• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

Class: The Great EADD Debate

One Thousand Words said:
A greater percentage of private school students enjoy rugby and cricket, exposure to these sports is more the reason than them being exclusive to the wealthy. All of society is being represented, it is simply the lower classes who have no desire to become a politician not because they are being prevented from it.
Click to expand...

I was on the school rugby team and we did play a bit of cricket but chronic lack of equipment and facilities made it kinda pointless Rugby I've never thought of as being a posh sport, rugger buggers are another matter. They're just bellends.

I also totally disagree with your last sentence. All of society is not represented - not even remotely close. If you truly believe it is you must have extremely limited exposure to any society beyond your own - "Elite" as the BBC apparently label it - circles. That survey/questionnaire thingy is hardly in-depth but I suspect there is some truth to it. I suspect I would find it as hard to get myelf up to your 'Elite' rating as you would to come down to my 'Precariat' rating. I personally don't have a problem with people purely because of their social classification, their income, their school background, but it does appear to me that it's only those at the top who seem to believe that class divisions don't exist or don't matter. It's cos they don't cause problems at the top end, at the bottom end they most certainly do. People "like you" (I realise that's a massive, broad generalisation based on a limited knowledge of your actual situation but I'm sure you know what I mean: privately educated, professional career, good income, comfortable lifestyle) are most certainly represented in the political system - over-represented, I'd say - whereas people like me simply aren't. Not even a little bit.
 
Sammy G said:
From what I've read....etc etc
Click to expand...

Oooh right.
Thanks for elaborating, I see what you mean now.
Yes, you understood me correctly.
"you appear to believe we live in a meritocratic society and that an individual's social mobility is directly proportionate to the amount of 'hard work' they're willing to put in "
Yes. I think this is true.
No it's not a level playing field, but it's not hopeless.

As for politics, yes I agree with what you said about the media.
I do think the internet has changed things though, things go viral and the media plays catch up. If only the 'occupy' stuff had matured and developed in some way. It seemed quite exciting at the time but it all kinda fizzled out and they never really reached out to the people that do actually vote




 
Would be nice to make state schools more appealing for teachers, as teachers are by far the main factor in a kids education. Problem being private schools have the money to entice them and even though a lot of teachers will go into the profession cos they care about kids and want to make a difference, the extra money makes a difference of where they choose to go.

I'm sure a lot of you had that one teacher you had some kind of connection with.
 
its true, it takes a rare person to fight the system. Our workplace screwed us over by eliminating shift bonuses which meant we all lost about 20% of our salary, one guy fought it for months and months. Hindsight is a wonderfull thing, and as one of our more insightfull colleagues pointed out, if we'd shown any solidarity we could have all walked and caused the company to loose a multi million pound contract. They were playing hard ball with us, using the recession as an excuse to slash our wages, whilst at that time they were making billions in profit.

We'd have been cutting off our noses to spite our faces, as we all may have been sacked. However they were holding us to ransom, i wish we had shown a united front and done an organised absence protest. That may have got the cunts worrying, at least shown them that they cannot fuck people over without consequences. We all just whinged and moaned about it for months, rather than taking direct action, which would have had severe consequences for the company. The killing off of the trade unions has left so many workers feeling powerless and disorganised and unaware of their rights or how to fight for them. If we had Trade Union support things might have been very different. I believe that we have Maggie Thatcher to thank for this.
 
bummer said:
If only the 'occupy' stuff had matured and developed in some way. It seemed quite exciting at the time but it all kinda fizzled out and they never really reached out to the people that do actually vote
Click to expand...

Actually the Occupy movement has grown up and continued. Mostly split up into smaller, more focussed groups which was inevitable really given the original was a rather unwieldy and famously unfocussed beast. It did, however, play an important part in bringing together "ordinary people" with more seasoned protesters which created opportunities for such people to pick up a few tips from what might be called professional protesters so they can organise groups that focus on whatever their particular issue happens to be. Whilst in its current, splintered form it may not have the pictorial power of thousands of people clogging the streets and halls of power, they are perhaps now actually achieving more - it's just that none of that stuff is often mentioned in the media cos day-to-day protest group stuff just ain't that exciting compared to hordes of people on the streets. It's less sexy, but more likely to actually achieve something these days.

