[Peter]

Every evening, at around teatime, the occupants of the small council house in the non-descript English market town of Northampton become nervous.

They are waiting for it to start.

Soon stones will be hurled at the home for hours on end. The mother, barely out of her teens herself, keeps her two disabled sons, aged four and nine, away from the windows in case they shatter. On some nights the siege continues until three or four in the morning. On others, the crowd of nine- to 16-year-olds has better things to do.

British children have the most miserable upbringing in the developed world. American children come next, second from the bottom.

In 2000, the country stood aghast upon hearing of ten-year-old Damilola Taylor, who bled to death, alone, in a public stairwell after being stabbed in the leg with a glass bottle by two boys aged 12 and 13. Fast forward through a few years of steadily rising violent crime rates, to the recent case of a 19-year-old who raped a 79-year-old grandmother, stabbed her to death and then left her body to burn on a cooker – it barely registered on the front pages. In 2005, a Reading teen’s binge-drink killing of his 14-year-old friend and a 16-year-old neighbor – one of whom had his throat cut so deeply that police first thought he’d been decapitated – was equally forgettable. Until recently, victims of crime under the age of 16 didn’t even make the official statistics.

Source: Adbusters : The Magazine - #71 Beginnings of Sorrow / Generation F*cked: How Britain is Eating Its Young

Whoa.
Little shits. I'm 20 and shocked by this crap. I can't decide if its more the Parents fault for not growing a pair and beating the living crap out of their kids, or the government to not allow the teachers to beat the living crap out of the misbehaving kids.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

It's Chavism and weed. It will be pass and something new will replace it.

[vexborg]

This is one of the reason why my wife and I are moving (ok, I'm already in) to Denmark.

We used to live in the middle of an council estate, and since my wife is german - we WERE the germans in that area (I'm danish), and of course then the little brats felt it was ok to pelt our windows with stones, mud and dogshit! It got way less when the council put up new streetlamps, as the little wimps only operated in the dark...

And now, according to my wife, it's been more than 6 months since anything has happened in the area.

It seems to me, that kids haven't got any respect for something which isn't theirs, no respect for adult, their parents or the police. Of course one's incident I remember was when a group of more than 15 kids where throwing stuff on our windows, and I went up and fired a flash from a 1st floor window, then the little shits ran away, only to go and fetch one of their parents, because "taking photos of children are illegal!", so it ok for them to throw stuff at our house, but we can't do anything against them?

Not even the police would (or could) do anything, as they didn't have any proof, and lending us a videocamera so that we could get the evidence, was against the law!

Still too late for our liking, so I managed to buy a wee rural house over here, just needs a bit of renovation, and then my wife is coming over with our 4 cats.

UK never again, only as an tourist!

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Peter

Little shits. I can't decide if its more the Parents fault for not growing a pair and beating the living crap out of their kids, or the government to not allow the teachers to beat the living crap out of the misbehaving kids.

I suspect more like the opposite: idiot redneck (or the British version thereof) parents not realising that beating the crap out of your children on a regular basis will probably make them little shits.

Edit: Velkommen hjem, vexborg

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

The media exaggerates this every decade. It used to be punks. Then it was skinheads. Then it was hip hop youth. Now it is the Chavs. A minority of children from poor estates who have low quality parenting. The truth is that schools are showing record numbers of students passing their exams and universities are being inundated with students looking for places. The media reports both but not at the same time. Nothing sells better than fear. Can't report the good side of the coin at the same time.

[Oisín]

The truth is that schools are showing record numbers of students passing their exams and universities are being inundated with students looking for places.

Yeah, that’s the same here. But the standard of schools has decreased a lot, too. What I learned the first few years of university was what my parents learned in high school; what I learned through most of high school was what my parents learned in ninth grade; and so on. They have to do that, otherwise all those kids who are now so into the whole gymnasium (= Danish high school, but not the same as a high school in the US sense) thing, but aren’t really cut out for what the gymnasium used to be, would simply fail it.

