|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jan 14, 2023 18:22:01 GMT
Brood in Scutland, wi' grdrs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 14, 2023 18:24:55 GMT
My school was a very odd place. It produced both Roger Moore and Dominic Raab. I think the headmaster though set the standards. He was a very sophisticated and educated man, but in no way what you could call a moderniser - more a bit of an English eccentric. It wasn't a bad punt. These comprehensives and what most schools are now I feel are soulless institutions. The school I was at had run for 400 years. I can't speak for the whole country. It was just the experience of my area. We had two other ‘ local’ Grammar / high schools . They were single sex schools and seemingly hard to get into. As I said , these were ‘ high’ schools that taught Latin and were perhaps more like your old school. My Grammar school called themselves ‘ Grammar technical ‘ and possibly concentrated more on technical education whereas the other schools were more focused on Classical education . Single sexed schools were common in my area. The one I went to was a boy's school, then it had its counterpart for girls a few miles away, and also there was Beaconsfield High School for Girls, now an academy apparently. Our area performed well above the national average in all the schools. |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jan 14, 2023 18:30:03 GMT
That doesn’t mean that there was not the potential within the lower classes. The upper class has the luxury and indulgence to be educated. The lower classes did not . This is why I am a supporter of the Grammar school system as it was in the 60s. The system liberated the more intelligent working class pupils . I was about to post a 'like' for you post until I read about your claim about Grammar schools 'liberating the more intelligent working class students. The 11+ was just about the most diabolical way of deciding who would go to grammar schools and who would not. A system introduced by well meaning educated morons who might have been hard pressed to design a more useless system. So you failed the 11+ ..,..... |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jan 14, 2023 18:35:35 GMT
Harold Wilson Wilson won a scholarship to attend Royds Hall Grammar School, his local grammar school (now a comprehensive school) in Huddersfield in Yorkshire. His father, working as an industrial chemist, was made redundant in December 1930, and it took him nearly two years to find work; he moved to Spital in Cheshire, on the Wirral, to do so. Wilson continued his education in the Sixth Form at the Wirral Grammar School for Boys, where he became Head Boy.
Starmer and Labour are double standard hypocrites trying to scrap Grammar Schools, it gave Wilson a chance he probably would never have had, and probably never would have became a Labour leader .... Labour and their hypocrisy is just jaw dropping.
Let's not forget there are more people going to University today than ever before, Most of them would have gone through the Comprehensive system. And like her or not Theresa May was comprehensive educated and she managed to become the leader of the Tory party as Prime Minister. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 14, 2023 18:39:06 GMT
Baron von Lotsov .. wrote .. "Ah but the time you refer to was when it was elitist. The drop in standards is now where it is more representative. If the working class brute down the public bar was as much entertainment as the ones who made it onto the telly then no one would bother with the telly, or with the theatre or any other showcase of talent. ------------------------------- Is it not a case that everything was more elitist back then, not only the BBC, and its society that has evolved and caught up. I believe that the BBCs ability to reflect society, and the quality of output are two separate issues, and I am certain that the freezing of the TV Licence over many years by this government is the sole cause of the lowering of quality, and the cutting of services, output and programming. This government is now on course to make our BBC into the same "Shit Producing" broadcaster as most of the other commercial stations which no one hardly watches. The TV Licence fee is to be abandoned ( though subject to the Tories winning the next election ), which will result in less money, therefore less services, and even poorer quality. If the Tories do happen to win the next election, it will signal the very end of high quality TV in this country. Well the commercial channels are forced to reflect the majority. It's not even an option in a public company because if the firm fails to exploit the market to the max then a larger more exploitative firm in the media industry will offer shareholders such a good deal on their shares that they would definitely sell. I agree that in the past the BBC has outperformed all commercial stations in the intelligence of the output. I think the way to look at the BBC is it is not just an entertainment medium, it should be a high quality state organisation setting the standards which benefit the state. The Open University was one example. You would never get it on a commercial station. Have you ever seen an equation on the Discovery Channel? The problem with commercial stations is they exploit human psychology. It's like people who do clickbait and that kind of thing. It's a case of scandal and horror sells stuff.
