It would seem that 20 Oxbridge colleges made no offers to black applicants this year, and one College hasn't admitted a black student in the last 5 years. http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/06/oxford-colleges-no-black-students
Given that those colleges educate the future leaders of our country, what message are they putting across.
I could be that there were no bright black applicants ........... :rolleyes:
Alan, if you are trying to 'prove' that racism exists today then there are few who would argue with it.
Many of us expect it to come from groupings such as the BNP and others of similar ilk.
However, if your country is run by a monarchy - in 2010 - which prevents a Catholic from ascending to the throne then how on earth can you expect those who live 'on the ground' from expressing a desire to live in a 'white supremacist' state.
Even the state these 'intellectuals' desire will have a heirarchy that we would all be expected to adhere to.
Ever read, 'Animal Farm?'
It's life as we know it, I'm afraid and there are those at every top level prepared to keep the staus quo, irrespective of argument.
Alan, if you are trying to 'prove' that racism exists today then there are few who would argue with it.
Many of us expect it to come from groupings such as the BNP and others of similar ilk.
However, if your country is run by a monarchy - in 2010 - which prevents a Catholic from ascending to the throne then how on earth can you expect those who live 'on the ground' from expressing a desire to live in a 'white supremacist' state.
Even the state these 'intellectuals' desire will have a heirarchy that we would all be expected to adhere to.
Ever read, 'Animal Farm?'
It's life as we know it, I'm afraid and there are those at every top level prepared to keep the staus quo, irrespective of argument.
It doesn't make any of it right though. And such stuff should always have the full glare of publicity. Otherwise its a shrug of the shoulders and "There you go, can't do anything about it."
Trying desperately hard to keep their elite status (because they are not stupid and know that all over the world there are other universities hot on their heels to take over) and they get this stupid UK wide, hand wringing over nothing, attack.
Black kids don't get to Oxford because of their social class, their poverty, their lack of historical high acheivement ect. How long have they been in this country, 50/60 years?
Good God, it's taken hundreds of years for poor white people to get into a position where their children might attend Oxford. And millions still aren't there.
Five, six generations later, when there are thousands, if not millions of black middle class parents who value education and have a good education themselves and a social network that encourages academic success surrounding them. Then and only then can a study like this mean anything.
Trying desperately hard to keep their elite status (because they are not stupid and know that all over the world there are other universities hot on their heels to take over) and they get this stupid UK wide, hand wringing over nothing, attack.
Black kids don't get to Oxford because of their social class, their poverty, their lack of historical high acheivement ect. How long have they been in this country, 50/60 years?
Good God, it's taken hundreds of years for poor white people to get into a position where their children might attend Oxford. And millions still aren't there.
Five, six generations later, when there are thousands, if not millions of black middle class parents who value education and have a good education themselves and a social network that encourages academic success surrounding them. Then and only then can a study like this mean anything.
Good points - Im flabbergasted at the comments on some threads
I would like to add my two cents, to this discussion.
I have been saying this for the longest time now, to many people. My take on this situation is that black people tend to live in socially deprived areas and are looked down upon by other, in-fact any person who comes from a socially deprived area is looked upon badly.
Reason being because we live in a classist society where people who have money, automatically assume they are better than those without.
For example many of us would walk past a homeless man begging and we would think why don't he just get a job. None of us actually know this mans situation and as to why he became homeless in the first place, but we all have assumption based on our own prejudices and think him getting a job is a simple task.
I know that the system fails black students, because I was one of those failed students. I remember when in year 9 taking test, to find out which set you get into and I scored a 96% on my history test and was still put into the middle set. Was a I not capable of being in the top set?
In-fact I was more than capable, having achieved the second highest score out of maybe 120 students.
But many people's argument on this thread is that black students are not intelligent enough and can not comprehend that teachers and schools do fail, black and socially deprived kids.
I allowed this situation to get the better of me and gave up trying, but in hindsight I should of tried harder to prove that teacher wrong. However I was 14 and didn't have the sensibility I have today.
Those who are dismissing people's arguments of instructional racism needs to take a hard look at them selves and think maybe their is a element of racism and if not racism maybe prejudice plays a huge part in this selection process.
No let me throw a huge curve ball at you all, maybe the reason other races get in is because they come from families who are more financially well of than those of the black candidates...just a thought.
I would like to add my two cents, to this discussion.
I have been saying this for the longest time now, to many people. My take on this situation is that black people tend to live in socially deprived areas and are looked down upon by other, in-fact any person who comes from a socially deprived area is looked upon badly.
Reason being because we live in a classist society where people who have money, automatically assume they are better than those without.
For example many of us would walk past a homeless man begging and we would think why don't he just get a job. None of us actually know this mans situation and as to why he became homeless in the first place, but we all have assumption based on our own prejudices and think him getting a job is a simple task.
I know that the system fails black students, because I was one of those failed students. I remember when in year 9 taking test, to find out which set you get into and I scored a 96% on my history test and was still put into the middle set. Was a I not capable of being in the top set?
In-fact I was more than capable, having achieved the second highest score out of maybe 120 students.