But that’s a whole different story.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

Yeah, that’s the same here. But the standard of schools has decreased a lot, too.

Maybe, maybe not. Some of the increased pass rates can be attributed to the internet which has made it so easy for students to write their term papers. The internet makes anyone an instant genius (without any real grasp of the subject), just take a look at the political lounge on this forum.

We can't really say the exams are easier unless we resit them.

Let's also remember France has a bigger problem with Chav youth and children of immigrants joining gangs. Reading that article Peter linked to it completely ignored how widespread gangs are and that it is a natural part of being a kid in a poor community. The article and research was written by people just wanting to take the usual cliche stab at America by using Britain as a proxy. Terribly amateur. No mention of France at all. No mention of how a there has always been youth like that down the generations. The author hadn't a clue about how serious and strict Americans are with their children too. I found that although American children were too gorged with sweets and video games they are by far some of the most disciplined children in the world. They say sir, ma'am, please and thank you far more than their counterparts elsewhere.

[vexborg]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

Velkommen hjem, vexborg

Mange tak skal du have, det er godt at være hjemme igen

[Oisín]

We can't really say the exams are easier unless we resit them.

But teachers, who have been teaching at the gymnasia/universities in question for perhaps thirty years, can. And they all, unanimously, say that when they look at old exam questions from their earlier years, they’re amazed at how dumbed down the whole thing has become.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost 

The truth is that schools are showing record numbers of students passing their exams and universities are being inundated with students looking for places.

That's because the exams are getting easier.

And yes, there's a major problem with young yobs in the UK at the moment. Variety of factors: Poor parenting, restricted parenting (government has taken *all* methods of punishment off parents), no police on the street, actually thinking 50 Cent is cool, government lax on punishment.

The UK is a total shithole. Irretrievably so.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Doofy

actually thinking 50 Cent is cool

That in itself is enough to qualify anyone for immediate commitment to a mental institution.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

But teachers, who have been teaching at the gymnasia/universities in question for perhaps thirty years, can. And they all, unanimously, say that when they look at old exam questions from their earlier years, they’re amazed at how dumbed down the whole thing has become.

I believe that too, but only sometimes. At other times I question how is it when there's been advances in the sciences, in IT, and the arts (and there are subjects to choose now that didn't exist before) that have all filtered down to students. All that new knowledge didn't exist in previous decades. It makes me curious how modern knowledge can be called dumbed down.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost 

We can't really say the exams are easier unless we resit them.

In around 1992, there was a change in the system. Higher education started to receive money for every student who passed the course (rather than started the course). Result: It was almost impossible to flunk a student, no matter how crap their work.

And this "dumbing down" which started under the Tories has only accelerated under Labour in a bid to be "inclusive" and not offend the thickos. Everyone must be a winner, so to speak.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

In around 1992, there was a change in the system. Higher education started to receive money for every student who passed the course (rather than started the course). Result: It was almost impossible to flunk a student, no matter how crap their work.

That can't be true because my stepbrother, who is as dumb as a brick of sh!t, failed his GCSEs in 1995-6.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost 

That can't be true because my stepbrother, who is as dumb as a brick of sh!t, failed his GCSEs in 1995-6.

It only really affected FE until Labour got in, then it slowly filtered down to high schools (different cause, same result). I'd bet that if your stepbro took GSCEs today he'd pass them all with at least a B+.

[- - e r i k - -]

Political lounge?

[Peter]

dammit Doof, your sig is too pretty.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I'd bet that if your stepbro took GSCEs today he'd pass them all with at least a B+.

I really doubt it. Even if he had the answers in front of him.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Peter 

dammit Doof, your sig is too pretty.

Not big enough and no rear.

[Peter]

Size isn't everything my friend
Back on topic... Exams are much easier.