Also when I listen to Radio 4 nearly everything is repeated. We only have half a radio station. The news is broadcast regularly, but most is repeated many times. They have allowed music on it now so bits of time are cheaply filled with a copy of a work, and there is more copying going on when they do book reviews where the author has done all the content and they repeat that. The density of material and intelligence one can extract out of it per hour is dropping all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 14, 2023 18:49:01 GMT
My school was a very odd place. It produced both Roger Moore and Dominic Raab. I think the headmaster though set the standards. He was a very sophisticated and educated man, but in no way what you could call a moderniser - more a bit of an English eccentric. It wasn't a bad punt. These comprehensives and what most schools are now I feel are soulless institutions. The school I was at had run for 400 years. I can't speak for the whole country. It was just the experience of my area. We had two other ‘ local’ Grammar / high schools . They were single sex schools and seemingly hard to get into. As I said , these were ‘ high’ schools that taught Latin and were perhaps more like your old school. My Grammar school called themselves ‘ Grammar technical ‘ and possibly concentrated more on technical education whereas the other schools were more focused on Classical education .The 1944 Education which introduced the 11+ also created the tripartite system that had Secondary Modern schools, Grammar schools and Technical High schools. The idea was that those passing the 11+ would go to either a Grammar or Technical High - those failing to a Secondary Modern. Unfortunately very few Technical High schools were created and the system morphed into a 2 strand Grammar or Secondary choice. If the system had been introduced as originally envisaged it would have massively benefited the UK economy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2023 18:50:53 GMT
I nearly gave you a ‘ like’ for that post but didn’t when I realised that you were a knob😉 LOL. Incisive, mentally stimulating, intellectually challenging, cutting edge debate going on here I see. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 14, 2023 18:58:22 GMT
Having two Tory parties does not serve the interests of democracy. And the working class very much still exists. It is the work that has changed, not the class. All those millions of nurses, bus drivers, taxi drivers, retail workers, hospitality sector workers, hair dressers, cleaners, builders, electricians, plumbers, bricklayers, labourers, grasscutters and grounds maintenance workers, street sweepers, road repair workers, delivery drivers, prison officers, firemen and women, lower level civil servants, lorry drivers, mechanics, etc, etc.....are all still working class occupations by and large. And some left wing policies are actually very popular when tested by polling, including many that formed a part of Labour's 2017 manifesto. What a party of the working class should be doing is identifying the problems of the working classes and addressing them with policy solutions that are popular amongst a majority of the electorate as a whole. And we are talking of a majority of the working class itself, not all of them because the working class is not a monolithic structure but contains a wide spectrum of opinion. There have for example always been working class Tories who would never identify with Labour even if it were a party of the working class. Some working class people, particularly some of the self-employed ones see themselves as rugged individualists and are naturally drawn to Tory thinking. I agree having two Tory parties serves no ones best interest, and yes the working class still exists, and the professions you mention still exist. But compared to 50 years ago working conditions have changed beyond recognition which is why trade union representation is a fraction of what is was 50 years ago. Regardless of profession or 'job', many people these days are likely to describe themselves as middle class, whatever that may mean. Some left wing policies will always be popular, nationalising the railways/utilities for instance. The fact that it's never going to happen is irrelevant, it will always be popular with some people. Starmers biggest problem is the fact that the Tories have moved to the centre ground. We have never had a more centrist conservative government. The thought of a Conservative government shelling out £billions in furlough and cold weather payments and £billions on illegals hotel bills would have Thatcher turning in her grave. These policies stole ground from under the feet of Labour, and Starmer knows it. As for you comments about some people being 'drawn to Tory thinking'. It's no secret that young people tend to be rebellious and left wing, as I was, to a point lol. It's also no secret that as people get older, perhaps wiser and more experienced, they tend to become more conservative. And with an ageing demographic, I honestly cant see a future for a left wing Labour party. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 14, 2023 18:59:47 GMT
Brood in Scutland, wi' grdrs? Is that a ref to Irn-Bru? I seem to remember jocks were quite fond of it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2023 19:01:52 GMT
Comprehensive schools were the political crime of the century. Comprehensive schools were the liberation of the 'working class'  Only for the ones who passed their 11 plus. The rest were consigned to very poor quality secondary moderns, often with poor teachers and insufficient funding. It has not worked out quite as intended, but the idea of comprehensives was to open up the best facilities and teachers to kids of all levels not just the brightest whilst avoiding the strugglers holding back the talented by using effective streaming by ability. The idea was good and a lot fairer in theory. And allowing all kids and not just the brightest to have access to the best was also good in theory. Putting it effectively into practice was always the problem. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2023 19:03:11 GMT
Here's a statement of fact .... The BBC is, by a long way, the most popular, and the most watched TV in the UK
Let us look at the most recent fully processed ratings for a full week, the week is the week prior to Christmas. These figures are produced by BARB, the British Audience Research Board.