But many people's argument on this thread is that black students are not intelligent enough and can not comprehend that teachers and schools do fail, black and socially deprived kids.
I allowed this situation to get the better of me and gave up trying, but in hindsight I should of tried harder to prove that teacher wrong. However I was 14 and didn't have the sensibility I have today.
Those who are dismissing people's arguments of instructional racism needs to take a hard look at them selves and think maybe their is a element of racism and if not racism maybe prejudice plays a huge part in this selection process.
No let me throw a huge curve ball at you all, maybe the reason other races get in is because they come from families who are more financially well of than those of the black candidates...just a thought.
Seen it myself and been a victim of it. Like Maya Angelou said "and still I rise."
Trying desperately hard to keep their elite status (because they are not stupid and know that all over the world there are other universities hot on their heels to take over) and they get this stupid UK wide, hand wringing over nothing, attack.
Black kids don't get to Oxford because of their social class, their poverty, their lack of historical high acheivement ect. How long have they been in this country, 50/60 years?
Good God, it's taken hundreds of years for poor white people to get into a position where their children might attend Oxford. And millions still aren't there.
Five, six generations later, when there are thousands, if not millions of black middle class parents who value education and have a good education themselves and a social network that encourages academic success surrounding them. Then and only then can a study like this mean anything.
What about the public school educated children of successful black families.
I would like to add my two cents, to this discussion.
I have been saying this for the longest time now, to many people. My take on this situation is that black people tend to live in socially deprived areas and are looked down upon by other, in-fact any person who comes from a socially deprived area is looked upon badly.
Reason being because we live in a classist society where people who have money, automatically assume they are better than those without.
For example many of us would walk past a homeless man begging and we would think why don't he just get a job. None of us actually know this mans situation and as to why he became homeless in the first place, but we all have assumption based on our own prejudices and think him getting a job is a simple task.
I know that the system fails black students, because I was one of those failed students. I remember when in year 9 taking test, to find out which set you get into and I scored a 96% on my history test and was still put into the middle set. Was a I not capable of being in the top set?
In-fact I was more than capable, having achieved the second highest score out of maybe 120 students.
But many people's argument on this thread is that black students are not intelligent enough and can not comprehend that teachers and schools do fail, black and socially deprived kids.
I allowed this situation to get the better of me and gave up trying, but in hindsight I should of tried harder to prove that teacher wrong. However I was 14 and didn't have the sensibility I have today.
Those who are dismissing people's arguments of instructional racism needs to take a hard look at them selves and think maybe their is a element of racism and if not racism maybe prejudice plays a huge part in this selection process.
No let me throw a huge curve ball at you all, maybe the reason other races get in is because they come from families who are more financially well of than those of the black candidates...just a thought.
Nobody here is arguing with that.
What's never acknowledged is that being financially well off enables so many other things to fall in place. Thats kind of the point of trying to make money.
It's not the bank balance, it's what it enables people to provide for their children.
A child who has been to the theatre, abroad, privately tutored in extra curicular activities, has instant access to anything or any support they need to persue something ect. ect. ect. is going to turn out at eighteen to be a far better educated person overall.
Take something very straightforward like learning an instrument for example. Yes a poor child can, But the rich child will recieve the added bonus of having a decent instrument, being able to attend concerts if the parents want them to, able to get the latest music books/cd's/equipment, able to change teachers, pay for exams. The list is endless.
So at eighteen, unless there's some huge underlying gift for music that the poor child possesses, the rich child's musical education will be infinately better.
OK that's a bit of a crude example, obviously not exactly correct, but the underlying principle holds true.
What finally changes that is, the poor child in turn becomes a parent, knows a bit more about music and earns a bit more than their parents, so their child has a bit of an added benefit who in turn passes it on to their child and so it goes on.
Trying desperately hard to keep their elite status (because they are not stupid and know that all over the world there are other universities hot on their heels to take over) and they get this stupid UK wide, hand wringing over nothing, attack.
Black kids don't get to Oxford because of their social class, their poverty, their lack of historical high acheivement ect. How long have they been in this country, 50/60 years?
Good God, it's taken hundreds of years for poor white people to get into a position where their children might attend Oxford. And millions still aren't there.
Five, six generations later, when there are thousands, if not millions of black middle class parents who value education and have a good education themselves and a social network that encourages academic success surrounding them. Then and only then can a study like this mean anything.
Your very ignorant! So black people have not achieved anything historically meritable in your opinion?
we have only been in England for 50-60 years, shows how much you middle class people read...it's true what they say its not what you know its who you know, cause clearly your intellect doesn't merit your middle class, highly aspirational waffle that you just typed. Try reading books and doing some research before yo post such ludicrous statements.
I will name a few black inventors that masterminded thing that we all use daily, but never get the recognition they deserve.
George Washington Carver, invented bleach, peanut butter, ink and instant coffe to name a few.
It doesn't make any of it right though. And such stuff should always have the full glare of publicity. Otherwise its a shrug of the shoulders and "There you go, can't do anything about it."
Exactly my point, Alan.
At the end of the day, if you are so outraged by it you would spend the rest of your life fighting aginst it.
But, you won't. That doesn't make it right either.
