Corbyn / BBC declare social class of employees?

Maizie, do forgive me, your reference to ‘ a level playing field’ has amused me ?

So what to do with these people who are educated , earn more money and are deemed to be from a higher class than somebody else who is well educated, earns a lot of money but from a lower class.?

The answer appears to be being avoided .

Would you refuse to employ the first group in favour of the latter? In other words create a path to Social Engineering.

What should we do with all those in the Shadow Cabinet Labour MP's , I say Labour because this is a Labour Party idea, employees of the BBC who were either grammar school or Private School educated, went to Oxford , Cambridge, Harvard et al and are deemed to be from a higher Social Class than those who have benefitted from the exact same educational path but come from a supposed lower class.

Would you refuse the first group to stand as our parliamentary candidates/ representatives but the latter group are welcomed because they have had the same benefits but they are deemed to be from a lower Social Class.?

Would you refuse to allow the first group in favour of the latter? In other words create a path to Social Engineering.

The establishing of what constitutes which ' Class' we belong to is valid and relative but nobody has said what to do about the information !

Nobody has informed me what lies behind the principle of wanting to know a persons class for ' transparency' but not asking what their political leaning/allegiances, race, sexual orientation etc. is..

Would Ken Loach be a more valid program maker than David Attenborough? Would Dianne Abbott be a more valid Member of the Labour Party than Hilary Benn?

If your answer is no then why is Social Class different when it comes to the BBC? If it is right for the BBC then why not in every walk of life ?

This could be the ' entryism ' , if we haven't seen enough class warfare already, of adopting the need to know our Social Class by government and that wreaks of the days of Stalin/Marx and other leaders who follow their dogma. Education but on our terms and let's get rid of the “bourgeois.” You can see what's coming down the track.

That is the need to know no matter what guise you put it under and this ' soft creeping ' of class warfare is dangerous and is alive and kicking once again in the Labour Party under Corbyn and perversely some at the top of his circle, usually outside of the Parliamentary Labour Party.

That is the crux of it, POGS It is not that "socialism will inevitably lead to communism" It is that in a democracy no party, however elevated and philanthropic their aims, can be certain that they will be in power after the next election, and that all that data that they have garnered on individuals to ensure the fabled level playing field will not be used to nobble the players on the field still further if they are revealed to be potentially in opposition to the current junta.

Information on their ethnic and religious origins, disabilities, or sexuality once placed people in gas chambers. That didn't happen suddenly; there was a gradual shift in social engineering until these people were seen as expendable. That must never be allowed to be repeated.

Class warfare always rears it’s head when the far left, trots and communists are are on the rise, Corbyn is obsessed with the politics of yesteryear. There was a time when one never heard anyone on the beeb who didn’t speak like the queen, now there are some accents I have trouble understanding.

The ideal of course POGS should be a high quality education system that all children attend and which makes provision for the differences on entry by providing more support for the most needy. It would then not be necessary to look at origins or class differences only at results. Perhaps that is how other countries do it?
Given that it is unlikely to happen, what else could be done? More expenditure on education certainly, which would probably need a tax rise. Perhaps an extension of a scheme to allow state pupils to visit and spend time in private schools and get to know how they work. But this will all take time.
Meantime looking at the actual qualifications, background and education of candidates would seem to me a good measure. And using this to ensure a wide range of employees all bringing differing ideas and experiences into an organisation would be valuable for everyone. What surprises me is that people are making exactly the same excuses for not doing this as were once used against the measures now used to ensure equality for ethnic minorities and the disabled.

How would a child from a comp benefit from visiting private schools and getting to know how they work?

There are already schemes running which do this Annie. There was a programme on TV some time ago about how this benefitted the children when a comp set up links with a public school.One or two were even offered places on scholarships because the school recognised their talent. It seems even public schools have more social awareness than some on GN.

I remember a tv programme involving an exchange between pupils from Eton and an inner city comprehensive (I think in Liverpool).

At the end when they got together together to compare their experiences one of the Comp boys said to an Eton pupil "your parents must really hate you to have sent you here"

Varian

You haven't answered any of the questions I have been asking though.

Many posters have mentioned the Grammar School ,. Privately educated who went on to Oxford/Cambridge /Harvard et al but they also blindly assume they did so because of the Social Class of their parents.

That is not only rubbish it is showing a persons education is not really of interest but the Social Class of a person is. Why?

I can see no reason why a person who has had for arguments sake a Grammar/Private/University education should be viewed as different species because of their Social Class.

I don't care about a persons Social Class as it does not necessarily tell me what the heart and soul of a person may be, that is of more interest . I dislike and will call out somebody who ' tells ' others not to send their children to a Grammar or Private School and do so themselves. They are hypocrite's of the 1st order and even those hypocrite's are not confined to their Social Class.

trisher, my grandson was recommended for sitting the scholarship exam to the boys public school in this town, that was 15 years ago. He had the choice , his choice was no, he wanted to go to the high school with his friends, a wise decision.

I am against grammer schools , my grandchildren have certaintly achieved much from going to the Comp and encouragement from their parents and grandmother.

