Privileged upbringings

[anotheoldgit]

There is no need to post the link that this passage came from, one can read similar in almost any newspaper.

/// Gordon Brown set the tone for a class war campaign yesterday by mentioning his 'ordinary middle-class background' while his Labour attack dogs launched spiteful attacks on David Cameron's privileged upbringing.///

The question I ask is, why are Labour constantly going on about 'privileged upbringings'?

Do they not also enjoy a privileged life style, and won't their off-springs also enjoy a 'privileged upbringing'?

[Sandy-Wroe]

They do. But the voters they hope to attract don't.

[Mr Veritas]

Well, when you consider that David Cameron and ALL his shadow cabinet went to Eton,I cannot see how they can have ANY connection with ordinary people?
Also he is a millionaire.

I don't like Gordon Brown either,but he was brought up as a the son of Minister (Church of Scotland) in Kirkcaldy,in a lower middle class household.So while he may be priviliged now he didn't start that way,where David Cameron did.

I don't know about Nick Clegg, sorry.

[New Judge]

Well, Mrs Veritas, this goes back to the old adage that “I cannot be represented by somebody who is not like me”.

Very few people lead the lifestyles even remotely similar to that of their MP (whatever their party). You do not have to be born in abject poverty to understand what it might mean to be poor any more than you do not have to be born rich to have an understanding of what it might be like to be rich.

There is a popular misconception among many people (which has not been dispelled but actively encouraged over the last ten years) that representatives have to reflect the community they serve. They do not, and furthermore with constituencies of around 50,000 voters, they cannot. I would far rather be represented by somebody who has had a decent education and is able to take objective decisions than have as my MP a person who was badly educated and is only interested in people with backgrounds similar to theirs.

The Tories will not win the election by appealing only to those in the electorate who were educated at Eton any more than Labour will win it by appealing only to trade union officials. They both know that.

If people are so fickle as to be swayed by the mud-slinging nonsense that is likely to come out of all parties over the next few weeks then they have not been observing what has been happening in the UK in recent years and, quite frankly, don’t deserve to vote.

[New Judge]

Sorry, MR Veritas !!!

[VHG]

>Also he is a millionaire.

And how much is Tony Blair now worth?

I bet Gordon Brown is worth a bob or two now as well.

Labour are having a go at people's backgrounds because they are running scared so decide to play dirty.

When you are in a good position and want people to vote for you on how good YOU are you dont need to rubbish the opponents.

Electionering of a coward.

[anotheoldgit]

/// Well, when you consider that David Cameron and ALL his shadow cabinet went to Eton,///

Without checking myself are you sure that ALL his shadow cabinet went to Eton?

But even if they were is it at all bad to have persons in charge of the country, who have been top educated?

If they had all been educated by some of our state schools, I would worry.

/// Also he is a millionaire.///

Are you sure Brown isn't? We all know that Blair is a multi-millionaire.

[Justincider]

New Judge, I congratulate you on an extremely good answer. And one that I was set to post, though no where near as eloquently.

[Davethedog]

Name the source AOG.

If you are going to take biased press stories as the basis of your politics then you show little inteligence. The phrase "Labour attack dogs launched spiteful attacks" are a fair reflection of the person who wrote that.

Politicaly there are many reasons to attack Labour and you have to ask why the Daily Mail has to resort to childish name calling rather than concentrate on the facts.

[Oneeyedvic]

Here is an answer I wrote back in 2007:

I wonder then why so many of our PM's and have come from private fee paying schools?

Sorry Jake but whilst I agree with some of your sentiments, this argument does not hold up:

Brown went to Kirkcaldy, a comprehensive school.

John Major went to Rutlish Grammar School

Thatcher went to Kesteven and Grantham Girls' School (also a Grammar School)

Calagham went to Portsmouth Northern Secondary School

and Wilson went to Royds Hall Secondary School (another Grammar)

Heath went to Chatham House Grammar School

So apart from Blair, you have to go back to Alec Douglas-Home in 1963 before the primeministers were privately educated.
http://www.theanswerb...6.html#answer-2065416

There is a common misnomer that all Tory politicians went to public schools - something that labour supporters would like to continue.