What about the public school educated children of successful black families.
It's a matter of percentages surely?
Not all privately educated children of non black successful families get into Oxford. It's been pointed out many times in this thread the small number of pupils applying.
Lets say one in a hundred get in. If the group you chose a child to be representive of has less than a hundred applicants, why should that childs group be at all successful?
What's never acknowledged is that being financially well off enables so many other things to fall in place. Thats kind of the point of trying to make money.
It's not the bank balance, it's what it enables people to provide for their children.
A child who has been to the theatre, abroad, privately tutored in extra curicular activities, has instant access to anything or any support they need to persue something ect. ect. ect. is going to turn out at eighteen to be a far better educated person overall.
Take something very straightforward like learning an instrument for example. Yes a poor child can, But the rich child will recieve the added bonus of having a decent instrument, being able to attend concerts if the parents want them to, able to get the latest music books/cd's/equipment, able to change teachers, pay for exams. The list is endless.
So at eighteen, unless there's some huge underlying gift for music that the poor child possesses, the rich child's musical education will be infinately better.
OK that's a bit of a crude example, obviously not exactly correct, but the underlying principle holds true.
What finally changes that is, the poor child in turn becomes a parent, knows a bit more about music and earns a bit more than their parents, so their child has a bit of an added benefit who in turn passes it on to their child and so it goes on.
I understand your statement, but in an elitist society, what constitute a good musical ability is not the same as those who enjoy mainstream popular music.
They enjoy Bach and Mozart and anything that is classified as high art. Something which is not really obtainable by socially deprived people is it?
What's never acknowledged is that being financially well off enables so many other things to fall in place. Thats kind of the point of trying to make money.
It's not the bank balance, it's what it enables people to provide for their children.
A child who has been to the theatre, abroad, privately tutored in extra curicular activities, has instant access to anything or any support they need to persue something ect. ect. ect. is going to turn out at eighteen to be a far better educated person overall.
Take something very straightforward like learning an instrument for example. Yes a poor child can, But the rich child will recieve the added bonus of having a decent instrument, being able to attend concerts if the parents want them to, able to get the latest music books/cd's/equipment, able to change teachers, pay for exams. The list is endless.
So at eighteen, unless there's some huge underlying gift for music that the poor child possesses, the rich child's musical education will be infinately better.
OK that's a bit of a crude example, obviously not exactly correct, but the underlying principle holds true.
What finally changes that is, the poor child in turn becomes a parent, knows a bit more about music and earns a bit more than their parents, so their child has a bit of an added benefit who in turn passes it on to their child and so it goes on.
I agree with a lot of what you've posted there. Schools do fail some black pupils, but white-working class boys are doing worse. There is a huge problem when certain groups, based on class or colour are doing badly. I don't agree that there is a historical lack of achievement with black pupils. The playing field is not and never has been level. No one from Merther Tydfill in Wales made it Oxbridge either, and no one would say the Welsh are historically underacheivers.
It also affords you a hell of a lot of confidence. I don't think David Cameron is that intelligent. He's not stupid by a longshot. He's certainly not as intelligent as Boris Johnson (we all know the buffoon thing is an act. BoJo is a highly intelligent man.)
What David Cameron has in spades is self-belief, self-confidence and he's been told from the time he was knee-high to a grasshopper that he could achieve whatever the hell he liked. He's lived a life of immense priviledge and with his family's wealth has risen to the upper echelons. All of that stuff about eating with the right forks, engaging in the right conversations-- it carries a lot of currency. My mother was a debutante who was privately educated her entire life. She taught me how to handle myself in social situations. I'm pretty sure that's helped me somewhere in my life.
Like I said earlier, it's a complex situation. The more money you have, the better educated your parents are, the better off you will be.
I would like to add my two cents, to this discussion.
I have been saying this for the longest time now, to many people. My take on this situation is that black people tend to live in socially deprived areas and are looked down upon by other, in-fact any person who comes from a socially deprived area is looked upon badly.
Reason being because we live in a classist society where people who have money, automatically assume they are better than those without.
What tosh. Have you seen a rap video? They are all about bragging about how much money you have and how successful you are? Rapping, a black culture, is mainly telling people how much better you are than them.
In reality, yoof culture is one of the most arrogant cultures in Britain today.
None of us actually know this mans situation and as to why he became homeless in the first place, but we all have assumption based on our own prejudices and think him getting a job is a simple task.
Again I would credit most people with knowing that you can't get a job without an address.
I know that the system fails black students, because I was one of those failed students. I remember when in year 9 taking test, to find out which set you get into and I scored a 96% on my history test and was still put into the middle set. Was a I not capable of being in the top set?
Obviously not, but seriously if they were racist why weren't you put in the bottom set?
But many people's argument on this thread is that black students are not intelligent enough and can not comprehend that teachers and schools do fail, black and socially deprived kids.
I don't think it's that, I just think there is a pressure in black culture to conform to the stereotype (which is generally the antithesis of the straight laced Uni student), similar to how young black men are encouraged into the gang life in the US it's just a lite version here. Some will get involved in actual gangs whereas other will just conform to the "Gangsta" dress code, way of talking etc....none of which are going to get you into Oxford.
