electorate is concerned.

I would disagree. The reason why there are a large number of Eton/Oxford/Cambridge graduates in the parties is simply down to the "old boys" network. An example would be Cameron and Osborne, friends before politics and now one giving the other one a job.

Also, when candidates are selected to fight for constituencies, a lot of the time the local hopeful is cast aside in favour of a candidate who's been "parachuted in". Naturally this candidate will tow the line of a political party more than someone who puts local issues first.

These people do not represent the majority of people in this country. It's almost mafia like.

It's [s]almost[/s] mafia [s]like[/s].

I would rather they went to a state school but most are shockingly poor

So you've observed most schools closely have you?

Catholic schools are no worse or better than any other type of school, infact take god out and they are pretty much the same.

getting back to the original question I want the brightest and most capable people to run the country,that they come from a wide section of society would be good.

The current situation needs to be changed

It was not the "old boys network" which got Tony Blair through the Labour Party until he became Prime minister El-bent. It was that private boarding school charisma which came shinning through. A Tony Blair who had sounded as if he had gone to a Scottish comprehensive school would not have made it.

And quite right too - I don't want my Prime Minister to sound like a grunting sweaty sock.

getting back to the original question I want the brightest and most capable people to run the country,that they come from a wide section of society would be good.

and are Grammar schools a way to achieve this and if so how?

The "old boys network" these days is no more than a construct of envy. A fabricated excuse.

You cant use an "old boys network" to get yourself into Oxford or Cambridge, no more than you can use one to get most jobs. Its more common that there's those who so desperately wish that there was some dark forces at work than it actually happening. Something to point at and say "that's why Im not successful, I dont have access to the Old Boys Network". Load of hooey.

It also patronises the achievements of anyone else who has graduated from a good university and gone on to be successful regardless of how they got there.

Political relationships, dynasties and chosen scions exist independently of academe. They surely do exist, as in the case of Osborne, Johnson and Cameron. But dont confuse their ability to get to a good university on the back of an expensive private education with some kind of string-pulling, plummy accented, [i]opus dei[/i]

Political relationships, dynasties and chosen scions exist independently of academe.

Indeed. The Kinnock clan, for example. Far more of a "Network" at work there than the "Old Boys network"

or the wedgewood-benns....

or the milldulls...

You cant use an "old boys network" to get yourself into Oxford or Cambridge

But you can use a better education paid for by daddy to do so, isnt that the same? Sure if your as thick as mince then you have no hope but it certainly isnt an equally playing field. The Oxbridge club is the reserve of those with money by and large, to ignore this fact is to bury your head in the sand.

Stoner - Member

The "old boys network" these days is no more than a construct of envy. A fabricated excuse.

Bullshine.

It is clearly still in place.

[img] ?w=468&h=420[/img]

1) the Hon. Edward Sebastian Grigg, the heir to Baron Altrincham of Tormarton and current chairman of Credit Suisse (UK)

(2) David Cameron

(3) Ralph Perry Robinson, a former child actor, designer, furniture-maker

(4) Ewen Fergusson, son of the British ambassador to France, Sir Ewen Fergusson and now at City law firm Herbert Smith

(5) Matthew Benson, the heir to the Earldom of Wemyss and March

(6) Sebastian James, the son of Lord Northbourne, a major landowner in Kent

(7) Jonathan Ford, the-then president of the club, a banker with Morgan Grenfell

(8) Boris Johnson, the-then president of the Oxford Union, now Lord Mayor of London

9) Harry Eastwood, the investment fund consultant

The "old boys network" these days is no more than a construct of envy. A fabricated excuse.

In some cases maybe, but not all. The effect of who you know rather than what you know works at all levels.

[img] ?w=585&h=350[/img]

(1) George Osborne, now the Chancellor;

(2) writer Harry Mount, the heir to the Baronetcy of Wasing and Mr. Cameron’s cousin;

(3) Chris Coleridge, the descendant of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, the son of Lloyds’ chairman David Coleridge, the brother of Conde Nast managing director Nicholas Coleridge

(4) German aristocrat and managing consultant Baron Lupus von Maltzahn,

(5) the late Mark Petre, the heir to the Barony of Petre;

(6) Australian millionaire Peter Holmes a Cour;

(7) Nat Rothschild, the heir to the Barons Rothschilds and co-founder of a racy student paper with Harry Mount

(8) Jason Gissing, the chairman of Ocado supermarkets.

Two figures on left of (6) and (7) were blacked out before the photo was released, causing wild allegations. Their identities are yet unknown. My top contenders (based on the influence in the City, the Athenaeum and their Oxford prominence) include:

(1) the Hon. Michael Gove, Shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, former president of the Oxford Union and “one-man think-tank”

(2) the Hon. Adam Bruce, the son of the Earl of Elgin and incumbent Unicorn Pursuivant of Arms

(3) the Hon. Edward Vaizey, the son of Lord Vaizey and the Shadow Minister for Culture

(4) the founder of Think Tank Policy Exchange, and conservative activist Nicholas Boles

(5) Steven Hilton, the director of strategy for Cameron and godfather of Cameron’s children

But you can use a better education paid for by daddy to do so, isnt that the same?

it's nothing like the same. at all.

An "old boys network" implies unequal treatment, selection indifferent to ability or achievement. Illogical preferential treatment.

No matter how an education is paid for academic and intellectual achievement is itself unblemished.

No matter how an education is paid academic and intellectual achievement is in itself unblemished.

erm:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/03/state-school-pupils-university

Pupils from comprehensive schools are likely to do better at university than children educated at private or grammar schools with similar A-level results, according to research carried out for the government and published today.

now is this showing that comps are shit or that they give more rounded kids?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/06/oxford-colleges-no-black-students

Figures revealed in requests made under the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act by the Labour MP David Lammy also show that Oxford's social profile is 89% upper- and middle-class, while 87.6% of the Cambridge student body is drawn from the top three socioeconomic groups. The average for British universities is 64.5%, according to the admissions body Ucas.

THE Kinnock family have made a fortune from the European gravy train.
Former Labour leader Neil, 67, was an EU Commissioner until 2004 and now gets a £63,900-a-year pension.

He also had a £270,000 payout.

MEP wife Glenys, 64, gets a £57,000 salary plus about £100,000 a year in expenses.

She steps down this summer.

Daughter Rachel, 33, was her researcher. And son Stephen, 35, spent eight years working for the British Council in Brussels.

Anything to add to that TJ? Of course, the chap behind Ocado didn't work his socks off like the Kinnock children, did he? Glenys, I am sure, was worth every penny of that as well.

Bullshine.

It is clearly still in place.

bravo TJ. You have just illustrated my point about the envious left very nicely.

How about you go through each of those people's cv's and make the case against their ACHIEVEMENT and EMPLOYMENT (not inherited wealth, that's a completely different argument) with reference to networking over academic results.

Your prejudices make you look woeful.

An "old boys network" implies unequal treatment, selection indifferent to ability or achievement. Illogical preferential treatment.

No matter how an education is paid academic and intellectual achievement is in itself unblemished.

the mafiosi thing for me stems more from the way that I imagine these kids at elite establishments to have been conditioned to view the world..

The "old boys network" these days is no more than a construct of envy. A fabricated excuse.

'Tis you who is deluding themselves Stoner..........if you do indeed believe that. Politics, and the dark and mighty art of political lobbying, has everything to do with contacts - including the contacts forged at Eton and the Bullingdon club.