Social Class
In UK, one of the most glaring social cleavages is the class difference between those who can afford to become the big wigs in parliament, and those who can't. Most of the people who become major players in politics mostly come from middle class or above social classes. The lower middle-class and the poor simply can't afford to play with politics and often don't have the right connections to do so either. Therefore the rich get more political representation by virtue of their the upper-middle class background, as most MP's come from the upper social classes.
One of the major contributing factors of this cleavage is that most successful politicians go to fee-paying public and private schools which, being more selective and competitive than state schools, often attract the best and brightest children who garner scholarships and with the richest who can afford the fee (Both public and private schools in Britain are privately run and funded by fees from parents; State schools are funded by the state and free). Once children enter this selective realm of moneyed and intelligent elite, they run in different circles compared to the common person and are exposed to different values and beliefs
This has become an unending and rather vicious cycle. The people who run in these elite circles tend to be smarter (scholarship students), better connected, or simply richer than the average person and will be better able to, in turn, send their own children to posh expensive schools, kicking off another round of the same cycle.
One of the major contributing factors of this cleavage is that most successful politicians go to fee-paying public and private schools which, being more selective and competitive than state schools, often attract the best and brightest children who garner scholarships and with the richest who can afford the fee (Both public and private schools in Britain are privately run and funded by fees from parents; State schools are funded by the state and free). Once children enter this selective realm of moneyed and intelligent elite, they run in different circles compared to the common person and are exposed to different values and beliefs
This has become an unending and rather vicious cycle. The people who run in these elite circles tend to be smarter (scholarship students), better connected, or simply richer than the average person and will be better able to, in turn, send their own children to posh expensive schools, kicking off another round of the same cycle.
The History Behind the Problem
UK has historically always been run by the social elite, often nobility, who usually are born into rich moneyed families, attend expensive schools, and socialize within selective circles. Before there were schools, the nobility would hire tutors for their kids, who would grow up to become educated and refined citizens who participated in politics by virtue of their birth and social standing. The commoners could not afford to employ tutors, and so common children played in the mud and grew into uneducated ruffians. Even later, when free schools become available, they often only taught the 3 R's, reading, 'riting, and 'rithmentics (but obviously not spelling). To become a refined politician who could navigate the upper circles, which had all the political influence and economic might, one must learn Latin, Greek, French, philosophy, history, geography, music, dancing, and a whole repertoire of other things. Later, even with the development of the state school system, the rich still attended posh private schools and sent their offspring to the ridiculously expensive Oxford and Cambridge for college because it was "traditional" and the education in those schools were seen as "superior."
Into Modern History
Between the post -WWII era and the beginning of the 21st century, UK's parliament saw the beginnings of a meritocracy, where the majority of the MPs (including Margaret Thatcher) were educated in free state grammar schools (the traditionally academically selective secondary schools). This was mainly because due to the vast amount of funding the state schools were given by the government and and the grammar schools' growing popularity and increased renown for being selective and very competitive. If a child was talented and could get good grades, he or she could enter a grammar school.
However, following Thatcher's education reforms, most grammar schools were abolished to be replaced by comprehensive schools, which did not determine admission through academic merit and so lost the competitive and selective edge of the grammar schools. Then, following the start of the 21st century, the state schools went into further decline due to cuts in government funding, a new, largely public school educated generation took over the Tories once more, and Labour became much more middle-class and "Oxbridge" again
However, following Thatcher's education reforms, most grammar schools were abolished to be replaced by comprehensive schools, which did not determine admission through academic merit and so lost the competitive and selective edge of the grammar schools. Then, following the start of the 21st century, the state schools went into further decline due to cuts in government funding, a new, largely public school educated generation took over the Tories once more, and Labour became much more middle-class and "Oxbridge" again
Quick Facts
- Prime Minister David Cameron, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and and Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne all went to private schools with fees now exceeding all the money an average British family earns in one year
- 50% of the cabinet and 1/3 of all MPs went to fee-paying schools - versus only 7% of the country in total
- Over 3% of all MPs come from the same school, Eton, which currently has a yearly school fee nearing £30,000 a year
- The average MP earns £135,600 each year, while the average British citizen earns £26,500 each year