Currently, the election campaign is in full swing and it is all about making the electorate vote for you. A good tactic is to try and point out that you went to the same type of school as the vast majority of people where as your opponent didn't.

[joggerjayne]

Surely the message should be ...

"We want you all to become privileged" !

Labours message ...

"We dislike privilege ... if you aspire to improve your lot, we will make sure we hold you back"

We all want to become a bit more privileged, don't we ?

Well, I sure as heck do.

Gimme a bit of privilege, and a leader who embraces privilege.

[jno]

you want everyone privileged, JJ? Sort of like the children of Lake Wobegon, who are all above average?

[Mr Veritas]

I wish I hadn't bother to answer this!
I wasn't saying vote for anyone,merely trying show the backgrounds of the party leaders.
I don't know why I try sometimes.
Talked about blinkered and closed minds.

[joggerjayne]

jno ...

Why do people dislike private schools ?

Because they are "better" ?

If so, we should want our leaders to come from the best schools.

If not, why do we care if they do come from private schools.

There is no logic.

[naomi24]

Mr Veritas, all the Shadow Cabinet didn't go to Eton. Several, including William Hague, were educated at state schools.

JJ, I like your honesty. Of course we all want to become privileged to a degree. We all aspire to better things. That's why this two-faced government have dumbed down university education by encouraging places for all - regardless of aptitude.

[jno]

getting better things then you've got isn't privilege - privilege is getting better things than everyone else has got.

[Quinlad]

You're barking up the wrong tree here, JJ. I don't know if that's because you have Conservative leanings and don't like to see them scrutinised.

But it's not to do with privilege, it's too do with a balanced, respresentative governing body.

If the cabinet had a grossly disproportionate quota of former miners, or jobless single mums, or black youth workers, similar questions would be asked.

You don't think a cabinet of young urban militants would make middle-class families in the shires sit up and ask whether they're being represented?

[Androcles]

Sorry jno, don't understand "getting better things then you've got isn't privilege - privilege is getting better things than everyone else has got. " Do you mean "....than you've got...."?

In any case, what's wrong with getting better things than every one else has got if you've earned it? You may choose to spend your money on something better than other people have got, that doesn't kmake it wrong. Perhaps you want everybody to only be able to buy cr@p, in some socialist nirvana, preferably on rationing?

[New Judge]

So just to open our minds, let’s have a look at the background of James “Gordon” Brown to see how it compares with those of some of the people he is said to be appealing to:

His father was a Minister of the Church of Scotland and his mother the daughter of a wealthy timber merchant (I don’t think she pursued a career and did not, as far as I can see, have to sign on to draw benefits).

Brown was fast tracked to Kirkcaldy High School where he was a pupil under the “hothouse” experimental education scheme. This is a form of intense academic study whose advocates claim is essential for the brightest to flourish intellectually and something which Brown later said he despised.

He went to Edinburgh University (again fast tracked) and gained a PhD in History.

Before going into politics he was a lecturer in that topic, and a journalist.

I don’t know how to define a privileged upbringing, but compared to most youngsters in his area I would suggest he was extremely privileged. I would also argue that Brown has as much in common with a single mother living in a high rise flat on a sink estate (who is unlikely to vote anyway as, for various reasons, she is unlikely to be on the electoral roll) as Cameron has – that is, nothing at all. Nor has he much in common with his constituents in Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. Here 35% of the working age population has no formal qualifications and 33% live in social housing. His upbringing in that area no more qualifies him to be Prime Minister than does Cameron’s.

So let’s put aside the leader’s early lives and let’s consider what they and their party might bring for the people of the UK. We already know what Brown and the Labour party will bring. Let’s see if we can find out about the others.

[Quinlad]

Oh, they're both very privileged, NJ.

That's why they need cabinet members to provide balance. The suggestion is that Cameron's - with their near-identical, clubby backgrounds - don't.

[naomi24]

jno, //getting better things then you've got isn't privilege //

Sorry, I can't see where 'things' have been mentioned. However, given the opportunity to acquire what they see as 'privilege', would those who don't have it turn it down?