Annie have I said i am in favour of grammar schools? -No!
Have I said I am in favour of selection-No!
But I do realise that there is a selection process at work in education which has nothing to do with ability but with family and money.(Even the richest can't get into Eton sometimes). Whilst I would be delighted to see the system changed, it is unlikely to be changed in the near future and until it is I think the public schools have a duty to reach out to the less fortunate.

trisher, did I say you had said those comments? No

In Scotland, as in the USA a public school is a school for the general public (as opposed to a private school which charges fees).

In the 1940s my Scottish FIL applied for a job in England, and filled in the application form truthfully saying he had attended XXX public school.

He got the job, quite a senior position for which he was well qualified by dint of his professional qualifications, and it was only some months later when one of his snootier colleagues patted him on the shoulder and said "We public school chaps must stick together" that the penny dropped!

Varian

I doubt you will give an answer as none have come forth so far to many points raised.

You do confuse me as to how you come to adopt your opinon reading your latest revelation I have to say.

So where would your father sit with regard to your previous posts?

If he was public school educated and working for the BBC would he be from the right Social Class or wrong Social Class to be acceptable for employment in the eyes of
Corbyn / Labour.

Oh POGS the whole point was he wasn't educated in what we call a public school but in a state school!

I am wondering POGS whether you are confusing me with another poster. I have not really expressed an opinion on Corbyn, BBC, social class etc except to say that most ordinary young folk without the help of the bank of Mum and Dad, could not afford to do unpaid work in London.

As for my FIL, he was never sure whether his "public school" education was a factor in his getting the job but he suspected it might have been as his English colleagues all assumed that "public school" meant the same thing in Scotland that it did in England. People like to have colleagues who are like themselves. That was a long time ago and I've no idea how much these attitudes might still prevail.

Incidently, I do agree with you about the hypocracy of Labour politicians who campaign against selective and private schools yet chose them for their own children.

trisher

I should have said father in law not father.

I remain confused however. You said:-

"In the 1940s my Scottish FIL applied for a job in England, and filled in the application form truthfully saying he had attended XXX public school."
--

Public Schools / Independant Schools are fee paying private education establishments to my knowledge.

Education establishments you are repeatedly railing against and believe to be , using your own words , " a selection process at work in education which has nothing to do with ability but with family and money ".

I am concerned that the question is being asked what a persons Social Class has to do with anything and I have just fell foul of my own opinion by asking about your family but you raised your family into the thread and I am intrigued where you get your opinions from which are in polar opposite positions dependent on what you post.

Another opposite of where you have stated your opinion , again I use your own words , " Even the richest can't get into Eton sometimes ".

According to you the richest most certainly can and do get into Eton and I am glad you accepted that is not the case.

Varian

I owe you an abject apology I have indeed mixed up posters.

Having fell foul of this myself I appreciate how annoying this can be. Please accept my apology , I have nothing more to offer.

Oh POGS the whole point was he wasn't educated in what we call a public school but in a state school!
Haberdasher's Adams was a voluntary aided school at that time.
It is now a selective grammar school.

Sorry Jalima could you explain how XXXpublic school became Haberdasher's Adams? Or have you some secret connection with Varian's FIL?

OK POGS I accept your apology.

There are many folk in England who do not realise that a "public school" in Scotland means a state school, where everyone can have a free education. In England it means an education at a school only availabkle to the priveleged few who can pay the high school fees.

trisher
I should have read the posts, I got when Corbyn was mentioned again.
It's been a long day (and not over yet)

That's Ok Jalima1108 I was imagining all sorts of under cover connections I'm a bit disappointed it's a mix-up. My imaginings were so much better

POGS I have never said the richest can get into Eton The class system which still exists at higher levels in Britain manages to restrict entry to the very best public schools to those who have firstly the right aristocratic connections, preferably a dad and grandad who went there, and then the money to pay for it. Only having the last qualification is no guarantee of a place. Of course money buys you lesser public schools.
As I am English and have no Scottish connections I refer to fee-paying schools as 'public' and state funded schools as "state'. Of course there are now academies which is a whole new area!

trisher

I have noted throughout the thread how you come to your conclusion re the educational system and your view that only those from the top of the Social Class or have wealth are given places.

Do you have any answers to the questions raised Wed 29-Aug-18 10:52:57 as an example.

I am interested to know why you believe Social Class is the criteria not an individuals political persuasion, sexual orientation, race etc. to be considered as a question to ask employees of the BBC for the purpose of ' transparency'.

I am interested to know if you believe Corbyn/Labour should lead by example and make all Labour Party employees and Shadow Cabinet/MP's declare their Social Class if it is an indicator of how an individual performs or fits in, whatever the ruddy reason Corbyn/Labour wants know . If not why not?

I am interested to know what you think should happen once an individual at the BBC has declared his/her Social Class? There must a reason for asking in the mindset of those who want to know. What do you believe this pool of information gives rise to?

I am interested to understand why I am wrong in feeling this is a precursor to Social Engineering on the part of Corbyn/Labour using a persons Class. Class Warfare.

I am interested to know if you believe an individual is better than another because of his/her class for the purpose of making programs for the BBC and if so why.

If you have the time to expand beyond the education system and stick with the question of the BBC and declaring their Social Class , why you feel Corbyn/Labour are asking this question and what the outcome would/could be I for one would be interested to know more of your thoughts .
Thank you.