And on the meritocracy thing, I'm about halfway between Sam and yourself. Whilst I agree it is indeed technically feasible for people to make a difference - perhaps to become an independent MP as you suggested up there somewhere - I also agree with Sam that the way "the system" is set up it makes such things all but impossible to ever gain any real ground. Unless you go the shamelessly populist route and form a UKIP or summat. It's just a shame that the kinda chnages that I suspect many of us here would wish to see simply don't have such obvious and clear mass-appeal. It's not just that somebody has to get off their arse, get together a deposit and go knocking on doors, there's also virtually the entire media structure (and sundry related vested interests) to take on and that really is a big ask.

It's not that change is impossible, it's just that just about everything you could imagine or think of is skewed against it.
 
Uncle Robert said:
I'm sure a lot of you had that one teacher you had some kind of connection with.
Click to expand...

Mmm... Mrs Read and her delumptious bosoms which she had a rather nice habit of resting on your shoulder as she looked over your work. Probably Operation Yewtree stuff in some views but can't say I complained :D

(i realise that was not the kinda connection you meant but did bring a pleasing pubescent memory to mind)
 
Ah and of course there was the teacher you fancied :)! Mine was a late-thirties spanish teacher. She got fired after about 6 months, can't remember why though. Just being shit at teaching I think..
 
Uncle Robert said:
Ah and of course there was the teacher you fancied :)! Mine was a late-thirties spanish teacher. She got fired after about 6 months, can't remember why though. Just being shit at teaching I think..
Click to expand...

Early-mid 30s French teacher in my case. She got married the second year I was at that school. Still not sure I've forgiven her for that :D
 
Shambles said:
Early-mid 30s French teacher in my case. She got married the second year I was at that school. Still not sure I've forgiven her for that :D
Click to expand...

Heartless! My french teacher was a fitty but her armpits didn't half sweat.. She also nearly knocked me off my scooter :( (my fault entirely)
 
Shambles said:
I was on the school rugby team and we did play a bit of cricket but chronic lack of equipment and facilities made it kinda pointless Rugby I've never thought of as being a posh sport, rugger buggers are another matter. They're just bellends.

I also totally disagree with your last sentence. All of society is not represented - not even remotely close. If you truly believe it is you must have extremely limited exposure to any society beyond your own - "Elite" as the BBC apparently label it - circles. That survey/questionnaire thingy is hardly in-depth but I suspect there is some truth to it. I suspect I would find it as hard to get myelf up to your 'Elite' rating as you would to come down to my 'Precariat' rating. I personally don't have a problem with people purely because of their social classification, their income, their school background, but it does appear to me that it's only those at the top who seem to believe that class divisions don't exist or don't matter. It's cos they don't cause problems at the top end, at the bottom end they most certainly do. People "like you" (I realise that's a massive, broad generalisation based on a limited knowledge of your actual situation but I'm sure you know what I mean: privately educated, professional career, good income, comfortable lifestyle) are most certainly represented in the political system - over-represented, I'd say - whereas people like me simply aren't. Not even a little bit.
Click to expand...

What stopped you from achieving your political ambitions? Did the sandstone university law school block your admission despite scoring straight A's at high school or did your friends distract you during class so much that your marks went to shit? The former would the elite keeping you down, the later would be your peers.

I don't argue that going to a private school does not come with great benefits but so does having a father who played for the all blacks. Money can open many doors but those doors mean nothing unless you are willing to still work hard. Many of my class mates were obscenely rich, but it didn't matter what school some of them attended, they would still have ended up on the board of the fathers companies. The one or two who did go into politics simply went to law school and rather than join the beer society or boxing clubs joined the student unions and played leaders when they could have been fucking girls.

Many of my mates were wealthy farmers worth millions who were as knock about as you, some were princes from village tribes in PNG, whose tuition was paid for by the Australian government and had essentially servants from their village living with them who treated them like a god, yet had little in terms of pocket money. One of the wealthiest families fortune was made from buying and selling milk runs were as several Chinese kids had so much money rather than live in a boarding house their parents bought them a house next door to live in with only a maid to cook and clean. Our backgrounds are all different but at the end of the day some of us made the most of our opportunities and some fucked around, were distracted by peer group pressure and wasted it.

If you want to know I was on a rugby scholarship, worked hard enough to be dux and now earn enough to supplement my mums rent. I grabbed my chance with two hands and never looked back or took no for and answer. Not bad for a snot nosed kid from a piss ant town at the foot of a volcano.
 
