Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should posh people be allowed to be MPs? Watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sw651)
    You are being classist right now, the irony.

    Oh stop your arrogance.

    Both my parents were born into working class families, I was born into a benefits family and adopted later. My parents worked hard to get where they are. Those who cannot rise up the class system simply haven't tried.

    I have plenty of experience of it, one of my sisters is on benefits and another lives on the lowest wage bracket.

    You clearly have a chip on your shoulder about the wealthy, that's because you think we sit there and sneer at you, you seem to forget as the highest tax payers we pay for most of the welfare state.
    loooool you are stupid, you can't be classist against the rich in the same way you can't be racist against white people or discriminate on the grounds of sexuality against straight people, please do a cheeky bit of googling lad

    Those who cannot rise up the class system simply haven't tried.

    are you actually saying that there are no forms of oppression that stop people progressing? and i disagree with the notion of social mobility anyway, because it supports the established class system and that for people to succeed, others must suffer.

    how does your sister being on benefits mean you have any experience of it? idiot

    yes, the welfare state is a large expense, and the vast majority of those benefits go to people who are in work you idiot because of low wages and gentrification.
    benefit fraud costs the taxpayer £1.2bn every year, whereas corporate tax avoidance (from people already making millions) loses the country around £19bn every year.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sw651)
    I was just making it clear because you didn't get the point I was making.

    I think you should get back to studying you GCSE politics exam.
    ive already done my gcses mate
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    you never even explained how this is even "fair" after I just explained comprehensively how it is the opposite of fairness



    you're full of **** mate. what propaganda are you talking about?

    it is fair because at the moment it is UNFAIR, and in order to balance it out action must be taken

    the BBC and the majority of other mainstream media support the tories and lie to people about stories. Boko Haram kill hundreds of africans and it doesnt get on the news, is that not propaganda? ISIS kill more muslims every day than theyve ever killed europeans, and their attacks do not get on the news, is this not propaganda? if one doesnt have any form of external media to get their information from, then one will think everything they see/read is true
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Then how come orphans run successful businesses? You're just making pathetic excuses.
    because they disproportionately do compared to people from independent education. im not saying people from discriminated backgrounds can't succeed, i'm saying its disproportionate compared to those from better backgrounds
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    The term is a Marxist one to describe the industrial working class. He was particularly thinking of British factories, mines and shipyards because he was living in the UK we he wrote Das Kapital, and we were the first country in the world to have an industrial revolution.

    Almost all those jobs have disappeared now. We are a white collar, service economy which hardly makes anything. the manufacturing sector gets smaller and smaller each year.

    Maybe you could call term call centre workers the modern day proles, but if they institute a totalitarian dictatorship, I am out of here!
    he was talking about manual labourers as the proles because they were the working class jobs that existed at the time - the proletariat still exists, the jobs have just changed
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hoping4Astars)
    Lol this is called discrimination. Every British citizen has the right to stand for MP. Although I would prefer to vote for a middle class candidate, I would rather vote for a posh millionaire than vote for some unemployed chav from the Brixton ends.
    you should vote for a person that represents the oppressed people, not someone who wants to maintain the establishment (though you probably benefit from it)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    you should vote for a person that represents the oppressed people, not someone who wants to maintain the establishment (though you probably benefit from it)
    No. One should vote for someone who has the best policies and leadership ability, regardless of who they stand for or their family background. Why do I benefit from the establishment?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    loooool you are stupid, you can't be classist against the rich in the same way you can't be racist against white people or discriminate on the grounds of sexuality against straight people, please do a cheeky bit of googling lad

    Those who cannot rise up the class system simply haven't tried.

    are you actually saying that there are no forms of oppression that stop people progressing? and i disagree with the notion of social mobility anyway, because it supports the established class system and that for people to succeed, others must suffer.

    how does your sister being on benefits mean you have any experience of it? idiot

    yes, the welfare state is a large expense, and the vast majority of those benefits go to people who are in work you idiot because of low wages and gentrification.
    benefit fraud costs the taxpayer £1.2bn every year, whereas corporate tax avoidance (from people already making millions) loses the country around £19bn every year.
    Sorry :fuhrer::fuhrer::fuhrer::fuhrer:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, of course, or else this man wouldn't be an MP:

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    it is fair because at the moment it is UNFAIR, and in order to balance it out action must be taken
    what's unfair? exactly. you can't point to a policy of the state that discriminates so you have to go and look towards the arbitrary or the consequences of individual liberty. you've already told me you're an authoritarian, so you've already lost here. instead of using force, use persuasion. truth > coercion. if a fact is true, it doesn't require aggression to assert itself in an intelligent society. that's why we don't live in the dark ages now.

    the BBC and the majority of other mainstream media support the tories and lie to people about stories. Boko Haram kill hundreds of africans and it doesnt get on the news, is that not propaganda? ISIS kill more muslims every day than theyve ever killed europeans, and their attacks do not get on the news, is this not propaganda? if one doesnt have any form of external media to get their information from, then one will think everything they see/read is true
    actually I completely disagree - I think the BBC is pretty left wing - their hosts are always so harsh on right wingers and always so accommodating (usually) for lefties.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hoping4Astars)
    No. One should vote for someone who has the best policies and leadership ability, regardless of who they stand for or their family background. Why do I benefit from the establishment?
    yes, and the person with the best policies would be a person who aims to end inequality and abolish the estbalishmentist class system.