I hope saying that doesn't jinx me and cause me to fail

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Peter 

Size isn't everything my friend

It is when I'm hungry...

Back on topic... Exams are much easier.

Then why can't ChavScum pass?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Peter 

dammit Doof, your sig is too pretty.

And there we go... ...that's the problem with Britain these days. Everything is dumbed down so that even the ugly girls get a chance (observe the recent fat birds on catwalks thing and the Dove ads). Everyone is beautiful, everyone is hot, nobody can fail to be hot. Those with splendid natural assets are chastised for being lovely. Same with exams. Now, if only they'd start say to fat birds "sorry love but you're a fat bird, you can't be on telly" then the whole of society would start to sliding towards being reasonably OK again. Fat birds would know they were fat (and go get themselves a job where they can be angry, such as Matron), dumb chavs would know that they're dumb chavs, Vanessa Feltz wouldn't be allowed on the TV and you'd be able to horsewhip the help for not getting you another beer fast enough. Like it was in the old days. Before Girls Aloud.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost 

I believe that too, but only sometimes. At other times I question how is it when there's been advances in the sciences, in IT, and the arts (and there are subjects to choose now that didn't exist before) that have all filtered down to students. All that new knowledge didn't exist in previous decades. It makes me curious how modern knowledge can be called dumbed down.

I didn’t say that modern knowledge per se has been dumbed down. There are still as many intelligent (in the sense of ‘bookish intelligence’) people as there always was, and they still obtain more or less the same goals as before (research, publishing articles, groundbreaking new discoveries, etc.).

What has changed is a different aspect of the educational system. Whereas earlier, if you were not gifted with books, you’d go into some kind of technical school and learn a trade of some kind, and be just fine with that. Nowadays, however, that’s not fancy enough for people: they want Bachelors and degrees and fancy titles, just like the university geeks. And the governments are supporting them in that. That means that people who would previously have spent a year or two in a technical school and then have an apprenticeship on a building site (for example) now have to go through three years of gymnasium and continue on to a university education where they don’t belong, just to have lots of little strings of letters behind their name.

Part of the blame also lies with the industry, of course: read an average ad for a cafeteria waitress, and they’ll require a masters in customer service management administration and at least two PhDs (slight exaggeration, but you get the picture).

Whereas the gymnasium (which is, basically, just a preparation for university, not much else; it gives no qualifications on its own) used to be for the ‘bookish elite’ and used to comprise about twenty per cent or so of the kids that graduated elementary school (nine years), it’s now the standard choice after elementary school, comprising around eighty per cent or so. And since most of the extra kids are the kind that would do far better in a technical school and are not particularly bookish in their talents, the gymnasia have obviously had to lower the bar for exams and general education a lot. And when the gymnasia do that, the universities have no choice but to follow suit—their new students don’t have the same general background they used to have to be able to study at the university, so now the universities have to provide it themselves, meaning that, in the other end, there’ll be less time to study the subject itself in depth.

[Rumor]

The US has punks like that as well. I wish they would just .

[red rocket]

Originally Posted by Oisín

Whereas the gymnasium (which is, basically, just a preparation for university, not much else; it gives no qualifications on its own) used to be for the ‘bookish elite’ and used to comprise about twenty per cent or so of the kids that graduated elementary school (nine years), it’s now the standard choice after elementary school, comprising around eighty per cent or so. And since most of the extra kids are the kind that would do far better in a technical school and are not particularly bookish in their talents, the gymnasia have obviously had to lower the bar for exams and general education a lot. And when the gymnasia do that, the universities have no choice but to follow suit—their new students don’t have the same general background they used to have to be able to study at the university, so now the universities have to provide it themselves, meaning that, in the other end, there’ll be less time to study the subject itself in depth.

I don't think you can just define one group of people as ‘bookish’ and another as ‘technical’, and say the one group should go to university and the other one shouldn't.

First of all, you cannot assume that just because somebody doesn't seem to be scholar material, he's automatically going to be good at a technical job.