'Scuse me for butting in
Just thought i'd share this link
Its almost relevant to the convo, helps me remember the bigger picture and puts things into perspective
http://www.globalrichlist.com/

I'm in the top 4.74% globally btw ( based on income )
 
People's opinions of each other regarding class are really irrelevant to what class is, and are just a downstream effect; and in modern consumerist society, superficial 'cultural' aspects are no guide anyway (any poor cunt has a caffetiere and a flatscreen these days (on credit though)).

To put it in old fashioned terms (and for knock), class is your relationship to the means of production - that's the marxist definition of class (and there isn't really any other worth speaking of). The definiton needs a bit of updating for our times (the 'means of production' are a lot more vaguely spread around) but the principle is the same - it doesn't matter what you think about it, your position with regards to the control of production/wealth of the world defines your class position (ie are you on the dole, do you work for someone, do you employ people, do you live off unearned income (rentier class), etc.). That's obviously not to say any individual can't defy the class structure, and plenty do (what with us being individuals) - but across a whole society, the idea of class as an overall determining factor of real outcomes is still valid (as borne out by SHMs numbers).
 
One Thousand Words said:
What stopped you from achieving your political ambitions? Did the sandstone university law school block your admission despite scoring straight A's at high school or did your friends distract you during class so much that your marks went to shit? The former would the elite keeping you down, the later would be your peers.
Click to expand...

I've never had political ambitions nor have I ever claimed to. I was forced to leave school at 14 due to acute mental health issues. It's likely that if my background had been different that wouldn't have happened. Almost certain in fact. But the difficulties resulting from my own situation had nothing to do with class specifically. Just rather unfortunate parentage and perhaps a few shonky genes.

As I said before, I truly believe things could've been very differnt for me if I'd had the opportunity of a proper education - not necessarily a private education but a decent one. That didn't happen for whatever reason. Although I suspect a large part of that reason was all the fukkin about with the education system through the 70s and 80s - wasn't a good time to be in school as far as getting an education goes. Certainly not "average" state schools anyway. If the opportunity had been there to either gain a scholarship to a decent school, or if I'd simply had parents who could afford to pay for a decent school, I think things would be very different for me. But neither was possible so things are as they are. And, as I said, my own particular case has more to do with other issues than class or wealth specifically.
 
mydrugbuddy said:
Sid was hardly a bass player either from what i gather he was fucking useless:D But i spose he looked the part and could spit at the crowd and sneer at them as well as anyone.
Click to expand...

Apparently he did manage to learn how to play after a while but Jones recorded much of the bass for the records and Sid was often unplugged at gigs of he was too smashed. Glen Matlock was quite a talented musician, the tension in the band due to Glen being a boring traditional rock type gave them an edge.

StoneHappyMonday said:
You are the only person in the world to mention this beside myself. Yes its true. Sid was all mouth. Paul Weller, unfortunately for Sid, was one of the few hard bastards to emerge from Surrey.

PS Post 93. Did you see the documentary?
Click to expand...

I didnt see it on TV but I assume it was The Filth and the Fury, some moving interview footage of Lydon talking about Sid....also called John and I bet you knew that as well;)
 
Shambles said:
Although I suspect a large part of that reason was all the fukkin about with the education system through the 70s and 80s - wasn't a good time to be in school as far as getting an education goes. Certainly not "average" state schools anyway. If the opportunity had been there to either gain a scholarship to a decent school, or if I'd simply had parents who could afford to pay for a decent school, I think things would be very different for me. But neither was possible so things are as they are. And, as I said, my own particular case has more to do with other issues than class or wealth specifically.
Click to expand...

Yep, it's important to remember that as a result of well-intentioned educational reforms, many people from the least privileged backgrounds in the UK didn't even get a chance to pursue a scholarship, or even to attend one of the 'better' state schools. Which incidentally are all former grammar schools, or at least they were when I was at school. I have no idea what the last set of reforms (city academies etc.) has accomplished, though I'm naturally skeptical.

It meant that a de facto three-tier education system (four or five if you make the distinction between small private schools, minor public schools and major public schools) while maintaining a pretence of equal opportunity. The former grammar schools, many of whom opted for grant maintained status (thereby freeing them of some of the restrictions imposed on state schools) had strictly-delineated catchment areas, in which house prices are significantly higher than in areas outside the boundary. This squeezed out children from families who couldn't afford to live in the area. The private schools had severely-limited numbers of scholarship places and again geographical boundaries forced those from lower-income families out. That's before we even touch on the issue of the uneven ethnic mix in many of these schools, which is another sorry tale.

The road to institutionalised inequality would seem to be paved with good intentions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top