I think most posters here will remember corporal punishment being used in schools, it's not fair just to point at boarding schools for that.

I am puzzled. Did anyone watch the video in the op?

The argument is an interesting one. The upper classes who become our leaders send their children to boarding schools. A result of this is to cut off from one's emotions - and those of others - a system psychopathy. This allows these leaders to make decisions about others - I would strongly argue that the Tories now actually cannot understand the damage they are doing to ordinary and disabled people because of austerity. Other schools using similar methods does not actually justify anything.

We really need to ask if we need our leaders to be damaged.

It's not all bad. England undoubtedly leads the planet in spanking and caning pornography, though the hats with the ribbons are a bit funny-looking.

Now, if I only had a satisfactory explanation for why the French passed the urolagnia baton to the Germans about a decade ago...

Clive Durdle wrote:I am puzzled. Did anyone watch the video in the op?

The argument is an interesting one. The upper classes who become our leaders send their children to boarding schools. A result of this is to cut off from one's emotions - and those of others - a system psychopathy. This allows these leaders to make decisions about others - I would strongly argue that the Tories now actually cannot understand the damage they are doing to ordinary and disabled people because of austerity. Other schools using similar methods does not actually justify anything.

We really need to ask if we need our leaders to be damaged.

I'm sure the schools themselves would stridently resist any suggestion that they do not care about the emotional wellbeing of their charges or that their practices, ciricula and/or ethos are anything but rooted in the best interests of their wards. That's probably true to a great extent, and aside from the profit insentive, questions here seem to condense around what the schools and parents actually think is right, and appropriate, and in the best interests of the children themselves. What does that actually mean?

Those of us who didn't board are probably all aware, from fiction and tv dramas and the news etc, how the well-to-do have traditionally appeares to raise their chidren by proxy - employing wet nurses, nannies, governessess, and (in fiction at least) hard-thrashing school masters to deal with the nitty-gritty of their children's developmental and eductional needs. Of those parents who opt for this procurement approach to child-rearing no doubt all of them would say that they just want the best for their chidren, and that buying the services of best professionals their money can buy is a way to ensure it - probably just as their parents did for them.

The quality or scope of the education provided by these establishments isn't the issue. These schools are obviousy very good, have high pass rates, and 3 A-levels from Eaton and a 2.2 in History from Oxford clearly provides one with all the skills needed to become the Chancellor of the Exchequer (!). But still, as the video implies, children are often sent away from the age of seven(ish) to live and grow as virtual orphans among other familially-detached boys and girls, with what passes for family life being reduced to holiday periods and social occassions. Is that a healthy family life? Does that leave a child feeling somehow rootless and alone at a deeper level? Does that, and the ethos of the schools, embed selfishness, or stymie childrens' development, inadvertently detatching them from their own emotions and inpinging on the ability to relate to the emotions of others? And what impact does it have on how the parents relate to and interact with their children when they do have them around?

I find it interesting that those among our curent crop of prep and public school educated millionaire ministers who trumpet so often and so loudly about the virtues of The Family and importance of 'family values', and are so quick and earnest in telliing us what kind of values the nation should aspire to, may actually not have much of a clue about what a family actually is, or what family life can or (imo) should be.

Clive Durdle wrote:I am puzzled. Did anyone watch the video in the op?

The argument is an interesting one. The upper classes who become our leaders send their children to boarding schools. A result of this is to cut off from one's emotions - and those of others - a system psychopathy. This allows these leaders to make decisions about others - I would strongly argue that the Tories now actually cannot understand the damage they are doing to ordinary and disabled people because of austerity. Other schools using similar methods does not actually justify anything.

We really need to ask if we need our leaders to be damaged.

We really need evidence before accusing hundreds of thousands or millions of people of psychopathy.

Thommo wrote:

Clive Durdle wrote:I am puzzled. Did anyone watch the video in the op?

The argument is an interesting one. The upper classes who become our leaders send their children to boarding schools. A result of this is to cut off from one's emotions - and those of others - a system psychopathy. This allows these leaders to make decisions about others - I would strongly argue that the Tories now actually cannot understand the damage they are doing to ordinary and disabled people because of austerity. Other schools using similar methods does not actually justify anything.

We really need to ask if we need our leaders to be damaged.

We really need evidence before accusing hundreds of thousands or millions of people of psychopathy.

I grew up in a boarding school from the age of 7, I'm no expert but I'm reasonably sure I'm not a sufferer of psychopathy. I might be a black swan though.

trubble76 wrote:I grew up in a boarding school from the age of 7, I'm no expert but I'm reasonably sure I'm not a sufferer of psychopathy. I might be a black swan though.

You and every other boarder I ever met, including two of my cousins.

Thommo wrote:

Clive Durdle wrote:I am puzzled. Did anyone watch the video in the op?

The argument is an interesting one. The upper classes who become our leaders send their children to boarding schools. A result of this is to cut off from one's emotions - and those of others - a system psychopathy. This allows these leaders to make decisions about others - I would strongly argue that the Tories now actually cannot understand the damage they are doing to ordinary and disabled people because of austerity. Other schools using similar methods does not actually justify anything.

We really need to ask if we need our leaders to be damaged.

We really need evidence before accusing hundreds of thousands or millions of people of psychopathy.

Come on Thommo, you've been on RatSkep long enough to know that that's not true