| Olympic Brit v the PC Crowd
On 20 August 2008, Leo McKinstry wrote the following in The Daily Mail: Quote:
Over the past weekend, our sailors, cyclists, swimmers and rowers won an unprecedented eight gold medals, by far the greatest haul by Britons in two days in a century of Olympic competition. Apart from the astonishing magnitude of the achievement, what is also striking is the background of the golden Olympians.
Of the 14 heroes pictured on the front page of yesterday's Mail, six were educated at independent schools…
While fewer than 10 per cent of all British schoolchildren go to fee-paying private schools, THEY ACCOUNTED FOR MORE THAN 40 PER CENT OF OUR WEEKEND OLYMPIC GOLDS…
Nor is this some statistical anomaly. The disproportionate Olympic success of privately educated contestants has been an enduring pattern in recent years. One recent study found that 60 PER CENT OF BRITISH MEDALLISTS AT THE 2004 OLYMPICS IN ATHENS WERE EDUCATED AT FEE-PAYING ESTABLISHMENTS… 58 PER CENT (WERE IN) THE 2000 OLYMPICS…
To some critics, such statistics are an indictment of the outdated, class-ridden nature of British society, where certain young people continue to be rewarded because of their affluent family backgrounds rather than their own talent. In this grievance-filled sports world of victimhood and privilege, the urban working class are said to be excluded because they do not have the same access to facilities, coaching, and support.
However, there is an entirely different way of looking at the issue. INSTEAD OF INDULGING IN THEIR USUAL CLASS OBSESSIONS, THE CRITICS SHOULD BE ASKING WHY THE STATE EDUCATION SYSTEM HAS SUCH A DISMAL RECORD IN PRODUCING OLYMPIC CHAMPIONS COMPARED TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
The British record is a sad indictment, not of class divisions, but of THE SORRY COMPLACENCY, INEPTITUDE, LOW STANDARDS AND LACK OF ENTERPRISE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM.
The simple explanations of the past - that independent schools were far richer than state schools - will not wash any more, because, as the Labour Government continually boasts, billions of pounds of extra funding has been poured into state schools in the past decade…
THE REAL ANSWER LIES IN THE ANTI-COMPETITIVE ETHOS THAT PREVAILS IN TOO MUCH OF THE STATE SECTOR. EQUALITY OF OUTCOME IS THE CENTRAL THEME OF THE POLITICALLY CORRECT BRITISH STATE. THE CONCEPT OF A TALENTED ELITE IS DESPISED RATHER THAN CELEBRATED.
THE ACCEPTED MINDSET IS THAT EXCELLENCE SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED FOR FEAR OF LOWERING THE SELF-ESTEEM OF THOSE WHO LAG BEHIND.
AS A RESULT, GENUINE SPORTING ACTIVITY, WHICH HAS RAW COMPETITION AT ITS CORE, HAS BEEN REMORSELESSLY DOWNGRADED IN STATE SCHOOLS, TOO OFTEN REPLACED BY PATHETIC SOFT GAMES WHERE NO ONE LOSES, BUT NO ONE LEARNS HOW TO STRETCH THEMSELVES.
Nor is this the only problem when it comes to state schools and sport. Another is THE SALE OF PLAYING FIELDS TO MAKE WAY FOR LUCRATIVE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.
Then there is the growing feminisation of the teaching profession, where more than 90 per cent of primary school teachers and 60 per cent of secondary teachers are women - a development that again leaves many sporty boys unchallenged.
And, of course, we must not overlook THE MALIGN INFLUENCE OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY BRIGADE, which wants to cover all children in cotton-wool and stifle their spirit of adventure.
But undoubtedly the greatest handicap for would-be sporting champions from state schools is that THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF THE OLYMPICS IS ANATHEMA TO THE RULERS OF BRITISH STATE EDUCATION, BECAUSE ELITISM OF ANY KIND IS FROWNED UPON, WHETHER IN THE SPORTING ARENA OR THE CLASSROOM.
Thus far, of course, THE EXTENT OF OUR ACADEMIC FAILURE HAS BEEN DISGUISED THROUGH THE DUMBING DOWN OF STANDARDS, SO THAT THE PASS RATE IN A-LEVELS HAS NOW REACHED 97 PER CENT.
But Olympic statistics are harder to manipulate, and while we should be proud of each and every one of our gold medal winners, ONE CAN ONLY WONDER HOW MUCH GREATER OUR MEDAL HAUL MIGHT BE IF STATE SCHOOL CHILDREN WERE ENCOURAGED TO STRIVE TOWARDS SPORTING EXCELLENCE IN THE SAME WAY AS THEIR PRIVATELY EDUCATED PEERS…
The Commons Select Committee on Culture recently demanded that our national sporting body, UK Sports, should COLLECT MORE INFORMATION ON 'THE BACKGROUNDS' OF TOP ATHLETES.
Such data, the committee said, WOULD 'HELP INCREASE THE SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC SPREAD' OF FUNDING.
In other words, THE COMMITTEE WANTS MORE SOCIAL ENGINEERING, MORE DRIVEL ABOUT EQUALITY, MORE INTERVENTION IN THE NAME OF ACCESS. THIS IS THE SORT OF NONSENSE THAT HAS RUINED STATE EDUCATION AND IT WOULD ONLY UNDERMINE OUR SPORTING COMPETITIVE SPIRIT.
| http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1046615/Is-coincidence-Olympic-champions-privately-educated.html Well, ladies and gentlemen, what do you want in 2012?
Olympic success, the best we can be or even more PC b***ocks?
Come to think of it, what do you want in the remainder of 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 as well?
Even more social engineering or a whole lot less PC Crowd?
Cotton-wool or the spirit of adventure?
Come on, ladies and gents, what do you really want from the scum who run our lives?
Do you want an "anti-competitive ethos"; a "society where excellence must not be encouraged"; "pathetic soft games where no one loses", the "sale of playing fields" and the "malign influence of the health and safety brigade", "class obsessions", the "dismal record of state education", "sorry complacency, ineptitude, low standards and lack of enterprise in the comprehensive system", "equality of outcome" and a "politically correct British state"?
Or would you rather have " raw competition", "stretching themselves" and a " talented" working-class "elite" doing well alongside their privately educated counterparts?
.
It's up to you, ladies and gentlemen.
You can have your country back if you want it.
If you want it, of course, you have to dare to vote for it.
Ay, there's the rub.  |
23-08-2008, 06:52 AM
Similar Threads 
Threaded Mode