Those who are dismissing people's arguments of instructional racism needs to take a hard look at them selves and think maybe their is a element of racism and if not racism maybe prejudice plays a huge part in this selection process.
Or maybe it doesn't and it is far more reasonable NOT to tar a bunch of Oxford selectors (albeit nameless and faceless) with a racism claim until some actual proof comes in.
No let me throw a huge curve ball at you all, maybe the reason other races get in is because they come from families who are more financially well of than those of the black candidates...just a thought.
Or maybe they just value qualifications higher generally as a race. What Indian mother doesn't want her son to grow up to be a doctor? It's a cliche but based in reality, you simply don't have the same kind of pressure to achieve academically in black families generally (or white families for that matter) as you do in Asian families.
Your very ignorant! So black people have not achieved anything historically meritable in your opinion?
we have only been in England for 50-60 years, shows how much you middle class people read...it's true what they say its not what you know its who you know, cause clearly your intellect doesn't merit your middle class, highly aspirational waffle that you just typed. Try reading books and doing some research before yo post such ludicrous statements.
I will name a few black inventors that masterminded thing that we all use daily, but never get the recognition they deserve.
George Washington Carver, invented bleach, peanut butter, ink and instant coffe to name a few.
Both those listed are American yes?
So they come from a huge pool of people that have historical roots that stretch back generations in the country they were successful in.
It's like a pyramid, if the base at the bottom is bigger, more will be able to be supported at the top. Everything is built on top of everything that's leading to the top.
I mean of course there are exceptions, I'm a firm believer in genius. But those are few and far between in any society. The rest are just exceptionally clever who need the help of the building blocks that support the climb.
I agree with a lot of what you've posted there. Schools do fail some black pupils, but white-working class boys are doing worse. There is a huge problem when certain groups, based on class or colour are doing badly. I don't agree that there is a historical lack of achievement with black pupils. The playing field is not and never has been level. No one from Merther Tydfill in Wales made it Oxbridge either, and no one would say the Welsh are historically underacheivers.
It also affords you a hell of a lot of confidence. I don't think David Cameron is that intelligent. He's not stupid by a longshot. He's certainly not as intelligent as Boris Johnson (we all know the buffoon thing is an act. BoJo is a highly intelligent man.)
What David Cameron has in spades is self-belief, self-confidence and he's been told from the time he was knee-high to a grasshopper that he could achieve whatever the hell he liked. He's lived a life of immense priviledge and with his family's wealth has risen to the upper echelons. All of that stuff about eating with the right forks, engaging in the right conversations-- it carries a lot of currency. My mother was a debutante who was privately educated her entire life. She taught me how to handle myself in social situations. I'm pretty sure that's helped me somewhere in my life.
Like I said earlier, it's a complex situation. The more money you have, the better educated your parents are, the better off you will be.
I think on the whole we are saying the same thing.
Yes it's class and money.
But what's not ever recognised in this country is that class follows money because of the broadly left leaning clap trap that's spouted.
If I had money I would send my children to be privately educated. They in turn would pick up from their peers things that would make them appear "posher" than ther background. And so it goes on.
What we are spoon fed in the UK is that "class" is somehow detatched from money, achievement and education and that elitism is something to be frowned upon.
Look at the dumbing down of so many BBC presenters, so many actors, so many people in the public eye. Tony Blair and his dropped 'aitches spring to mind.
It's a complete lie. Being well educated and good at something has got mixed up with being seen as elitist and a snob.
But it's the education that has led to all the other things.
Who seriously can go on speaking like an east end barrow boy of old when you're well read, have a good grounding in literacy, have benefitted from traveling, meeting lots of people, experiencing life rather than restricted to the narrow confines of your homelife.
What tosh. Have you seen a rap video? They are all about bragging about how much money you have and how successful you are? Rapping, a black culture, is mainly telling people how much better you are than them.
In reality, yoof culture is one of the most arrogant cultures in Britain today.
..because he's of no fixed abode. Nothing to wonder about.
Again I would credit most people with knowing that you can't get a job without an address.
Obviously not, but seriously if they were racist why weren't you put in the bottom set?
I don't think it's that, I just think there is a pressure in black culture to conform to the stereotype (which is generally the antithesis of the straight laced Uni student), similar to how young black men are encouraged into the gang life in the US it's just a lite version here. Some will get involved in actual gangs whereas other will just conform to the "Gangsta" dress code, way of talking etc....none of which are going to get you into Oxford.
Or maybe it doesn't and it is far more reasonable NOT to tar a bunch of Oxford selectors (albeit nameless and faceless) with a racism claim until some actual proof comes in.
Or maybe they just value qualifications higher generally as a race. What Indian mother doesn't want her son to grow up to be a doctor? It's a cliche but based in reality, you simply don't have the same kind of pressure to achieve academically in black families generally (or white families for that matter) as you do in Asian families.
Where do I start?
First bit. Rapping is not black culture, no more than Heavy Metal is white culture. Furthermore, not all rap music is remotely like what you describe, just the mainstream nonsense. It's like saying Britney Spears is on par with Carole King.
