Why the most of the Prime Ministers were from elite univeristies? Watch

Muhtasim Ali
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
Hi everyone. It is really depressing to see where not only in the UK but also in other countries people who tend to become prime ministers come from elite universities. This is unacceptable , people like us who did graduation from an average uni cannot reach the top. Is it possible to change this order?
2
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
(Original post by Muhtasim Ali)
Hi everyone. It is really depressing to see where not only in the UK but also in other countries people who tend to become prime ministers come from elite universities. This is unacceptable , people like us who did graduation from an average uni cannot reach the top. Is it possible to change this order?
A key lesson you have to learn is “it is not what you know that matters, it is who you know”.

It is a sad lesson but once you understand it, your life gets better by you prioritising the right things. The rich protect the rich and the poor remain poor.
4
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
(Original post by Wired_1800)
A key lesson you have to learn is “it is not what you know that matters, it is who you know”.

It is a sad lesson but once you understand it, your life gets better by you prioritising the right things. The rich protect the rich and the poor remain poor.
Or maybe those are top institutions are brighter, smarter and more capable to fulfill the roles as compared to those from poor ranked universities who take on students to satisfy their financial needs.
16
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by JYP1)
Or maybe those are top institutions are brighter, smarter and more capable to fulfill the roles as compared to those from poor ranked universities who take on students to satisfy their financial needs.
I don't agree with this point. That is the illusion that has been pushed out. The idea that a grad from Southampton Uni or Bristol is not good enough when compared to Oxbridge, Manchester or Durham is laughable.

Also politics is not about academic ability or brilliance but public persuasion and connections. To even get an MP job, many have come from central headquarters as researchers, special advisers or ‘runners’.
1
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by Wired_1800)
I don't agree with this point. That is the illusion that has been pushed out. The idea that a grad from Southampton Uni or Bristol is not good enough when compared to Oxbridge, Manchester or Durham is laughable.

Also politics is not about academic ability or brilliance but public persuasion and connections. To even get an MP job, many have come from central headquarters as researchers, special advisers or ‘runners’.
You are comparing top universities with other top universities - not sure why you have grouped every RG university when they are similar in terms of student recruitment.

Why not Durham/Bristol/Manchester/Sheffield/Leeds to MMU/NTU/DMU/Westminster/Hertfordshire?? Fairly sure the OP is speaking about "top" universities which in the UK would probably equate to the Russell Group vs the rest. Might be mistaken but thats my take. I think students accomplishments are being downplayed by undermining the lack of work it requires to attain a place at said universities compared to the ease at others. No ones "contacts" are going to get them a place at top universities, just a load of hearsay bull****.
1
reply
Muhtasim Ali
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by Wired_1800)
I don't agree with this point. That is the illusion that has been pushed out. The idea that a grad from Southampton Uni or Bristol is not good enough when compared to Oxbridge, Manchester or Durham is laughable.

Also politics is not about academic ability or brilliance but public persuasion and connections. To even get an MP job, many have come from central headquarters as researchers, special advisers or ‘runners’.
Exactly!!! Leave Southampton or Bristol , they still fall under elite university ( as they are both part of Russell group) My question is why people who do not go to such unis cannot reach the top even though they have all the qualities you mentioned. I also want to know if they were bright then why the world is such in disarray. Trust me, I have seen so many people who have the great potential to become great leaders but it is due to the ****ty social order that they have failed to reach the top.
1
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by Muhtasim Ali)
Exactly!!! Leave Southampton or Bristol , they still fall under elite university ( as they are both part of Russell group) My question is why people who do not go to such unis cannot reach the top even though they have all the qualities you mentioned. I also want to know if they were bright then why the world is such in disarray. Trust me, I have seen so many people who have the great potential to become great leaders but it is due to the ****ty social order that they have failed to reach the top.
If they were as bright as you suggest, one would question why they are at said universities.

Dont think you know many people who have great "potential" to become leaders, what are you basing this off, your annual university debate. Give it a rest.
1
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by Muhtasim Ali)
I have seen so many people who have the great potential to become great leaders but it is due to the ****ty social order that they have failed to reach the top.
Is it though? Can you prove that?

The cream always rises to the top, even in environments where it is genuinely a meritocracy. Look at the armed forces. While there is an element of knowing the right people, you also have had to do the right things, performed well to earn promotions and make it to the top.

Despite that, those that make the top are almost always the privately educated and top tier university students.

It's not always a conspiracy.
2
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by JYP1)
You are comparing top universities with other top universities - not sure why you have grouped every RG university when they are similar in terms of student recruitment.

