4 ms·

> todays elite Well - somewhat tangential to the article text if not to its title - consider this image[1]. The Prime Minister of the UK (seated at the right

> todays elite Well - somewhat tangential to the article text if not to its title - consider this image[1]. The Prime Minister of the UK (seated at the right of the bottom row) just appointed the circled person stood in front of the door, to the "committee on standards in public life," one of whose tasks would be to ensure the propriety of corporate lobbying undertaken by the person stood next but one on his left, the ex-Prime Minister of the UK David Cameron, which has recently caused some disquiet[2] The photo, notoriously, shows the members of a "private all-male dining club for Oxford University students. It is known for its wealthy members, grand banquets, and bad behaviour, including vandalism of restaurants and students' rooms. The club is known to select its members not only on the grounds of wealth and willingness to partake but also by means of education. Former pupils of public schools such as Eton, Harrow, Stowe School, Radley, Oundle, Shrewsbury, Sedbergh, Rugby, Westminster, Charterhouse, St. Paul's, and Winchester form the bulk of its membership."[3] Britain's "todays elite" are the old elite. 1: https://www.thenational.scot/resources/images/12804107/ https://www.thenational.scot/resources/images/12804107/ 2: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/20/david-cameron-showed-significant-lack-of-judgment-on-greensill-inquiry-finds https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/20/david-camer... 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullingdon_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullingdon_Club

patrickk 5y ago
To expand further on your point, this phenomenon can be seen beyond politics too, in media and culture. Consider the following photos[1][2] of Cambridge Footlights former members. Being a member of this theatrical club, attached to an elite university, has the capability of plugging you into a network of movers shakers who can propel you to the best TV careers going. If you didn't quite make it into Cambridge, tough luck. [1] https://www.facebook.com/14554658690/photos/a.10150355587333691/10156078217953691/?type=3&theater https://www.facebook.com/14554658690/photos/a.10150355587333... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1zdaa7/david_mitchell_richard_ayoade_and_john_oliver_at/ https://old.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1zdaa7/david_mitchell... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footlights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footlights
- Veen 5y ago
  This, in fact, rather undermines the point. None of these people are traditional elites. David Mitchell's parents are middle-class hotel managers. John Oliver's parents are teachers. Richard Ayodade's parents are Nigerian and Norwegian immigrants. Ben Elton (in spite of the impression he strives to convey) does come from an upper middle-class background, as do Hugh Laurie and Steven Fry. But none of them are anything like aristocracy or the types that would be considered for Bullingdon membership.
  - ttctciyf 5y ago
    > undermines the point I think it slides right past the point without noticing it, for the reason you state. None of these people are running the UK.
  - TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
    Except for Oliver, everyone on your list went to public school. The fact that they're not upper-upper doesn't change the fact that a public school education is a fast track to Oxbridge and to insider status. But even with the fast track, the upper middle classes are motivated by anxiety and envy about not being upper upper enough. The original article almost highlights this, but doesn't quite hammer it home. The class system is about aspiring to become the kind of person who has ancestral money and some huge houses. (Not just one huge house. That's the entry level.) But the people with the ancestral money and huge houses are neither special nor interesting. They're groomed for confident self-interest and social polish, but they don't actually do much except cream money off the markets, order inferiors around, and breed. Their self interest sets the tone for those lower down the tree who aspire to be like them. That's why they're so toxic. They're hostile to any kind of collectivity which erodes their "natural" privilege. And they'd rather own a country which is falling apart than lose some status in a country with more social mobility which might challenge their self-perceived high status.
    - ttctciyf 5y ago
      > everyone on your list went to public school. *Note for non-Brits: "public school" is the British way of saying "private school"[1] 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_(United_Kingdom)

patrickk 5y ago

To expand further on your point, this phenomenon can be seen beyond politics too, in media and culture. Consider the following photos[1][2] of Cambridge Footlights former members. Being a member of this theatrical club, attached to an elite university, has the capability of plugging you into a network of movers shakers who can propel you to the best TV careers going. If you didn't quite make it into Cambridge, tough luck. [1] https://www.facebook.com/14554658690/photos/a.10150355587333691/10156078217953691/?type=3&theater https://www.facebook.com/14554658690/photos/a.10150355587333... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1zdaa7/david_mitchell_richard_ayoade_and_john_oliver_at/ https://old.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1zdaa7/david_mitchell... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footlights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footlights

Veen 5y ago
This, in fact, rather undermines the point. None of these people are traditional elites. David Mitchell's parents are middle-class hotel managers. John Oliver's parents are teachers. Richard Ayodade's parents are Nigerian and Norwegian immigrants. Ben Elton (in spite of the impression he strives to convey) does come from an upper middle-class background, as do Hugh Laurie and Steven Fry. But none of them are anything like aristocracy or the types that would be considered for Bullingdon membership.
- ttctciyf 5y ago
  > undermines the point I think it slides right past the point without noticing it, for the reason you state. None of these people are running the UK.
- TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
  Except for Oliver, everyone on your list went to public school. The fact that they're not upper-upper doesn't change the fact that a public school education is a fast track to Oxbridge and to insider status. But even with the fast track, the upper middle classes are motivated by anxiety and envy about not being upper upper enough. The original article almost highlights this, but doesn't quite hammer it home. The class system is about aspiring to become the kind of person who has ancestral money and some huge houses. (Not just one huge house. That's the entry level.) But the people with the ancestral money and huge houses are neither special nor interesting. They're groomed for confident self-interest and social polish, but they don't actually do much except cream money off the markets, order inferiors around, and breed. Their self interest sets the tone for those lower down the tree who aspire to be like them. That's why they're so toxic. They're hostile to any kind of collectivity which erodes their "natural" privilege. And they'd rather own a country which is falling apart than lose some status in a country with more social mobility which might challenge their self-perceived high status.
  - ttctciyf 5y ago
    > everyone on your list went to public school. *Note for non-Brits: "public school" is the British way of saying "private school"[1] 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_(United_Kingdom)