Second bit is absolute cack. I, as a black person has never felt any pressure to act as anything like a stereotypical black person. Never, not the clothes I wear, the way I speak, the music I listen to, the person I married. You make the grave mistake of lumping all black people together. I have absolutely nothing in common with an African or a Caribbean person. I relate more to suburban white Americans.
Just to let you know, I know PLENTY of black mothers that want their children to be doctors, lawyers, teachers and business people. I know very few that want their children to become worthless.
I think on the whole we are saying the same thing.
Yes it's class and money.
But what's not ever recognised in this country is that class follows money because of the broadly left leaning clap trap that's spouted.
If I had money I would send my children to be privately educated. They in turn would pick up from their peers things that would make them appear "posher" than ther background. And so it goes on.
What we are spoon fed in the UK is that "class" is somehow detatched from money, achievement and education and that elitism is something to be frowned upon.
Look at the dumbing down of so many BBC presenters, so many actors, so many people in the public eye. Tony Blair and his dropped 'aitches spring to mind.
It's a complete lie. Being well educated and good at something has got mixed up with being seen as elitist and a snob.
But it's the education that has led to all the other things.
Who seriously can go on speaking like an east end barrow boy of old when you're well read, have a good grounding in literacy, have benefitted from traveling, meeting lots of people, experiencing life rather than restricted to the narrow confines of your homelife.
BIB-- it's like that in the USA as well. One of the claims that so many of the ignorant people level at Obama is that he is elitist. I'm sorry, but I don't care what side of the political divide a person is on, I want them to be from an elite group of people if they are to lead the country. I want them well-read, well spoken and fiendishly intelligent. One of the reason I dislike Sarah Palin so much is that she is not bright, and she mocks intellectual curiosity.
I'm not one of these people that thinks you should never forget where you come from. I've never been back to the area I grew up in. Why would I-- it was shit. I worked my ass off to get away from all of that.
Where do I start?
First bit. Rapping is not black culture, no more than Heavy Metal is white culture. Furthermore, not all rap music is remotely like what you describe, just the mainstream nonsense. It's like saying Britney Spears is on par with Carole King.
Second bit is absolute cack. I, as a black person has never felt any pressure to act as anything like a stereotypical black person. Never, not the clothes I wear, the way I speak, the music I listen to, the person I married. You make the grave mistake of lumping all black people together. I have absolutely nothing in common with an African or a Caribbean person. I relate more to suburban white Americans.
Just to let you know, I know PLENTY of black mothers that want their children to be doctors, lawyers, teachers and business people. I know very few that want their children to become worthless.
But you're "type" of black person is rarely portrayed on British TV. It's the american shows my children have grown up with that are showing the black middle classes.
So if you haven't got children it's quite possible that there being a large black middle class is unusual.
It's struck me for years, watching American TV, why don't we see the same here. I mean there have been literally hundreds of flms and tv shows showing aspirational black people. I just don't see the same being made here.
I'm not trying to make you see anything. You are posting opinion as fact. In fact, what you said about black culture is wrong on all levels. For one, it supposes that all black culture is identical, when it is clearly not. Secondly, white working class males do worse than everyone academic wise, but you choose to ignore this. Then you come up with this insane idea that everyone is racist-- if so, then why are mixed-race people soon to become the largest ethnic group in Britain?
I note you say white working class males. But remove the control for class and most ethnic minority males do academically worse than white males.
The statistics techniques used in pretty much all the sociology papers I've read is quite terrible. Someone needs to teach them some econometrics.
But you're "type" of black person is rarely portrayed on British TV. It's the american shows my children have grown up with that are showing the black middle classes.
So if you haven't got children it's quite possible that there being a large black middle class is unusual.
It's struck me for years, watching American TV, why don't we see the same here. I mean there have been literally hundreds of flms and tv shows showing aspirational black people. I just don't see the same being made here.
I remember when The Cosby Show first came out. People were saying that it was not a true representation of black people. A whole lot of black people were perplexed, because their lives were exactly like the Huxtables. Hell, Jack and Jill is one of the oldest upper-class black society clubs going.
One thing that Hollywood doesn't seem to portray is black romance. Why couldn't Thandie Newton, Kerry Washington or Zoe Saldana play a role like Julia Roberts played in "My Best Friend's Wedding?" I've heard from loads of black scriptwriters that people won't see black romance as "believable."
You're right about the types of television shows made here, and black British actors have lamented this as well. I'm sure it's down to frankly lazy-assed programme makers.
I note you say white working class males. But remove the control for class and most ethnic minority males do academically worse than white males.
The statistics techniques used in pretty much all the sociology papers I've read is quite terrible. Someone needs to teach them some econometrics.
The economic control is important, simply because most ethnic minority males tend to come from poorer backgrounds, areas of deprivation and households with low aspirations. I don't think anyone would argue that a white guy from a nice market town is going to do better than a Bangladeshi guy from Tower Hamlets. Something needs to be done to stop young men from withering on the vine, regardless of colour.
They enjoy Bach and Mozart and anything that is classified as high art. Something which is not really obtainable by socially deprived people is it?
