Just as Martin Luther King had a good dream for his children not to be judged by the colour of their skin, would it not be a good dream if people were not judged by the popular class in which they are categorised but, as he admonished, by the content of their character: and also perhaps by the content of their contribution and excellence.
Sports lovers, and perhaps all lovers of excellence, humble ambition, determination and skill, cheered in July 2026 a new UK tennis hero named Arthur Fery. So perhaps it was disappointing when a panel of Sky commentators embracing his achievement were interrupted by one who questioned that achievement “but he comes from a privileged background”. Is the obsession with categorising people into social classes and passing judgement accordingly or deciding fairness and political policy on that basis preventing the UK moving forward in unison? Combine that with a culture among some influencers, including politicians and elitists, which decries financial or other success yet lauds the Gods of envy, equality and fault, and the UK nation goes backwards or at best stagnates, as division and spite predominate.
EQUALITY AND PRIVILEGE
Pursuing equality to seek to ensure fairness of treatment is essential to the civilised Western or democratic world. The concept hardly exists elsewhere. Laws and rules which abhor prejudice against race, creed, disability or sexuality are needed for that. Equality before the law underpins justice. But it is not about making people the same. Yet so often the idea of equality or lack of equality is called upon when it is irrelevant. Generally, people are simply not equal but are different in many respects. In fact, is not each one unique? They have different talents, propensities, preferences, physical attributes, family and social backgrounds – the list of differences is potentially endless. Taking education, it cannot be made equal for all, as for example quality of schools, parenting and teaching varies etc. What can be sought to get done generally is to seek to give all people a good chance to maximise their potential, in the circumstances in which they find themselves. And each to seek their own brand of goodness and excellence. The outcomes will not be equal and cannot be made so.
In addition, it is typical for a person to be classed as privileged if they come from a household which is wealthier than most. Or if a person is born into a family with historic royal or old-fashioned landed gentry with a lordship or other bestowed title. Or lives in a “posh” area. Or if a person receives a top-class education. Or even health care. Why are these privileges and not simply features among many affecting a person’s existence?
With the word “privilege” today comes prejudicial judgement when otherwise next to nothing else is known about the person’s circumstances. But is it not a greater privilege for a person to have caring parents who work in the best interests of the child and teach responsible values; and how to be responsible citizens; or to have good friends: wealth and breeding are irrelevant to these things. If a person is unable to care for themselves, is it not a privilege, even amazing good fortune, that others in society will out of their own hard-earned income provide for that person, such as by social benefit payments or charity? Are they seen that way?
Then there is the person whose parents were labourers and cleaners ,what many might term lower or working class, and that person takes education seriously, is bright or just works hard to do as well as they can and become higher income earners and maybe move to a posher area: are they now privileged and what class are they? Is class really a purposeful idea?
CLASS CATEGORISATION IS PERNICIOUS IN TODAY’S WORLD
Those who want to influence are using the categorisation of people into classes to push agendas, diverting from important realities. In politics Keir Starmer lied when he said he served the country, as in almost every proposition he asserted how it benefited working people, whoever that was, possibly people who had few savings. Working people who earnt above average money were clearly excluded yet those who did not work were included. Now, Andy Burnham is proud that he will serve the working class. Who are they today? Is it essential to come from, for example, poor housing estates, preferably in the North of England? Or what parentage is necessary to qualify? What about everybody else? Politicians presume it is best to vaunt their heritage if their parents worked in old fashioned shop floor, or at least less well paid, industries, and so to show how they understand the tough life of graft. The assumption is that this makes them better than a person who may have achieved a level of wealth or went to Eton, who may equally have grafted. This reverse snobbery is for the birds and is nothing about judging by merit or character: these features can exist in good or bad forms whatever a person’s heritage.
Then there are the classes in which extremist pressure groups cast others in order to denigrate. The idea of White Privilege has been promoted and sadly not squashed at birth. The idea that non white people in the UK need special kids glove treatment or a leg up is in fact patronising even insulting towards them and yet white men are decried. In the UK is it relevant that poor white boys, especially from single parent homes, are worst school performers and most likely to turn to crime? This too when a greater percentage of black, Asian and coloured children go to University in the UK than white youth. Where is the white privilege? Those who espouse that trans people need special rights denigrate as transphobic those who want to respect biological sex, even though those people also wish to treat all including trans people with decency and respect.
Extremists who embrace net zero by 2050 for the UK tar those who disagree with the brush of planet destroyers, deniers of climate change. Yet they are generally not: they simply believe the UK can go a bit slower, be more flexible on fossil fuels and improve the standard of living without increasing the peril for the planet: it is evident that whether the UK is net zero by 2060 or 2050 barely moves the needle on damage to the world as the UK is such a small piece of the carbon jigsaw. This is abuse by class categorisation. Putting people in classes is highly misleading and divisive.
That we see so often public sector jobs reserved for minority groups, so white males must not apply, is a new low.
GOVERNMENT BY CLASS DOOMS THE UK
Under current Government policies and media prejudice, largely elitist non liberalism dressed up as progressive, the success of ordinary decent people is derided. Keir Starmer declared himself pro-business, but acted the opposite. Andy Burnham makes the same declaration but as yet has done nothing towards it. His policies announced to date, albeit small picture but with a soft appeal, seem to stem from a class approach: his opening flagship was getting rough sleepers off the streets of the UK by Christmas, as in Covid, but with no plan for the long term; placing asylum homes in more affluent areas, but not dealing with migration; capping bus fares; reducing VAT on energy and handing out energy subsidies; more travellers camps in more affluent areas; clamping down on retailers who rip off the public; he believes he can find pockets of money by taxes but which class will be pinched again? Will we hear that the broadest shoulders must bear the burden so that more handouts can buy the votes of the less well off? And moving growth policy to a number 10 of the North is clearly based on his Northern prejudice. Will he embrace the UK’s entrepreneurs and economy builders?– Not if he insists on being a champion of the working class, whoever they are.
The old ideas of class and privilege belong in the 70s not here today. Nearly all people wish to improve their lives, have more choice with better incomes and to be fair across society. But contribution, effort and ability need recognition. Embracing quality, striving for excellence and making those the benchmarks for action will serve better than class prejudice. The world is competitive and it is only by outperforming and driving quality that growth and prosperity can flourish.
See also: –
Leave a Reply