Newspeak, "lockdown liberals" and "privilege"; parents have nothing to feel guilty about
Hardworking families who pay for education aren't asking for pity, but have nothing to feel guilty about; educational privilege exists, but it's found elsewhere
As a quick recap (welcome new subscribers), I want to encourage debate about the future of education. If we want good schools, then harming good schools is an odd place to start. I hope to persuade policymakers that we shouldn’t impose VAT on independent school fees, that doing so will lose money and will harm state schools as well as independent schools (and their children, families and employees); it’s actually the opposite of what we should be doing; finally I hope to encourage people to enter the debate and not take it lying-down. If you agree, please sign the petition, follow and share this blog, and spread the word.
Today’s post is for any independent school supporters who are not yet able or willing to defend their choice in the language of the greater good. Perhaps this is because they hear so much about privilege and guilt from people who call themselves liberals. The language we use is important and this is absurd - I’ll explain why.
A hard-earned life isn’t a privilege. There is genuine privilege in British education, and it’s found in elite, exclusive free taxpayer-funded schools. Read on:
Language of liberals
In a brief digression, we observe that “liberals” locked families up for months on end, prohibiting travel, office life, and seeing Granny. “Right-wingers” said no. “Liberals” came up with test-and-trace, mask mandates, quarantine and vaccine passports. It was the “hard-right” that objected; even protecting freedom of expression has become a “hard-right” thing. “Liberals” oppose women’s freedom to associate; presumably again it’s the “right-wing” that sticks up for it. [update 18/04/24 - now we have “liberals” closing down a bunch of “hard-right” people who peacefully express pretty anodyne and certainly widely-held views about family, immigration etc.]
Eh? There are many definitions of “liberal” but all liberals (Classical Liberal like me, libertarian, left-libertarian/Georgist, anarcho-capitalist)…all of us emphasise liberty starting with self-ownership, from which we derive our fundamental freedoms (of expression, contract, association, medical treatment based around the Hippocratic Oath and informed consent). Live-and-let-live.
When politicians and media rejected those freedoms, and did so with an astonishingly low bar for proof, debate and scrutiny, they stopped being “liberals”. We should deny those “lockdown liberals” the gentle language they prefer. Let them justify lockdown and the rest, and tell them (often, loudly) that their position is illiberal, authoritarian and thuggish.
On Privilege and charity
“You are so privileged because your children are at this school. You should do be forced to do more to help children at less-privileged schools”
This is illiberal, thuggish language (the clue is in “forced”). If anyone wants to give money, time, books, sports kit to the less well-off, terrific. If you want to make an extra tax donation to HMRC, crack on. You can even tell me about it, and try to persuade me, all in the name of charity.
Beyond charity, we’re talking tax, such as Labour’s VAT policy on children’s education. Tax is forceful and illiberal and … well, let me help you with that guilt.
Lex, legis
I’m not the first liberal (as in, live-and-let-live, rather than a “lockdown liberal”) who’s complained about misuse of the word “privilege”:
Privilegium: peculiar advantage, special arrangement, “law applying to one person” which turn is linked to
Privatus/a: private
Lex: law
Private Law. Not: “you have a nice house, you have privilege” or “you work long hours for good money, you have privilege”. And definitely not “your kids have a nice school, you have privilege”. Privilege is a private legal arrangement giving you greater freedom or more power than others.
The preferred caste in apartheid societies have privilege. Trade unions have privilege. OECD bureaucrats have privilege when your taxes pay their tax-free salaries so they can argue for you to pay higher taxes. Lawyers and their clients have privilege. Green Belt property-owners defending their view / house price by denying would-be property-owners…definitely privileged.
It’s easy to keep listing who has privilege, and it’s to do with the law not the outcome. In fact, the fake depiction of outcomes as “privilege” is just good old-fashioned socialism….but that doesn’t poll very well (see also: Miliband, Corbyn)… so the levelling-down socialists have learned to talk about “privilege” instead of “to each according to his needs”, just as the thugs have learned to call themselves “liberals”.
I’m interested to hear what “private law” applies to working families that pay heaps of tax for public services they don’t use. Feel free to comment below.
Independent school families have nothing to be ashamed of
The system isn’t rigged in favour of fee-paying parents, quite the opposite. They don’t need to be guilty. By choosing independent schools they (1) work hard to earn income (2) pay progressive rates of income tax (up to 62%) and NI (15.8%) (3) relieve pressure on state schools (4) educate children who will be an asset to the future economy. Anyone inclined to charity is free to give away more, but others are not obliged to follow suit.
Practicalities, not emotions
They shouldn’t expect pity (although they should argue that human cost of (1) school disruption for children and (2) closure risk for communities and employees is taken into account as part of our dispassionate analysis). They’re fine, for the moment, but they also shouldn’t expect public policy based on the deadly sins of envy and anger, or on false accusations of privilege.
Instead, voters and policymakers should be guided by practical matters such as the amount of tax money that won’t be raised when they harm a productive sector of the economy, in order to do no good to state schools.
Where privilege is found in British education
Now I’m not advocating some ghastly levelling-down exercise within the state sector, although Rachel Reeves might well be. I just want good schools, and will cheer wherever they are found. But if you want to see who’s doing really well out of education in Britain, it’s those (often relatively affluent people) receiving the best of state education. According to Tatler, in 2022 the top-10-ranked Oxbridge-entry schools had 4 state schools, 4 independent schools and 2 overseas schools.
Try the following for (actual) privilege, regarding admission to free taxpayer-funded sixth form colleges that achieve several dozens of Oxbridge places each year (as many as the very “best” independent schools, and without the opprobrium, discrimination or fees). Turns out that if you’ve already had the benefit of free taxpayer-funded education, you can expect the privilege of first dibs for even more.
The majority of these high-achieving state schools are selective, so you will need high GCSE grades to be granted a place (typically 6.5 Average Point Score across all GCSEs), and they will typically offer places first to applicants from partner primary or secondary state schools within the county or surrounding area.
How “privileged” is the high-performing (imaginary) 15-year-old who hasn’t been on holiday for ten years while her family squeezed the fees out of after-tax income? She’s now excluded from a top free sixth-form college, in favour of an (also imaginary) boy from a free state school whose parents (on comparable income) tucked enough away to buy him a flat and an annual ski-trip. She’s “privileged”? He’s not?
In two years’ time her so-called privilege will again come under the spotlight when they both apply to a Russell Group university. Even if they both get in (harder for her), his parents can probably pay his tuition fees up-front. From where I’m sitting, he’s the “privileged” one.
Privilege, so often found Through the Looking-Glass.
Good points. It’s also worth bearing in mind that some countries (I think Ireland and NZ?) provide a tax rebate for those choosing private education, whereas making that choice in the U.K. effectively means paying for a state school place AND the private one.