Of the top ten most watched TV programmes on TV during that week, only one programme was not on the BBC, which was the World Cup (soccer), ITV1.
The Tory argument is always "choice and value for money", in reality it always ends up with a lot of choice of shit.
If there was something wrong with the BBC, it would not consistently beat all its rivals in the ratings wars
It is popular because it makes and produces quality programming, because it has the resources to do so, but in recent years that quality and scope has somewhat deteriorated due to the years of government enforced licence fee freezes, and because the government has asked the BBC to bail-out, prop-up and subsidise less popular broadcasters, and to contribute to Welfare Payments ( free TV licenses ).
Its not complicated, and its not rocket science, the BBC ( our BBC ) could remain the nations favourite if it were to be given back the resources it had.
Sadly, like everything else in the public sector, its always a case of a race to the bottom with the Tories.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 14, 2023 19:07:50 GMT
Incisive, mentally stimulating, intellectually challenging, cutting edge debate going on here I see. I should coco, sniff. Hold on don't start without me, I have to nip out for a fart, I hate farting in my cave, it's almost airtight and it's cold outside so I'm not opening the window, I'm sure you understand.  |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jan 14, 2023 19:11:45 GMT
We had two other ‘ local’ Grammar / high schools . They were single sex schools and seemingly hard to get into. As I said , these were ‘ high’ schools that taught Latin and were perhaps more like your old school. My Grammar school called themselves ‘ Grammar technical ‘ and possibly concentrated more on technical education whereas the other schools were more focused on Classical education .The 1944 Education which introduced the 11+ also created the tripartite system that had Secondary Modern schools, Grammar schools and Technical High schools. The idea was that those passing the 11+ would go to either a Grammar or Technical High - those failing to a Secondary Modern. Unfortunately very few Technical High schools were created and the system morphed into a 2 strand Grammar or Secondary choice. If the system had been introduced as originally envisaged it would have massively benefited the UK economy. Well all I can say that our school called itself a grammar tech and the two same sex schools called themselves ‘ high’. They did that right up until my grammar tech became a comprehensive ..in 1967. Iirc the two high schools remained so for some years . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 14, 2023 19:17:03 GMT
Having two Tory parties does not serve the interests of democracy. And the working class very much still exists. It is the work that has changed, not the class. All those millions of nurses, bus drivers, taxi drivers, retail workers, hospitality sector workers, hair dressers, cleaners, builders, electricians, plumbers, bricklayers, labourers, grasscutters and grounds maintenance workers, street sweepers, road repair workers, delivery drivers, prison officers, firemen and women, lower level civil servants, lorry drivers, mechanics, etc, etc.....are all still working class occupations by and large. And some left wing policies are actually very popular when tested by polling, including many that formed a part of Labour's 2017 manifesto. What a party of the working class should be doing is identifying the problems of the working classes and addressing them with policy solutions that are popular amongst a majority of the electorate as a whole. And we are talking of a majority of the working class itself, not all of them because the working class is not a monolithic structure but contains a wide spectrum of opinion. There have for example always been working class Tories who would never identify with Labour even if it were a party of the working class. Some working class people, particularly some of the self-employed ones see themselves as rugged individualists and are naturally drawn to Tory thinking. I agree having two Tory parties serves no ones best interest, and yes the working class still exists, and the professions you mention still exist. But compared to 50 years ago working conditions have changed beyond recognition which is why trade union representation is a fraction of what is was 50 years ago. Regardless of profession or 'job', many people these days are likely to describe themselves as middle class, whatever that may mean. Some left wing policies will always be popular, nationalising the railways/utilities for instance. The fact that it's never going to happen is irrelevant, it will always be popular with some people. Starmers biggest problem is the fact that the Tories have moved to the centre ground. We have never had a more centrist conservative government. The thought of a Conservative government shelling out £billions in furlough and cold weather payments and £billions on illegals hotel bills would have Thatcher turning in her grave. These policies stole ground from under the feet of Labour, and Starmer knows it. As for you comments about some people being 'drawn to Tory thinking'. It's no secret that young people tend to be rebellious and left wing, as I was, to a point lol. It's also no secret that as people get older, perhaps wiser and more experienced, they tend to become more conservative. And with an ageing demographic, I honestly cant see a future for a left wing Labour party. Red - the important thing to understand about middle class as it was understood at the time the middle class invented themselves was that it meant freedom. If you were working class you would be assigned to one of the chain gangs and if you were upper class you would rule and own the land. However, from the working class were a few bright