Why not Durham/Bristol/Manchester/Sheffield/Leeds to MMU/NTU/DMU/Westminster/Hertfordshire?? Fairly sure the OP is speaking about "top" universities which in the UK would probably equate to the Russell Group vs the rest. Might be mistaken but thats my take. I think students accomplishments are being downplayed by undermining the lack of work it requires to attain a place at said universities compared to the ease at others. No ones "contacts" are going to get them a place at top universities, just a load of hearsay bull****.
The OP talked about elite and this was how I interpreted it.

You probably don't understand how the system works and how the wealthy and powerful ensure their privilege is passed on to their children and children’s children.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by Muhtasim Ali)
Exactly!!! Leave Southampton or Bristol , they still fall under elite university ( as they are both part of Russell group) My question is why people who do not go to such unis cannot reach the top even though they have all the qualities you mentioned. I also want to know if they were bright then why the world is such in disarray. Trust me, I have seen so many people who have the great potential to become great leaders but it is due to the ****ty social order that they have failed to reach the top.
Because those reach the top are rarely the brightest but the most privileged. If it was based on academic intelligence, many politicians and officials wont be where they are today.
3
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by Wired_1800)
The OP talked about elite and this was how I interpreted it.

You probably don't understand how the system works and how the wealthy and powerful ensure their privilege is passed on to their children and children’s children.
Yeah all the students at top universities only got their because their parents rang the dean. I think you might be the biggest moaner on this forum. Constant bull**** coming out from you.

Always the same from people who got **** A-levels and are now at **** universities with the classic "your parents paid for you to get to that university" or maybe they just worked harder and got better grades.
0
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by Wired_1800)
Because those reach the top are rarely the brightest but the most privileged. If it was based on academic intelligence, many politicians and officials wont be where they are today.
Yeah Sadiq Khan, Sajid Javid, Preeti Patel must have all got their bus driver dads to ring Cameron and get them into government.

**** me you are as thick as they come.
1
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by JYP1)
Yeah all the students at top universities only got their because their parents rang the dean. I think you might be the biggest moaner on this forum. Constant bull**** coming out from you.

Always the same from people who got **** A-levels and are now at **** universities with the classic "your parents paid for you to get to that university" or maybe they just worked harder and got better grades.
Private school students make up 7% of the population, yet they're overwhelmingly represented at the top tier unis. Is it really purely a case of them all being genuinely better, or are some of them benefiting from being in a fortunate position to get better teaching and coaching for the specific requirements of getting into the elite unis...?
Last edited by Drewski; 1 month ago
4
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by Drewski)
Private school students make up 7% of the population, yet they're overwhelmingly represented at the top tier unis. Is it really purely a case of them all being genuinely better, or are some of them benefiting from being in a fortunate position to get better teaching and coaching for the specific requirements of getting into the elite unis...?
Top universities want top students to maintain their status as top universities. The specific requirements is getting top grades and being academically capable. Most private schools have selection tests therefore the students they take on are academically bright from the get go.

Universities have to maintain their reputation and the only way to do so is to recruit the cream year on year.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by JYP1)
Top universities want top students to maintain their status as top universities. The specific requirements is getting top grades and being academically capable. Most private schools have selection tests therefore the students they take on are academically bright from the get go.

Universities have to maintain their reputation and the only way to do so is to recruit the cream year on year.
Do they?

Maybe to get scholarships, but the fees are enough of a boundary and entry test for most...

More kids outside the private school system get top grades than those inside them, yet they're not represented at top unis, so there has to be more to it.

It's not the meritocracy you seem to think it is.
0
reply
username5061612
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by Drewski)
Do they?

Maybe to get scholarships, but the fees are enough of a boundary and entry test for most...

More kids outside the private school system get top grades than those inside them, yet they're not represented at top unis, so there has to be more to it.

It's not the meritocracy you seem to think it is.
You clearly know nothing then. Most of the "elite" private schools which are represented at top universities are also selective. There are plenty of "private schools" which are just money shops and hold no real prestige to employers/universities the like and take students who can pay the 3k a term. When you are talking about representation at at top universities - you need to consider the top private schools who are charging 7-8k+ a term. They, like universities, have to maintain standards, otherwise no one would go to them, so they have selection tests.

Yes, simply because there are MORE kids who attend state schools. Its just that a minority will achieve those grades from state schools as opposed to the majority at private schools. As much as you think everyones parents sit down and have dinner with the dean of Oxbridge, they dont.
1
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by JYP1)
Yeah all the students at top universities only got their because their parents rang the dean. I think you might be the biggest moaner on this forum. Constant bull**** coming out from you.