Anyone can go down to poundland and get a Bach or Mozart CD for a pound.
The fault lays with families not the universities. Millions and millions of f3ckless people begetting more of the same, breeding similar people who have no skills to get out of the mire that their parentage gave them. With no aspirations apart from the perpetuation of their species. As many have pointed out the research is poor, you don’t need a stato to point out that it compares apples and oranges and concludes a pear. One group amongst this hopeless lot are widely frowned upon and told to get a job, sort themselves out whilst another as in the topic here (as pointed out are disproportionately in the hopeless) are excused. We excuse one on the colour of their skin and the other rightly told what the issues are. We discriminate on the basis of skin colour, which will be some people’s fave word.
We take on people according to the colour of their skin into the fire and many other public services. It uses discrimination (although it refers to it as positive) to potentially employ not the best person to save our souls. So the best person is discriminated against (we can refer to this as negative). We live in a complete hypocrisy where it’s the most heinous crime to discriminate against one group and encouraged against another.
Of course because of our historical ‘nastiness’ we ‘deserve all we get’ or so I keep hearing. I heard a few weeks ago herein that any black mates I might have will be laughing at me behind my back, I knew this from some of said (now ex) friends. I never knew my pink skin was so amusing. We are indeed universally hated because of what our white skin makes us, we are a nation busily engaged in heaping.
I remember when The Cosby Show first came out. People were saying that it was not a true representation of black people. A whole lot of black people were perplexed, because their lives were exactly like the Huxtables. Hell, Jack and Jill is one of the oldest upper-class black society clubs going.
One thing that Hollywood doesn't seem to portray is black romance. Why couldn't Thandie Newton, Kerry Washington or Zoe Saldana play a role like Julia Roberts played in "My Best Friend's Wedding?" I've heard from loads of black scriptwriters that people won't see black romance as "believable."
You're right about the types of television shows made here, and black British actors have lamented this as well. I'm sure it's down to frankly lazy-assed programme makers.
The economic control is important, simply because most ethnic minority males tend to come from poorer backgrounds, areas of deprivation and households with low aspirations. I don't think anyone would argue that a white guy from a nice market town is going to do better than a Bangladeshi guy from Tower Hamlets. Something needs to be done to stop young men from withering on the vine, regardless of colour.
doesn't some of that also have to do with the demographics of the UK - according to the 2001 census about 2% of the population was classed as black whereas in the US in 2009 it was about 13% of the population
Comments
Alan, if you are trying to 'prove' that racism exists today then there are few who would argue with it.
Many of us expect it to come from groupings such as the BNP and others of similar ilk.
However, if your country is run by a monarchy - in 2010 - which prevents a Catholic from ascending to the throne then how on earth can you expect those who live 'on the ground' from expressing a desire to live in a 'white supremacist' state.
Even the state these 'intellectuals' desire will have a heirarchy that we would all be expected to adhere to.
Ever read, 'Animal Farm?'
It's life as we know it, I'm afraid and there are those at every top level prepared to keep the staus quo, irrespective of argument.
It doesn't make any of it right though. And such stuff should always have the full glare of publicity. Otherwise its a shrug of the shoulders and "There you go, can't do anything about it."
Trying desperately hard to keep their elite status (because they are not stupid and know that all over the world there are other universities hot on their heels to take over) and they get this stupid UK wide, hand wringing over nothing, attack.
Black kids don't get to Oxford because of their social class, their poverty, their lack of historical high acheivement ect. How long have they been in this country, 50/60 years?
Good God, it's taken hundreds of years for poor white people to get into a position where their children might attend Oxford. And millions still aren't there.
Five, six generations later, when there are thousands, if not millions of black middle class parents who value education and have a good education themselves and a social network that encourages academic success surrounding them. Then and only then can a study like this mean anything.
Good points - Im flabbergasted at the comments on some threads
I have been saying this for the longest time now, to many people. My take on this situation is that black people tend to live in socially deprived areas and are looked down upon by other, in-fact any person who comes from a socially deprived area is looked upon badly.
Reason being because we live in a classist society where people who have money, automatically assume they are better than those without.
For example many of us would walk past a homeless man begging and we would think why don't he just get a job. None of us actually know this mans situation and as to why he became homeless in the first place, but we all have assumption based on our own prejudices and think him getting a job is a simple task.
I know that the system fails black students, because I was one of those failed students. I remember when in year 9 taking test, to find out which set you get into and I scored a 96% on my history test and was still put into the middle set. Was a I not capable of being in the top set?
In-fact I was more than capable, having achieved the second highest score out of maybe 120 students.
But many people's argument on this thread is that black students are not intelligent enough and can not comprehend that teachers and schools do fail, black and socially deprived kids.
I allowed this situation to get the better of me and gave up trying, but in hindsight I should of tried harder to prove that teacher wrong. However I was 14 and didn't have the sensibility I have today.
Those who are dismissing people's arguments of instructional racism needs to take a hard look at them selves and think maybe their is a element of racism and if not racism maybe prejudice plays a huge part in this selection process.
No let me throw a huge curve ball at you all, maybe the reason other races get in is because they come from families who are more financially well of than those of the black candidates...just a thought.
