Category: General

Social Engineering

My argument for the preferential treatment of certain subjects in education met with an objection from some to ‘social engineering’. I find this puzzling. Do these people object to social engineering in principle, or to what has over the years been a primary objective of that process? If it is the former, they have a logical dilemma. One cannot object to the principal of ‘social engineering’ and protest about the government’s failure to control immigration, for example.

If we view society as a complex entity in a state of constant transition we have to accept either that its shape is ‘engineered’ or left to random forces. If the former is thought preferable, we have to ask who or what should do the engineering. Historically, that has been done by governments and is, indeed, the rationale for having government at all. In my view, it is the principal responsibility of government to define a society’s strategic needs, and to determine the policies necessary to meeting them. That is simply what governments should do, and is the reason for our desire to have some democratic control over their activity.

Recognising the need for that process does not imply support for the specific strategic aims a government pursues. For many years British governments of all stripes have pursued pseudo-egalitarian objectives, perhaps most closely observed in education. We witnessed the attack on grammar schools, for instance, by the likes of Anthony Crosland and Shirley Williams conducted in the name of social equality and fairness. Yet, while slamming the door in the face of bright, working class children, these people did not abolish the public schools, which were a much more evident symbol of inequality. It was, of course, a pseudo-egalitarianism that they pursued, but successive governments have continued to pay lip-service to this particular idol.

I am bitterly opposed to such idolatry, but my objection to a specific objective or set of policies does not deny the legitimacy of government’s role in developing and pursuing strategic objectives on our behalf. I do not believe the slogan that less government is better government. Indeed, the reason we are presently in crisis lies in government failure to do its job.

G’Day Sport!


Australian sues Council for racial discrimination in England.
I had no idea they were such delicate little flowers.
The only ones I came across in the work environment had enough self-confidence for the planet, and then some, although we did enjoy ribbing them, mainly because they seemed to think Melbourne was the centre of the universe. It stemmed apparently from their school atlases being centred on – you’ve guessed? – Australia! I grant you, his workmates do sound pretty childish to have kept it up for so many years – a few well-aimed blows at the very beginning would have put a stop to it. Do Australians rank as a “race”? Over to you, Bearsy.

The ODI series so far: 3-0

Although as an Aussie I am delighted at the results, it cannot be said that Australia won these three matches. Rather, they just about rescued them from defeat.

Shane Watson rescued the first; Shaun Marsh rescued the second with delightfully eccentric help from Douggie Bollinger, who temporarily forgot that he cannot bat.   Dave Hussey rescued the latest, on a moderate foundation set by Brad Haddin, and with solid support from John Hastings, the new boy.   The rest of the team, with one exception, might as well have been on holiday.

There have only been two constants on which one can rely – firstly the exemplary bowling from that ghostly hero from a bygone age, Brett Lee, who was the only bowler from either side who achieved a consistently good line and length, and secondly the abysmal performance of the passenger Pup (aka Michael Clarke and as ‘the metrosexual wanker’ in Strine, or ‘a tosser’ in Brit, and as ‘captain’, whatever that means, by CA).

Thank goodness Ricky Ponting wasn’t playing, or Australia would have lost all three matches.

England, on the other hand were remarkably consistent – bad in every respect on all three days.   Is this the team that breached the walls of Ilium?  Sorry, … that retained the Ashes?   Many of them look the same, but they must be poorly cloned copies, for their performance was naff, to say the least.

Surely the Australia Day match on Wednesday can’t be as bad as these three, can it?   I guess I know the answer – sigh!

Rational Discrimination

When I suggested recently that the level of university fees should differ according to the area of study, with science and engineering students being favoured over the arts, I was criticised as a philistine. At the risk of the accusation being repeated, I assert again the view that it makes little sense, vis-à-vis national strategy to treat all university subjects as of equal value. I find myself supported in that view in Dambisa Moyo’s latest book ‘How the West Was Lost’. She points to two features of education in the West as reasons why we are losing out economically in competition with countries such as China and India: egalitarianism and an aversion to science and engineering.

On egalitarianism she says “Indeed there is a growing concern that an ‘anti-meritocratic’ style of education may be becoming increasingly prevalent in more developed countries, places like the UK and Europe…” “This can be contrasted with the competition for places and brutal streaming in countries like India and China, where the exercise of academic culling is ongoing.”

Perhaps this explains why, in the eighties, when I was recruiting trainee managers from successful A level students, I had to include remedial education in English and maths in their training programme.

As to favouring science over the arts, she makes the point that sophistication in science and engineering is associated with economic growth, and suggests that these studies have become passé in the West. She contrasts China with America in this respect, telling us that in 2008 China had around 3.7 million engineering students while “…the US prefers lawyers over engineers by 41:1.”

As for the UK, GEC was struggling twenty years ago to find enough graduate engineers for its needs. Also, I recall meeting a British engineer in a French hotel some years ago. His machine tool company had been bought by a French rival and he was in France on a training programme. In conversation with me he expressed his astonishment at how much more advanced was the French company over his old outfit.

So, wanting to see discrimination in the educational field has nothing to do with being a philistine, but a lot to do with being an economic realist.

Ah, but what are you driving now?

Old Movie Guy’s excellent trip down memory lane,  ‘A Night at the Orchid’

https://charioteers.org/2011/01/21/a-night-at-the-orchid/

seems to have veered off like an errant Vauxhall Victor into a discussion of what we were driving back in the day.  Please have a look at OMG’s post to get the flavour and then I’d like to know a) what you were driviing then and b) what you’re driving now, as I’m wondering if the flair, style and romance has gone out of motoring, or, if as Bearsy says, nostalgia isn’t what it used to be.

Continue reading “Ah, but what are you driving now?”