lads who took the Age of Enlightenment literally, got into science stuff and found a way to make something much faster than it could be done by hand but charging a similar price for the merchandise. If you managed to invent a machine that could do the job of one hundred men you were no one's slave any more. Instead you would become the enemy of the upper class and very rich. You would however be living by your wits. No one was going to pay you a steady wage. You'd sink or swim in the battle of the marketplace. A good example of the middle class which were once poverty-stricken working class was the Stephenson family. It was not an easy ride either and the firm was threatened with bankruptcy. I think we call them entrepreneurs these days. If a government job 9-5 in a council office sounds like this then I guess they could pass as middle class, but really they lack the buccaneering character and the nerve to challenge the upper class at their own game. The upper class eventually fought back with rules and regulations, trade quotas and millions of other scams. They also created socialism - lol. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2023 19:27:02 GMT
Having two Tory parties does not serve the interests of democracy. And the working class very much still exists. It is the work that has changed, not the class. All those millions of nurses, bus drivers, taxi drivers, retail workers, hospitality sector workers, hair dressers, cleaners, builders, electricians, plumbers, bricklayers, labourers, grasscutters and grounds maintenance workers, street sweepers, road repair workers, delivery drivers, prison officers, firemen and women, lower level civil servants, lorry drivers, mechanics, etc, etc.....are all still working class occupations by and large. And some left wing policies are actually very popular when tested by polling, including many that formed a part of Labour's 2017 manifesto. What a party of the working class should be doing is identifying the problems of the working classes and addressing them with policy solutions that are popular amongst a majority of the electorate as a whole. And we are talking of a majority of the working class itself, not all of them because the working class is not a monolithic structure but contains a wide spectrum of opinion. There have for example always been working class Tories who would never identify with Labour even if it were a party of the working class. Some working class people, particularly some of the self-employed ones see themselves as rugged individualists and are naturally drawn to Tory thinking. I agree having two Tory parties serves no ones best interest, and yes the working class still exists, and the professions you mention still exist. But compared to 50 years ago working conditions have changed beyond recognition which is why trade union representation is a fraction of what is was 50 years ago. Regardless of profession or 'job', many people these days are likely to describe themselves as middle class, whatever that may mean. Some left wing policies will always be popular, nationalising the railways/utilities for instance. The fact that it's never going to happen is irrelevant, it will always be popular with some people. Starmers biggest problem is the fact that the Tories have moved to the centre ground. We have never had a more centrist conservative government. The thought of a Conservative government shelling out £billions in furlough and cold weather payments and £billions on illegals hotel bills would have Thatcher turning in her grave. These policies stole ground from under the feet of Labour, and Starmer knows it. As for you comments about some people being 'drawn to Tory thinking'. It's no secret that young people tend to be rebellious and left wing, as I was, to a point lol. It's also no secret that as people get older, perhaps wiser and more experienced, they tend to become more conservative. And with an ageing demographic, I honestly cant see a future for a left wing Labour party. Re your last paragraph. The phenomenon of people moving to the right with age has always been closely connected with them getting more prosperous with age, getting on the housing ladder, and so on. This has been breaking down in more recent years with the consequence that the age at which more people vote Tory than Labour is getting ever higher. Unless something is done to improve the prospects for generation rent, this same move to the right with age is likely to be far less pronounced than in the past, and far less pronounced than you seem to be automatically assuming it will be. As for the changes in the working economy over the decades, yes they have been quite profound but not always in a positive way. There is far more insecure low paid work of a zero hours type nature, far more underemployment on part time contracts with workers desperate for overtime which can never be guaranteed, there is the utterly insecure gig economy, and there has been a big expansion in faux self employment being used by bad employers as a means of avoiding giving paid leave and suchlike. Outside work the social housing sector has shrunk, those on the waiting list for it now number many millions, home ownership is in sharp decline as extortionate house prices have become too unaffordable for too many, and the private rental sector has greatly expanded but charging ever higher rents and providing very little in the way of security of tenure. And way too much of it is unfit to live in. In consequence, much of the working class are now part of a precariat, suffering insecure work that pays poorly and insecure housing that costs a king's ransom. This is driving many of them towards the left, others to the far right. It is a political earthquake waiting to happen, a political explosion some way down the line unless these chronic insecurities can be addressed and effectively ameliorated somehow. |
|