Seen it myself and been a victim of it. Like Maya Angelou said "and still I rise."
What about the public school educated children of successful black families.
Nobody here is arguing with that.
What's never acknowledged is that being financially well off enables so many other things to fall in place. Thats kind of the point of trying to make money.
It's not the bank balance, it's what it enables people to provide for their children.
A child who has been to the theatre, abroad, privately tutored in extra curicular activities, has instant access to anything or any support they need to persue something ect. ect. ect. is going to turn out at eighteen to be a far better educated person overall.
Take something very straightforward like learning an instrument for example. Yes a poor child can, But the rich child will recieve the added bonus of having a decent instrument, being able to attend concerts if the parents want them to, able to get the latest music books/cd's/equipment, able to change teachers, pay for exams. The list is endless.
So at eighteen, unless there's some huge underlying gift for music that the poor child possesses, the rich child's musical education will be infinately better.
OK that's a bit of a crude example, obviously not exactly correct, but the underlying principle holds true.
What finally changes that is, the poor child in turn becomes a parent, knows a bit more about music and earns a bit more than their parents, so their child has a bit of an added benefit who in turn passes it on to their child and so it goes on.
Your very ignorant! So black people have not achieved anything historically meritable in your opinion?
we have only been in England for 50-60 years, shows how much you middle class people read...it's true what they say its not what you know its who you know, cause clearly your intellect doesn't merit your middle class, highly aspirational waffle that you just typed. Try reading books and doing some research before yo post such ludicrous statements.
I will name a few black inventors that masterminded thing that we all use daily, but never get the recognition they deserve.
George Washington Carver, invented bleach, peanut butter, ink and instant coffe to name a few.
http://inventors.about.com/od/cstartinventors/a/GWC.htm
Vivien Thomas developed proceeders to treat blue baby syndrome, his worked became unnoticed because Alfred Blalock took credit for this.
http://www.medicalarchives.jhmi.edu/vthomas.htm
those are not under achievers are they?
Exactly my point, Alan.
At the end of the day, if you are so outraged by it you would spend the rest of your life fighting aginst it.
But, you won't. That doesn't make it right either.
It's a matter of percentages surely?
Not all privately educated children of non black successful families get into Oxford. It's been pointed out many times in this thread the small number of pupils applying.
Lets say one in a hundred get in. If the group you chose a child to be representive of has less than a hundred applicants, why should that childs group be at all successful?
I understand your statement, but in an elitist society, what constitute a good musical ability is not the same as those who enjoy mainstream popular music.
They enjoy Bach and Mozart and anything that is classified as high art. Something which is not really obtainable by socially deprived people is it?
I agree with a lot of what you've posted there. Schools do fail some black pupils, but white-working class boys are doing worse. There is a huge problem when certain groups, based on class or colour are doing badly. I don't agree that there is a historical lack of achievement with black pupils. The playing field is not and never has been level. No one from Merther Tydfill in Wales made it Oxbridge either, and no one would say the Welsh are historically underacheivers.
It also affords you a hell of a lot of confidence. I don't think David Cameron is that intelligent. He's not stupid by a longshot. He's certainly not as intelligent as Boris Johnson (we all know the buffoon thing is an act. BoJo is a highly intelligent man.)
What David Cameron has in spades is self-belief, self-confidence and he's been told from the time he was knee-high to a grasshopper that he could achieve whatever the hell he liked. He's lived a life of immense priviledge and with his family's wealth has risen to the upper echelons. All of that stuff about eating with the right forks, engaging in the right conversations-- it carries a lot of currency. My mother was a debutante who was privately educated her entire life. She taught me how to handle myself in social situations. I'm pretty sure that's helped me somewhere in my life.
Like I said earlier, it's a complex situation. The more money you have, the better educated your parents are, the better off you will be.
What tosh. Have you seen a rap video? They are all about bragging about how much money you have and how successful you are? Rapping, a black culture, is mainly telling people how much better you are than them.
In reality, yoof culture is one of the most arrogant cultures in Britain today.
..because he's of no fixed abode. Nothing to wonder about.
Again I would credit most people with knowing that you can't get a job without an address.
Obviously not, but seriously if they were racist why weren't you put in the bottom set?
I don't think it's that, I just think there is a pressure in black culture to conform to the stereotype (which is generally the antithesis of the straight laced Uni student), similar to how young black men are encouraged into the gang life in the US it's just a lite version here. Some will get involved in actual gangs whereas other will just conform to the "Gangsta" dress code, way of talking etc....none of which are going to get you into Oxford.
Or maybe it doesn't and it is far more reasonable NOT to tar a bunch of Oxford selectors (albeit nameless and faceless) with a racism claim until some actual proof comes in.
Or maybe they just value qualifications higher generally as a race. What Indian mother doesn't want her son to grow up to be a doctor? It's a cliche but based in reality, you simply don't have the same kind of pressure to achieve academically in black families generally (or white families for that matter) as you do in Asian families.
You've kind of just proved my point.
Both those listed are American yes?
So they come from a huge pool of people that have historical roots that stretch back generations in the country they were successful in.