I've also known plenty of people over the years who had no intellectual interests or skills to speak of, but ended up just following in their parents' footsteps by getting degrees in engineering, business, teaching, et cetera, and landing secure but boring jobs afterwards.

Then there are the creative types. Graphic design, typography, media studies, art pottery and so forth, aren't the type of things that people used to attend university for, those are skills that used to be acquired through apprenticeships in the respective trades.

Let's face it, you basically have to have some sort of degree nowadays, otherwise you can't get a decent job.

The traditional working class has lost its place in modern western society, if you force people into some kind of menial non‑career, they won't be able to earn a living wage through to retirement age.

As I see it, the problem doesn't so much lie with standards having been lowered due to an increase in non‑bookish people in a higher education system designed for bookish people, rather it has to do with a combination of

(a) the aforementioned progressive eradication of the working class,
(b) the transmogrification of universities into vocational training centres, and,
(c) secondary education allowing premature specialisation into non‑subjects like gender studies and media production, whilst traditional core subjects like mathematics and English can be dropped.

The education standard needs to be raised for everyone. The way I see it, people should be encouraged to keep studying until 30, at the least.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Red Rocket

I don't think you can just define one group of people as ‘bookish’ and another as ‘technical’, and say the one group should go to university and the other one shouldn't.

First of all, you cannot assume that just because somebody doesn't seem to be scholar material, he's automatically going to be good at a technical job.

I think we’re saying more or less the same thing here. I wasn’t dividing people into ‘bookish’ and ‘technical’, but more into, perhaps, ‘academic’ and ‘everything else’. ‘Academic’ would of course be the ones who originally went to university and became teachers, researchers, etc.

‘Everything else’ would traditionally go to various forms of technical schools (meaning not necessarily places where you go to learn how to lay bricks, but also places where you could study, for instance, graphic design, typography, media studies [journalism included], art pottery, and so forth as you mention) and then learn their skills in the ‘real world’.

The problem, at least here, is that, although gymnasia now take in more or less anything that can walk and breathe at the same time, there are lots of people who would have done much better in some kind of non-academocentric studying environment than in a gymnasium and university, where the basic premise is still academia.

Add to that the fact that the industry requires a degree or five for pretty much any kind of job there is, and educational institutes find themselves forced to include more and more things that basically have nothing to do with what they originally did. Studying photography in the university? That’s completely backwards. Unless you want to study the history and backgrounds of photography from a sociological perspective (and I can’t really see why you’d want to do that), photography should be learned at a school where technique and craft is put first, just like it always was, up until the 70s or thereabouts.

[Asiadeep]

To me its just a lack of education and proper upbringing. I think its hard to apportion blame on anyone as it is the system that these people and families are stuck in which create the children like these. Place them in different situations or systems and you can bet that the outcome will be different.

[Kerrigan]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

And there we go... ...that's the problem with Britain these days. Everything is dumbed down so that even the ugly girls get a chance (observe the recent fat birds on catwalks thing and the Dove ads). Everyone is beautiful, everyone is hot, nobody can fail to be hot. Those with splendid natural assets are chastised for being lovely. Same with exams. Now, if only they'd start say to fat birds "sorry love but you're a fat bird, you can't be on telly" then the whole of society would start to sliding towards being reasonably OK again. Fat birds would know they were fat (and go get themselves a job where they can be angry, such as Matron), dumb chavs would know that they're dumb chavs, Vanessa Feltz wouldn't be allowed on the TV and you'd be able to horsewhip the help for not getting you another beer fast enough. Like it was in the old days. Before Girls Aloud.

Right, I think the leveling/flattening of culture is not a good thing. Certainly, in a liberal democracy, everyone ought to be treated equally, but that does not mean everyone should think that they are equal to their superiors.

So many people in this generation want to excel at something effortless, like being sexy or thuggish or glamorous. The fact is, if you want to succeed in anything, you either have to be born into favorable circumstances, or work your arse off.

