Zompist Bboard Again

Oh, that article was not behind a paywall last night.
As I recall, what it said was that Boris Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg and other prominent Tories were at Oxford at the same time in the late 80's. At the time, apparently, you could get by at Oxford with no work whatsoever, the whole point was to be president of a student union, or a debating society, in the like. And in the wake of Thatcher's trouble with EU, something much like Brexit was being discussed in Tory students' associations.

The article does mention that all of this was true in the 80s and that Oxford is a lot more meritocratic now than it was back then; and they expect hard work from their students now.

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:19 pm The French system, according to my tutors at Oxford, was traditionally much more dominated by enarques than the UK system was by Oxbridge. Particularly on the elected side - we've always had a lot of highly-educated civil servants, but less so our politicians. And we've always had more diversity in terms of the number of educational establishments that counted as being adequately educated (even in ancient days, there were Trinity and the scottish universities).

Absolutely. Looking at our presidents: Macron was at Sciences Po, later ENA; his parents are neurosurgeons. Hollande: Sciences Po / ENA. His father was a surgeon. Chirac: Sciences Po/ENA, his father was a bank manager. Mitterrand: law studies and Sciences Po. He didn't study at the ENA, but that's just because the ENA didn't exist back then. His father was an engineer.

But the big issue is simply applications. Whether a child applies to Oxbridge is heavily influenced by their parents and by their schools, and children are often inculcated with a self-fulfilling prophecy of resentment and reverse-snobbery - "you can't go there, it's not for people like us". Private schools, on the other hand, push the option, even make it seem natural.

We have the same problem with Sciences Po/ENA (the usual pathway into politics). In some ways, it's probably a bit worse. As I see it, Britain is acutely aware of its class divides; in France we tend to pretend there is no such thing.

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:19 pmThe British system, incidentally, hasn't been dominated by the traditional upper class for over a century - indeed, until comparatively recently the upper classes were prohibited from sitting in the Commons altogether (although there were always occasional aristocrats who renounced their titles, like Home or Benn). The Cameron government was mostly drawn from the upper middle class, but even that was an unusual situation much remarked on at the time.

Indeed, though the Commons hasn't exactly been composed of majority working-class MPs either, especially before the Labour party was a thing.

But it's worth pointing out that Oxford (and I'm sure Cambridge, and I'm told other top universities) invests great resources in attempting to recruit more students from impoverished backgrounds, and from state schools more generally.

Well indeed Oxbridge certainly is (I know for certain my college tries damn hard at getting people to apply from its access areas, especially West Yorkshire, which is, perhaps coincidentally, where our current master is from, and I'd say it's been fairly successful at that), but the laser focus of the popular consciousness on these two universities in particular has actually to some extent left other universities off the hook, like Durham and the Royal Agricultural College, which have now earned a reputation as being posher even than Oxbridge. With Durham it isn't helped by the fact that it's seen more as a dumping ground for failed Oxbridge applicants (which are presumed posh and often are) rather than as a university in its own right.

snip

Indeed the cultural divide is often quite disarming. For context: the main reason both me and my brother applied to Oxbridge was because of my dad basically making a strong suggestion to the both of us that we try it. The amount of pushing the school did was limited at best - with me I think they probably would have suggested I should do it, but they certainly didn't with my brother. There was a kind of presentation where and access worker from an Oxford college (in my case Brasenose) came along with some students from Oxbridge to talk through applications and the like (notably in my year at least Gonville & Caius, the college attached to our region, didn't send anyone), and afterwards the few of us that did end up considering it seriously went to a further presentation at another school. I reckon it was something like 3% of the year ended up applying, with only 2 getting an offer and only me actually meeting said offer (in my brother's case he's the only one in his year that got an offer, we're waiting on his exam results to see if he'll actually get in).

And it's also a broader cultural issue - the big thing private school kids have that the rest of us often don't is just confidence. That's huge in the context of a daunting admissions procedure and one-on-one interviews.

And of course, all this is built on that school system. Often, universities seem to get the blame for disparities in the secondary (and primary!) education system. The fact underlying the dominance of private schools at Oxbridge is that private schools have much, much higher educational standards (on average). So the field is dramatically tilted before the universities even get to it!

It's not even necessarily just the standards, as you say it's a confidence thing, and another thing private schools are often good at is giving their students the confidence that makes them appear smart even when they really aren't.