It's like a pyramid, if the base at the bottom is bigger, more will be able to be supported at the top. Everything is built on top of everything that's leading to the top.
I mean of course there are exceptions, I'm a firm believer in genius. But those are few and far between in any society. The rest are just exceptionally clever who need the help of the building blocks that support the climb.
I think on the whole we are saying the same thing.
Yes it's class and money.
But what's not ever recognised in this country is that class follows money because of the broadly left leaning clap trap that's spouted.
If I had money I would send my children to be privately educated. They in turn would pick up from their peers things that would make them appear "posher" than ther background. And so it goes on.
What we are spoon fed in the UK is that "class" is somehow detatched from money, achievement and education and that elitism is something to be frowned upon.
Look at the dumbing down of so many BBC presenters, so many actors, so many people in the public eye. Tony Blair and his dropped 'aitches spring to mind.
It's a complete lie. Being well educated and good at something has got mixed up with being seen as elitist and a snob.
But it's the education that has led to all the other things.
Who seriously can go on speaking like an east end barrow boy of old when you're well read, have a good grounding in literacy, have benefitted from traveling, meeting lots of people, experiencing life rather than restricted to the narrow confines of your homelife.
Where do I start?
First bit. Rapping is not black culture, no more than Heavy Metal is white culture. Furthermore, not all rap music is remotely like what you describe, just the mainstream nonsense. It's like saying Britney Spears is on par with Carole King.
Second bit is absolute cack. I, as a black person has never felt any pressure to act as anything like a stereotypical black person. Never, not the clothes I wear, the way I speak, the music I listen to, the person I married. You make the grave mistake of lumping all black people together. I have absolutely nothing in common with an African or a Caribbean person. I relate more to suburban white Americans.
Just to let you know, I know PLENTY of black mothers that want their children to be doctors, lawyers, teachers and business people. I know very few that want their children to become worthless.
BIB-- it's like that in the USA as well. One of the claims that so many of the ignorant people level at Obama is that he is elitist. I'm sorry, but I don't care what side of the political divide a person is on, I want them to be from an elite group of people if they are to lead the country. I want them well-read, well spoken and fiendishly intelligent. One of the reason I dislike Sarah Palin so much is that she is not bright, and she mocks intellectual curiosity.
I'm not one of these people that thinks you should never forget where you come from. I've never been back to the area I grew up in. Why would I-- it was shit. I worked my ass off to get away from all of that.
But you're "type" of black person is rarely portrayed on British TV. It's the american shows my children have grown up with that are showing the black middle classes.
So if you haven't got children it's quite possible that there being a large black middle class is unusual.
It's struck me for years, watching American TV, why don't we see the same here. I mean there have been literally hundreds of flms and tv shows showing aspirational black people. I just don't see the same being made here.
I note you say white working class males. But remove the control for class and most ethnic minority males do academically worse than white males.
The statistics techniques used in pretty much all the sociology papers I've read is quite terrible. Someone needs to teach them some econometrics.
One thing that Hollywood doesn't seem to portray is black romance. Why couldn't Thandie Newton, Kerry Washington or Zoe Saldana play a role like Julia Roberts played in "My Best Friend's Wedding?" I've heard from loads of black scriptwriters that people won't see black romance as "believable."
You're right about the types of television shows made here, and black British actors have lamented this as well. I'm sure it's down to frankly lazy-assed programme makers.
The economic control is important, simply because most ethnic minority males tend to come from poorer backgrounds, areas of deprivation and households with low aspirations. I don't think anyone would argue that a white guy from a nice market town is going to do better than a Bangladeshi guy from Tower Hamlets. Something needs to be done to stop young men from withering on the vine, regardless of colour.
Anyone can go down to poundland and get a Bach or Mozart CD for a pound.
The fault lays with families not the universities. Millions and millions of f3ckless people begetting more of the same, breeding similar people who have no skills to get out of the mire that their parentage gave them. With no aspirations apart from the perpetuation of their species. As many have pointed out the research is poor, you don’t need a stato to point out that it compares apples and oranges and concludes a pear. One group amongst this hopeless lot are widely frowned upon and told to get a job, sort themselves out whilst another as in the topic here (as pointed out are disproportionately in the hopeless) are excused. We excuse one on the colour of their skin and the other rightly told what the issues are. We discriminate on the basis of skin colour, which will be some people’s fave word.
We take on people according to the colour of their skin into the fire and many other public services. It uses discrimination (although it refers to it as positive) to potentially employ not the best person to save our souls. So the best person is discriminated against (we can refer to this as negative). We live in a complete hypocrisy where it’s the most heinous crime to discriminate against one group and encouraged against another.
Of course because of our historical ‘nastiness’ we ‘deserve all we get’ or so I keep hearing. I heard a few weeks ago herein that any black mates I might have will be laughing at me behind my back, I knew this from some of said (now ex) friends. I never knew my pink skin was so amusing. We are indeed universally hated because of what our white skin makes us, we are a nation busily engaged in heaping.
doesn't some of that also have to do with the demographics of the UK - according to the 2001 census about 2% of the population was classed as black whereas in the US in 2009 it was about 13% of the population