Vocal Voices

So says Red Ed and he wants change.

He is actually right, but maybe not about class. There is an imbalance, but whose fault is it that there are so many lawyers, bankers and barristers? The culture of the parties themselves, that's who, with his being one of the worst offenders.

He is a rich London boy who represents..... Doncaster. His brother represents....South Shields. They both had probably never heard of the places till they were "selected" to represent them. His mates round this way are all parchutists - Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Hilary Benn (not so much a career politician as a dynasty politician) along with a whole load of others.

The Tories and LibDems are no better, tbh.

Could not agree more.. Clegg, Cameron, I would hardly say that Vaz is middle class or Varsi, And the amazing thing is that the majority of MP's good bad and indifferent were "Researchers".. The Milibands should be the last ones to run down the middle classes, when their father was a lecturer in one of the biggest Marxists establishments, the LSE where Gaddafi's son thanks to B'Liar managed to get his degree (fiddled)...

Parliament is indeed too middle class. But as the Labour party has very conspicuously put southern middle class MP's into very safe northern working class seats against the wishes of local party members, Miliband is one hell of a hypocrite!
Nothing new there, then.

Never mind middle class - it's the ex public schoolboys, the minor aristos, who worry me! Far too many of them in positions of power these days. Politicians who have never had a real job...........straight from public school, to uni, to politics

Soon most of the professions will be full of rich kids whose parents can afford to support them through these ridiculous unpaid internships that seem to be the coming thing, not just in politics but also the law and many other professions............. No ordinary family can afford to do that.....................

Kaz it is amazing just how many working class, refer to themselves as Middle class. Its almost as if working class is a dirty word these days...

The Middle Classes, admired and despised in equal measure.

What are they, though? Red Ed said that parliament was too middle class then said he wanted more business people and ex Armed forces officers in there! They are an amorphous group defined differently from within and without.

What I dislike about the make up of parliament comes from what Kaz said. I could not care less about how they define themselves, class wise, but I do hate the fact that most of them come from a narrow section of society. Regardless of political persuasion they all move in the same circles, all know each other, and they are all prepared to do anything to protect that status quo.

Absolutely Frank! It worries the life out of me............

Workingman wrote:What are they, though? Red Ed said that parliament was too middle class then said he wanted more business people and ex Armed forces officers in there! They are an amorphous group defined differently from within and without.

When we actually had a class society (which we don't today), the middle classes were pretty much defined by the businessmen, either with active businesses or business investments which they managed. The phrase, today, is used and abused to mean whatever the person using it wants to convey. Usually incorrectly. It has been the middle classes which have caused almost every revolution on the planet and then they have ruled the country with an iron fist until the next "revolution". Anyone in the forces who makes it to the rank of Sergeant or higher is immediately "middle class" and nobody would vote for a 22 year private for government. Said private would only be in for 22 years because s/he completely lacked the skills required for government.

Today everyone in central government is "middle class". If you want to see working class you need to go to regional assemblies or local councils. Usually most of them find it hard to sting 5 words together when making a speech. Listening to the MSP's in the Scottish "Government" (gibberment perhaps), is often cringeworthy. I often hear Mrs S saying "and this is the face we present to the world as our representatives".

And there is the rub. Your government is your body for governing the country and also the body of people who represent you to the world. Those people, pretty much by definition, need a reasonable standard of education and reasonable communication skills. That education and communication facility leads to ambition and the wish to hold a good job down. Which catapults them directly into the middle classes.

To say that we have too many middle class in Government is an oxymoron. Because Government IS middle class and produces middle classes from the working classes.

For all his education, Balls is a moron and comes over as a moron and makes moronic statements to try and gain political capital.

The press, for repeating it are not morons. They are just amoral.

Suff wrote:
When we actually had a class society (which we don't today),

Oh I think we do!!

So the policeman has to enter by the servants entrance at a "gentleman's" house? People are denied education, vote, jobs or admittance to establishments because of how they speak or where they were born?

I don't think so. We have a divide between the rich and the poor but that is not a "class" society, that is pure economics.

People in Britain no longer even know what a Class based society looks like. Many of them use the word to further their political aims or goals. If you want to see a rigid class society, head to India.... Or perhaps china.