As I say, I can't read the article. But it seems strange to me to talk about Oxford shaping Brexit - clearly, given that Oxford is fanatically remain, they didn't shape it very well!

Heh, probably more like "Oxford and Cambridge University Conservative Associations" shaping Brexit tbh.

Oh! An interesting detail, indeed! Oxford itself may be "fanatically remain" (Oxfordshire voted strongly for remain, not sure about the town, let alone the students and faculty of the university itself). But those are current Oxfordnians, right? The country is run by former Oxfordnians. If you were to canvas almost any university in the United States, you would find generally left-wing politics, but those college-educated conservatives must come from somewhere. Once you leave the Oxbridge system and make your way on the long path to high political office, you are exposed to years and years of money and power. Maybe a pratty education isn't enough, but a pratty education plus rank and privilege is a deadly combination. Tell a young, idealistic cleverboy that only his personal genius can save the world from X, and he'll happily replace X with whatever's convenient over the years.

Have you met any young conservatives at Oxbridge? They're already bad while they're in university, and to some extent worse - I get the impression they see their time at university as when they say and do the things that would get them fired in actual public office, like being blatantly racist or burning money in front of homeless people (which actually happened by the by).

Burning money in front of homeless people does seem like the kind of thing I would expect a conservative in college to do...

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:19 pm ... - indeed, until comparatively recently the upper classes were prohibited from sitting in the Commons altogether (although there were always occasional aristocrats who renounced their titles, like Home or Benn).

That's a massive distortion. Eldest sons of peers could sit in the House of Commons until they inherited their father's non-courtesy title. And younger sons (such as William Waldegrave and Colin Moynihan) were by no means absent.

Richard W wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2019 3:49 pm

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:19 pm ... - indeed, until comparatively recently the upper classes were prohibited from sitting in the Commons altogether (although there were always occasional aristocrats who renounced their titles, like Home or Benn).

That's a massive distortion. Eldest sons of peers could sit in the House of Commons until they inherited their father's non-courtesy title. And younger sons (such as William Waldegrave and Colin Moynihan) were by no means absent.

And of course there was Viscount Cranborne (now Marquess of Salisbury), one of Thatcher's MPs, who was known by his courtesy title. (He was even known by it when he received a writ of acceleration, as opposed to a life peerage, when he was brought into government after standing down as an MP.)

Happy Fourth!

Are you now forbidden from owning rubber mallets in the UK?

Driving back from work with my brother, and happened to spot an unexpected number of people and a camera crew in the outside area of the Heck Food Factory up here in North Yorkshire (a bit north of Ripon off the old A1). My brother, driving, said "is that Boris Johnson?!". Turned round at the nearest roundabout (as did the van in front), and lo and behold it was BoJo himself with Rishi Sunak at his side. Turned round again (the van, still in front, doing the same, exchanging a thumbs up with my brother), see if we could get a photo or something, but no such luck.

I suspect he's up here trying to gain the support from the local Conservative Party membership, and I guess support from Sunak as well. Expecting it to be on the news some time soonish.

sangi39 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 04, 2019 12:25 pm Driving back from work with my brother, and happened to spot an unexpected number of people and a camera crew in the outside area of the Heck Food Factory up here in North Yorkshire (a bit north of Ripon off the old A1). My brother, driving, said "is that Boris Johnson?!". Turned round at the nearest roundabout (as did the van in front), and lo and behold it was BoJo himself with Rishi Sunak at his side. Turned round again (the van, still in front, doing the same, exchanging a thumbs up with my brother), see if we could get a photo or something, but no such luck.

I suspect he's up here trying to gain the support from the local Conservative Party membership, and I guess support from Sunak as well. Expecting it to be on the news some time soonish.

I'm pretty sure Rishi was already on the Bojo hype train, but regardless yes he will be doing some canvassing here, which isn't surprising considering how many Tory supporters there are round here.

OK so now there's been a leak of private emails from her majesty's ambassador to the US Si Kim Darroch which, let's just say, weren't too kind about Trump. Naturally the POTUS has done what he always does when he's accused of being immature - had a tantrum on twitter, and refused to engage in anything with him. This of course rather defeats the point of being an ambassador, so he's just resigned. This of course leaves an open question as to who is going to fill the role and who will pick him, on which front there was a debate between the two options where neither came out as a winner - Boris Johnson is still a total pillock and Jeremy Hunt still has a super-punchable face.