Always the same from people who got **** A-levels and are now at **** universities with the classic "your parents paid for you to get to that university" or maybe they just worked harder and got better grades.
The UK system is not as stark as the US approach where people can donate millions of dollars to ‘retain’ a seat for little Tarquin or Olivia.

In the UK, the wealthy use a different and, sometimes, very effective approach. Let me give you an example.

Little Olivia is born to a wealthy family in Wiltshire. She attends the local private school where she receives first rate education. There she learns French, Latin and Greek. She also learns to swim and play netball. She moves on to Marlborough or Cheltenham Ladies where her skills are honed further. She is educated on how to speak with an RP accent and how to confidently express her view (whether it is right or wrong).

She studies History and Politics. Goes to Greece and Rome for History and then to the US for Politics. She receives firsthand account from her teachers who have Oxbridge degrees or PhDs in the subject, which gives her the chance to dive deep. Olivia then applies for PPE at Oxford. There she feels at home. Her interview is difficult, but stimulating. She discusses the reasons why she wants to study the subject and comfortably relates them to her own experiences and knowledge.

She gets into Oxford, joins the Oxford Union and further develops her public speaking skills and engages directly with the leading figures in politics, society, business and others. At this point, her CV is taking good shape and her overall ability is high. She completes her degree and secures a place at Westminster as a junior researcher. From there she moves to Council elections or Special Adviser to an MP and makes her name. She gets on the list and fights for an election in a safe Tory or Labour seat. She wins the election and is an MP at 32.

Now compare that to Paul who is from Bradford. He is poor and receives his education in the local school with poor facilities, limited public support and sub-standard teaching. He struggles through out and does not do well in his GCSE because he has had to work in the evenings and on the weekends in Aldi to support his parents and siblings. His grades cannot get him into a decent 6th form, so he moves to the local one. He does poorly again in his A levels and ends up at a poor uni.

At this point, the difference between Paul and Olivia is clear. If you cannot see it, then you are deluded.
Last edited by Wired_1800; 1 month ago
1
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by JYP1)
You clearly know nothing then. Most of the "elite" private schools which are represented at top universities are also selective. There are plenty of "private schools" which are just money shops and hold no real prestige to employers/universities the like and take students who can pay the 3k a term. When you are talking about representation at at top universities - you need to consider the top private schools who are charging 7-8k+ a term. They, like universities, have to maintain standards, otherwise no one would go to them, so they have selection tests.

Yes, simply because there are MORE kids who attend state schools. Its just that a minority will achieve those grades from state schools as opposed to the majority at private schools. As much as you think everyones parents sit down and have dinner with the dean of Oxbridge, they dont.
I don't think that at all.

I just also don't think it's as simple and fair as you're making it out to be.

And I also think your tone is needlessly aggressive. Coming across as a **** is not a way to win an argument.
1
reply
BasicMistake
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
28 British Prime Ministers went to Oxford and 14 went to Cambridge. Does this mean that Oxford students are better educated than Cambridge students?

Of the 28 who went to Oxford, 13 were in Christchurch college. Does this mean that Christchurch is better at educating their students than the other Oxford colleges?
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by JYP1)
Yeah Sadiq Khan, Sajid Javid, Preeti Patel must have all got their bus driver dads to ring Cameron and get them into government.

**** me you are as thick as they come.
Those are exceptions and they were part of Cameron’s drive to make the Tory Party to be more diverse.

Let us take a look at the political leadership:

1. Boris Johnson - Eton & Oxford
2. David Cameron - Eton & Oxford
3. Michael Gove - Robert Gordons & Oxford
4. Jacob Rees Mogg - Eton & Oxford
5. Jeremy Corbyn - Castle House School
6. Ed Miliband - Primrose Hill School & Oxford
7. Nick Clegg - Westminster School & Cambridge
8. Ed Balls - Nottingham High School & Oxford
9. Tony Blair - Fettes & Oxford
10. Geoffrey Cox - Kings College, Taunton & Cambridge
11. Rishi Sunak - Winchester & Oxford
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How many uni open days have you been to/did you go to?

0 (66)
27.39%
1 (40)
16.6%
2 (40)
16.6%
3 (33)
13.69%
4 (16)
6.64%
5 (20)
8.3%
6 (6)
2.49%
7+ (20)
8.3%

Watched Threads

View All