December 2, 2013

Meritocracy News, Labour Party Dept.

In British news, the Tory mayor of London Boris Johnson is being denounced for mentioning IQ in a speech. As we all know, Tories are Bertie Woosters, while Labour casts its nets far and wide to find its leadership in the coal mines and other proletarian places. For example, the current Labour leader is Ed Miliband, whose father was a famous Marxist college professor. In contrast to the inbred Tories who all come from the same social background, Ed's chief rival for party leadership was David Miliband, whose father was also a famous Marxist college professor. In fact, he was the same famous Marxist college professor.

This pattern is not all that uncommon in the Labour Party leadership. Left of center politicians have been eugenically bred in England since the time of Darwin and Galton. For example, shadow cabinet minister Hilary Benn is a fourth-generation MP. His father, the Grand Old Man of the Labour Party Tony Benn, used to be Anthony Wedgwood Benn, 2nd Viscount Stansgate. In other words, the Benns are part of the same china-making Wedgwood family as Charles Darwin's mother and wife.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

In contrast to the inbred Tories who all come from the same social background, Ed's chief rival for party leadership was David Miliband, whose father was also a famous Marxist college professor. In fact, he was the same famous Marxist college professor.

He wasn't just a famous Marxist college professor. He was a "man who hated Britain":

"The man who hated Britain: Red Ed's pledge to bring back socialism is a homage to his Marxist father."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2435751/Red-Eds-pledge-bring-socialism-homage-Marxist-father-Ralph-Miliband-says-GEOFFREY-LEVY.html#ixzz2gJK5YVuG

Ross said...

Boris Johnson is one of the few politicians who can emerge unscathed by a controversy like this, he is made of political teflon.

As for the Milibands- they aren't unique. There are Austrian cellars that feel less incestuous than the Labour Party. When you look at the background of their leading figures a phenomenal amount of them are brothers, wives, sons or cousins of other prominent figures in the party.

Bert said...

Boris Johnson is just as pro-immigration as anybody in Labour, so I don't feel too inclined to defend him.

Bostonian said...

"Left of center politicians have been bred in England". I think you meant "inbred".

dearieme said...

Steve, it's well worth hunting down a prog the BBC made a few years ago: "Who do you think you are" does the genealogy of famous people, and the Boris one is a hoot.

Anonymous said...

The Conservative Party of Britain is standard left wing in most things: pandering to non whites, lecturing whites, pro immigration, pro homosexual, pro welfare (not as much as Labour obviously), pro censorship, anti free speech etc. Its biggest criticism goes to the UKIP, usually on ideological grounds. Its criticism for Miliband is largely about whether he is competent to be Prime Minister, not on any real principled differences.

Despite the occasional things Boris Johnson says, the fact is that Britain is utterly left wing it really is beyond any hope of ever being able to save itself.

stari_momak said...

FWIW, Boris Johnson is X-grandson of the last Ottoman grand vizier or some such.

Also, Paul Collier has an op-ed on migration in the NYT. Of course, he can't say it's bad for the receiving country in that forum, so he says it's bad for the sending countries. And you know what, he is correct.

Maxwell Power said...

Hey, the guy who crashed that train in NYC is a Rockefeller

Anonymous said...

(1) Apparently Boris Johnson regards it as a problem that 16% of the population have IQs below 85. Good luck with fixing that.
(2) "Darwin's mother and wife". The British liberal elite weren't quite as inbred as that sounds, these were 2 different women. Darwin originated the theory that cousin marriage was a bad idea, when he attributed the poor physical health of several of his children to the fact that he and his wife were first cousins.

LetraSet said...

A comment for Boris Dissected at a left-wing blog:

Johnson was being as racist as he could be in his comments on IQ. According to "psychometrics" (appropriate name for a vile discipline), it's 15% of "whites" who have an 85 IQ or lower. For Blacks, it's 50% (or more!) who have that low an IQ, or lower. For Chinese and Jews, it's much far fewer than 15%, coz they supposedly have a higher average IQ than "whites", who in turn (supposedly) have an higher average IQ than Blacks. Bell curve, y'see.

Anonymous said...

Despite the occasional things Boris Johnson says, the fact is that Britain is utterly left wing it really is beyond any hope of ever being able to save itself.

If that is the case, I'm not sure what the implications are of the Daily Mail being the most popular online newspaper in the world are, and the general trend of green arrowing of opinion.

Anonymous said...

Once upon a time senior Labour Party figures *were* actually former worker.
James Keir Hardie, the first ever 'Independent Labour Party MP', (MP for the now 'enriched' West Ham constituency way back in the 1890s, if my memory serves me correctly), went down the Lanarkshire coal mines at the age of eleven. Many other figures in the first Labour government, that of Ramsay McDonald in the 1920s wer former millhands factory workers, miners etc. In those days, believ it or not, Labour really was the 'workers' party' - it really was socialist and egalitarian in outlook - hard to believe now, but it was. As an aside a senior Labour man of the 1920s was George Lansbury, a disappointed emigrant to Australia, who happened to be actress Angela Lansbury's dad.

Today we have a party run by a bunch of Economist reading shits. Why did they foist massive uncontrolled immigration on an unwilling Britain? - Beacuse 'The Economist' told them that 'clever' people like immigration.

It's my firm belief, oft-stated here to the point of tedium, that 99% of the world's problems ie the fall-out from shit policies were instigated by the need of politicians to look 'clever' for the benefit of 'The Economist' - you see politicians are vain and shallow and being 'clever' is an attribute highly prized - what else can they do to appear 'clever' but to partake in that fount of second-rate tossers everywhere.

An original theory, true, and I know you are all scoofing and muttering 'schizophrenic' or some such, but me, I'm convinced of it. Utterly. Only f*cked up theories can explain a f*cked up world, as JD Laing might have said.

Anonymous said...

Any society has an aristocracy by default. One of the problems with the New Class is their refusal to regard themselves as aristocrats.

And so you get people with smarts, wealth, power, connections, etc. who nonetheless insist they're Men of the People and therefore don't recognize the responsibilities of noblesse oblige.

It's understandable that Jews in particular would like to identify with the proles, considering the grief they've gotten for their exceptionality in the past, but at this point it's anachronistic and counterproductive.

Maxwell Power said...

Power tends to corrupt, and meritocratic power meritocratically