To be fair to Trump, for once he's actually just being honest where others would pointlessly lie.

Obviously Trump is seriously pissed off by the ambassador's highly insulting remarks and apparent duplicity - any President would be. And as a result, Trump will no longer trust the ambassador - no President would. And Trump will do his best to avoid dealing with the ambassador - many if not most Presidents would do likewise. The only real difference is that Trump actually says it out loud.

And in this case, why not? Trump's goal is to have the ambassador fired, and he has succeeded. Mission accomplished.

Except it would have happened anyway. The UK ambassador to the US is not just a postal clerk or the government's private journalist (as with the ambassadors to some countries) - their job is to maintain close connexions with the White House and ensure the White House looks favourably upon them (and hence us). Apparently Sir Kim is regarded as having been a great success - he's installed himself in the midst of Trump's intimate circle (apparently the embassy has become a major social hub for white house officials and those wanting to mingle with them) and liaised very effectively with Trump's minions. He's persuaded them, in effect, that he's on their side, or at least sympathetic to them. And all along he was laughing at them behind their backs. These leaks totally compromise his ability to do his job effectively, and while the Foreign Office didn't want to be seen to be failing to back up their man in public, he would have been expected to fall on his sword for the sake of the nation (and will probably get some cushy posting now, or else retire).

To be clear, he did nothing wrong - he served Britain's interests, or at least he served what he was commanded to believe were Britain's interests, which was his job. But his job meant effectively screwing over the people he was pretending were his friends, and when this was revealed it was inevitable that he wouldn't be able to continue in that job.

Other Presidents would have privately expressed their fury to the PM and made clear that Sir Kim was now persona non grata (not in the technical sense!) and that the administration would no longer work with him. Trump did the same thing, but told the public about it. Given that being honest with the public in this instance didn't have any negative effects, or even reveal anything we didn't already know, I don't think it's really a problem that he declined to lie.

Trump could have overreacted - he could have declared the ambassador officially PNG, as, for example, Ecuador did to the US ambassador in a similar case a few years ago.

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:31 pm To be fair to Trump, for once he's actually just being honest where others would pointlessly lie.

Recently, I saw someone somewhere on the internet - I forgot whom, or I would give them credit - claim that, while Trump is a lot into telling the kind of lies usually told by used car salesmen and the like, he isn't actually that good at telling the lies usually told by politicians. Your comment made me think of that.

https://twitter.com/Ian_Fraser/status/1 ... 4252623872

(A day old, so probably already outdated by the standards of today's news cycle, but still...)

That thread is a good demonstration of why Boris is Winning and most politicians and activists are Losing.

Remainers: [solid explanation of the problems, that sounds like it comes from another planet]
Boris: [simple, amusing distillation of the problem into day-to-day terms and reassurance that it's been blown out of all proportion]
Remainers: [pretend to take joke seriously, histrionic attacks on the details of the joke, rather than the content of the debate]
Public: [conclude that Boris must have been right]

The correct response to "we won't run out of Mars bars" is the one person in that thread who points out that we may actually run out of Mars bars - because that's putting the problem in daily-life terms. "HOW CAN YOU THINK ABOUT MARS BARS DON'T YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE MORE SERIOUS ISSUES WE'RE ALL DOOMED" will not connect so well with the apathetical and the confused.

[Boris, like Trump, is also a further demonstration that hope beats fear nine times out of ten...]

Does anyone know when exactly the result of the Tory Leadership Contest will be announced? The most precise information I could find just said "June 23rd".

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2019 5:27 pm Does anyone know when exactly the result of the Tory Leadership Contest will be announced? The most precise information I could find just said "June 23rd".

No, it's 23rd of July i.e. tomorrow. BBC and Wikipedia concur on this.

MacAnDàil wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:35 am

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2019 5:27 pm Does anyone know when exactly the result of the Tory Leadership Contest will be announced? The most precise information I could find just said "June 23rd".

No, it's 23rd of July i.e. tomorrow. BBC and Wikipedia concur on this.

Tuesday morning, according to the latest from the BBC.

MacAnDàil wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:35 am

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2019 5:27 pm Does anyone know when exactly the result of the Tory Leadership Contest will be announced? The most precise information I could find just said "June 23rd".

No, it's 23rd of July i.e. tomorrow. BBC and Wikipedia concur on this.

Ooops, sorry, I misswrote, of course I meant July.