Why are Working Class People supporting Hopkins?

3 of 4

missfrizzy

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Aspiegirl:
“She's a charming sociopath, they always have sheep to follow them around, it's why they are successful”

Yes, but without the "charming" bit.

Moo_Chops

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by orangeballoon:
“working class is so outdated.

blue collar to white collar... but even then, there are a lot of blue collar jobs that pay far more and lots of white collar jobs that pay very little.

its not a question of any of those things...

it is...

do you think for yourself - and is that just based on the environment around you that you assume is "like everything" except for the grass always being greener area
do you expect to work for what you get and you can get it
do you blame others for not getting things
do you expect others to do something for you

chips on shoulders will never heal unless you get rid of internalised hate of others!”

totally agree

missfrizzy

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by amyawake:
“Correction: Hopkins is the vulgar bigot and Perez the rebellious child.”

That's an excellent analogy.

ChoccyPeanuts

28-01-2015

I'm surprised that anyone supports her in the way that they do tbh. Defending her on this board as though their lives depended on it even though they don't know her.

She's just a person and a pretty cringey one at that.

p381

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Matt_Maher:
“Well you seem to fall for things rather easily if you honestly think she hates ginger babies!”

Oh come on.
She obviously doesn't think Ginger people are attractive.
That's just her "jokey" way of getting around it.
I don't find her funny at all!

munkyfellover

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by seellee:
“I think the majority of viewers are probably middle class to be honest. My mom tried to make out she was working class the other week. She earns over 40k a year not including dads salary and owns her own house. Lol”

That IS working class.

Ms Ann Thrope

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Matt_Maher:
“That's because you display maturity, intelligence and tolerance. Something which many could do with applying themselves.”

.....including Katie Hopkins, who displays none of those traits that you find laudable. Hence the irony

Penfolds_place

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Matt_Maher:
“Very good point.
Some people seem to want to ban anything that might possibly be offensive.

It's about time people just started saying "you're offended? Oh well, deal with it, not my problem".”

Who wants to ban her?

I would rather TV shows didn't giver her the time of day, but I just vote with my feet and change the channel. I haven't seen anyone say she should be banned.

Scamps8

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by anne_666:
“According to Katie, unless your Mum was born into wealth and privately educated she is thick and worthless and so are you. Nor are you entitled to University education.”

Please provide direct proof/source that she said this

Her family was not particulaly well off so I doubt it

Penfolds_place

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Scamps8:
“Please provide direct proof/source that she said this

Her family was not particulaly well off so I doubt it”

According to an article in the guardian she doesn't believe in social mobility. She contradicts herself so much though I doubt she really believes it.

Scamps8

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Matt_Maher:
“That's because you display maturity, intelligence and tolerance. Something which many could do with applying themselves.”

Well said

Pointy

28-01-2015

In my opinion, she appeals to bigoted idiots, be they working-class or middle-class. People who choose to spout the hypocritical rubbish she does are a major reason why this country has fallen behind others in recent years.

ChoccyPeanuts

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Pointy:
“In my opinion, she appeals to bigoted idiots, be they working-class or middle-class. People who choose to spout the hypocritical rubbish she does are a major reason why this country has fallen behind others in recent years.”

Or dense people who are on the Katie to win bandwagon, because she's so amazing, because reasons...

Ms Ann Thrope

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Scamps8:
“Well said ”

Except its rubbish.

missfrizzy

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Ms Ann Thrope:
“.....including Katie Hopkins, who displays none of those traits that you find laudable. Hence the irony ”

Touche Ann

theid

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by puddytat:
“Because despite the things she says, the moment she opens her mouth she's entertaining, she's like the child with attitude in the class where Perez is just the village idiot.”

I find `children with attitude´ deeply worrying and if it carries on into adulthood ........
surely her family could have afforded therapy - or maybe they didn´t notice there was a problem, which speaks volumes about KH´s constant `look at me` life.

sheils1

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by ChoccyPeanuts:
“I'm surprised that anyone supports her in the way that they do tbh. Defending her on this board as though their lives depended on it even though they don't know her.

She's just a person and a pretty cringey one at that.”

Totally agree with you.

Ms Ann Thrope

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Scamps8:
“Please provide direct proof/source that she said this

Her family was not particulaly well off so I doubt it”

They were wealthy enough to send both her and her sister to private school from 3 to 16. That's not poor.

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-ra...kins-interview

Interesting article. In it she says that she doesn't experience fear, which is really not normal. I won't try to 'diagnose' her, but I know what that makes me think.