    you benefit from the establishment because i assume you are a middle class white man from the way you're defending it. you benefit from oppression, and unless you are actively opposing it you are supporting it
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    what's unfair? exactly. you can't point to a policy of the state that discriminates so you have to go and look towards the arbitrary or the consequences of individual liberty. you've already told me you're an authoritarian, so you've already lost here. instead of using force, use persuasion. truth > coercion. if a fact is true, it doesn't require aggression to assert itself in an intelligent society. that's why we don't live in the dark ages now.



    actually I completely disagree - I think the BBC is pretty left wing - their hosts are always so harsh on right wingers and always so accommodating (usually) for lefties.
    what's unfair is institutionalised discrimination, which was created and is maintained by the elites.

    if you think the BBC is left wing, then you obviously have no external source of information and im gonna have to assume you are just brainwashed. check out Al Jazeera and follow some lefties on twitter or something, you'll then be able to see the reality
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Nah no poshos.

    #Onlybruvvas4MP.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    what's unfair is institutionalised discrimination, which was created and is maintained by the elites.
    "institutionalised" referring to what exactly? culture? again, you can't control culture. culture isn't like lego where you can rebuild it if you don't like it. it builds itself.

    if you think the BBC is left wing, then you obviously have no external source of information and im gonna have to assume you are just brainwashed. check out Al Jazeera and follow some lefties on twitter or something, you'll then be able to see the reality
    buddy - even when I was a far leftist, I thought the BBC were fairly left wing. it's not something I think that can possibly be argued, that the BBC is somehow right wing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    "institutionalised" referring to what exactly? culture? again, you can't control culture. culture isn't like lego where you can rebuild it if you don't like it. it builds itself.



    buddy - even when I was a far leftist, I thought the BBC were fairly left wing. it's not something I think that can possibly be argued, that the BBC is somehow right wing.
    yes, i am referring to culture and society - which can be controlled through the promotion of positive values and and through positive discrimination. culture is also controlled by the media, who ensure many of the white working class become racist against their fellow people, all of whom are affected by institutionalised discrimination

    have a gander as some external, non-mainstream media you absolute idiot
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    yes, i am referring to culture and society - which can be controlled through the promotion of positive values and and through positive discrimination. culture is also controlled by the media, who ensure many of the white working class become racist against their fellow people, all of whom are affected by institutionalised discrimination

    have a gander as some external, non-mainstream media you absolute idiot
    "promotion of positive values" = good, because that's the spreading of the truth through voluntary interactions between civilised people. but positive discrimination is just childish. both kinds of discriminations are wrong. two wrongs don't make a right. we just have to look at the issue of discrimination and accept that it was bad back then and it's still bad. we cant do anything about it now other than advocacy, NOT authoritarianism. there are just some lines that you cannot cross - people don't deserve to be mistreated for what past generations did. that's "unfair".

    "you absolute idiot"? it's funny because I find you so pathetic that somebody like *you* calling me an idiot is like an adult being told "you're a poopy head" by a child - I don't value your opinion one bit
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well, I understand your feelings against just people who are from the upper class ruling however they are still citizens and if people vote for them then that is the will of the people. I find that a mixture of views from a range of society is best.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    positive discrimination doesn't negatively affect anyone's life, so it isn't wrong at all, i'm not really sure you know what it is.

    and yh mate you are an idiot i'd send you to a gulag
    yes it does - if I'm trying to get accepted into a university and its between me and somebody else who is of ethnic origins - even if I get better grades or have a better CV, if the university wants to have a quota of ethnic students, then it will mean that I will not get into that university because the other applicant is more valuable to them than I am.

    and a ****ing gulag? so, you're arguing for "fairness" yet you're arguing for torture. okay...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    yes it does - if I'm trying to get accepted into a university and its between me and somebody else who is of ethnic origins - even if I get better grades or have a better CV, if the university wants to have a quota of ethnic students, then it will mean that I will not get into that university because the other applicant is more valuable to them than I am.

    and a ****ing gulag? so, you're arguing for "fairness" yet you're arguing for torture. okay...
    if you have better grades and a better CV then of course you'll get in, but if you two were exactly equal then I'd advocate for the person from a discriminated background being chosen over someone who isn't.

    gulag was bants but i also advocate for the violent overthrow of the bourgeois so u never know
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Swanbow)
    Although there is a disproportionate amount of MPs who were privately educated, and could be described as 'posh', banning them from taking a seat in the commons is absurd. Some of our best politicians have been privately educated. However much like the Labour party has all female short-lists we could see the introduction of all state educated short-lists to help make the Commons more reflective of the society it is meant to represent.

    However I'm not too excited about that idea either in all honesty.
    No, quite. Because it would be offensive and patronising to the 'beneficiaries' of the scheme, and an active diversion away from finding the best candidate, regardless of their background or irrelevant attributes. Just like the all women shortlists.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.