Alrightmate

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by p381:
“I just don't get it.
This woman obviously doesn't like working class people, so why on earth are most of the BB viewers (many who are working class) supporting and agreeing with this woman?
In real life, she'd probably cross the road to avoid most of them!”

The people who do probably secretly like to be led by people they see as authority figures.

p381

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Pointy:
“In my opinion, she appeals to bigoted idiots, be they working-class or middle-class.”

Very good point.

missfrizzy

28-01-2015

It's insane isn't it?

bootyache

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Matt_Maher:
“You're not making sense.

To accept that someone can have different opinions to yours without deciding to be against everything they say is a sign of maturity, intelligence and tolerance.”

An opinion is the right of free speech. To use that right to abuse is the abuse of free speech.

And if you say that it takes maturity, intelligence and tolerance to accept different opinions, then why don't you accept people's different opinions in here?

anne_666

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by Scamps8:
“Please provide direct proof/source that she said this

Her family was not particulaly well off so I doubt it”

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-ra...kins-interview

Quote:
“f you managed to miss all of that, you would get an idea of her style from her reply when I ask if she'd call herself a snob. "Oh, definitely yeah, 100%. I think it's really important to be snobby. Do I think social mobility policy will ever work? Absolutely not. Is social class a much more efficient way of getting people to the top? Absolutely. Social class has worked for years. Born into the right family, go to the right schools, even if you're not super bright to start with, you'll turn out bright. You go to the right university, you get the right job, you have the right connections, you'll make it to the top. Job done, very efficient."

Efficient at what? "Efficient at getting smart, well-connected people to the top. It is efficient, because what public money was required to move those people to the top? None." That would depend on whether we want the best people at the top, surely, or just the cheapest way to get some people to fill up the top? "Oh, for goodness sake," she exclaims impatiently. "It's this whole state school thing: 'Oh, there are a couple of bright sparks, let's invest £50m trying to get the two or three that might achieve to the top.' Or, shall we take really clever people and not have to spend any money on them, and get them to the top because they're connected and went to brilliant schools and their families will support them and they're fantastic? So why bother with social mobility? Why does it matter? Why? Why? I don't understand the obsession with it."”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...me/8734458.stm

http://usvsth3m.com/post/55857079607...lls-for-profit

Quote:
“Katie Hopkins ✔ @KTHopkins
Follow
'Hi, this is my daughter Charmaine'. I hear: 'Hi, I am thick and ignorant'.
7:49 PM - 4 Jul 2013”

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz/3...-Katie-Hopkins

T

Quote:
“he ex-Apprentice star was blasted on Twitter for saying private school pupils were “more able” than normal children.

She slated top universities like Oxford and Cambridge for giving places to skint students with fewer top A-level grades.”

http://www.cherwell.org/comment/inte...-katie-hopkins

Quote:
“Private schools are an “efficient way of processing highly intelligent individuals… into elite institutions”, because the children who deserve to succeed are naturally to be found amongst the upper classes.”

bootyache

28-01-2015

Originally Posted by anne_666:
“Sorry I missed your post. Did your read this, the girl is mentioned and much more about her "climbing the ladder" in the only business orientated job "success" she's had.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...ells-pain.html
This also explains the vitriol she spews about stay at home Mums.

She even lies about that job on her ancient website as well as Sandhurst. What a lot of rollocks!
https://www.katiehopkins.co.uk/

Honesty and Katie don't mix.”

Thanks Anne.

patsylimerick

28-01-2015

Now this is a REAL Big Brother discussion.

If we go back to the man who started it all off, George Orwell believed (or at least the Brotherhood's handbook in 1984 did) that, down through the annals of time, people were high, low or middle. (Forgive me the paraphrasing but I'm getting on and my memory's not what it used to be

).

The highs want to maintain their position at all costs. The middle say they want equality for all but in actuality want to usurp the high. The low are so busy dealing with everything stacked against them that they have neither the time nor inclination (nor education, nor opportunity) to challenge their position.

As history moves on, the middle comes to usurp the highs, becoming the highs themselves before they split and one side of the split emerges victorious; then you have a middle and a high again and the battle starts all over again.

At all times, both high/middle, high and middle are busy convincing low that they are where they should be and are lucky to have the beneficence of middle/high. The middle are always complicit in the suppression of the low because they concentrate only on where they are, where the high are, and how they can get their.

3 of 4