If you want to move off of a council estate, try working harder to succeed in your career. And if you can't, focus on what you can do well, like being a good neighbor or parent. But these 30 year old mums in neon pink tracksuits who sit around all day and bring up yobs clearly have their priorities wrong.

[ndptal85]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

And there we go... ...that's the problem with Britain these days. Everything is dumbed down so that even the ugly girls get a chance (observe the recent fat birds on catwalks thing and the Dove ads). Everyone is beautiful, everyone is hot, nobody can fail to be hot. Those with splendid natural assets are chastised for being lovely. Same with exams. Now, if only they'd start say to fat birds "sorry love but you're a fat bird, you can't be on telly" then the whole of society would start to sliding towards being reasonably OK again. Fat birds would know they were fat (and go get themselves a job where they can be angry, such as Matron), dumb chavs would know that they're dumb chavs, Vanessa Feltz wouldn't be allowed on the TV and you'd be able to horsewhip the help for not getting you another beer fast enough. Like it was in the old days. Before Girls Aloud.

There are guys who love the 'fat birds' as you like to say and can't stand the stick figures you seem to be fond of. By putting everyone up, everyone has something to chose from.

[macintologist]

Where's a good country to raise your family?

[Spook E]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

Where's a good country to raise your family?

Antarctica

No chavs there

[Graviton]

Still, we have the worlds greatest ales, test match Cricket and those little jam roll things.

[- - e r i k - -]

… and self-irony

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ndptal85 

There are guys who love the 'fat birds' as you like to say and can't stand the stick figures you seem to be fond of. By putting everyone up, everyone has something to chose from.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[Naplander]

and good cups of tea

[moonmonkey]

and lots of sausage rolls

[Doofy]

And a police force which is less efficient at stopping crime than criminals are...

'Gangsters ran our estate better than the police' | the Daily Mail

When the Mafia-style thugs who ran this estate were jailed,a strange thing happened...crime actually went UP!The depressing truth is they deterred crime more effectively than the police

[olePigeon]

And beer.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

Well, I guess I'm part of the problem then, too.

[Mastrap]

Glorifying the past doesn't make for a better future. Britain has always had it's fair share of yobs. Her majesty's constabulary used to be able to ship them to Australia for fun and profit, now with that option removed the system is at a bit of a loss.

[- - e r i k - -]

Yeah...and they actually thought sending criminals to paradise was punishment back then.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost 

The media exaggerates this every decade. It used to be punks. Then it was skinheads. Then it was hip hop youth. Now it is the Chavs. A minority of children from poor estates who have low quality parenting. The truth is that schools are showing record numbers of students passing their exams and universities are being inundated with students looking for places. The media reports both but not at the same time. Nothing sells better than fear. Can't report the good side of the coin at the same time.

I agree the generalizations are often unwarranted, but sometimes the generalizations have a reason.

I still remember back in high school a bunch of my friends went down to the US, and noticed that every single time they walked into a store in one town, big burly guys would come out and watch them suspiciously.

Finally, one of my friends asked what was going on. It turned out that because they had short brush cuts and/or shaved heads, people thought they were nasty skinheads looking for trouble. My friends were surprised because people didn't have that reaction back in Canada. It turns out that in that town, stores were being vandalized on a regular basis, by... you guessed it... nasty skinheads.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Peter 

Soon stones will be hurled at the home for hours on end. The mother, barely out of her teens herself, keeps her two disabled sons, aged four and nine, away from the windows in case they shatter. On some nights the siege continues until three or four in the morning. On others, the crowd of nine- to 16-year-olds has better things to do.

Why doesn't she call the cops? Their appearance would get the youth to go away, at least for a while.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Why doesn't she call the cops? Their appearance would get the youth to go away, at least for a while.

I can tell you don't live in Britain.

1) The cops would show up three days later.
2) The kids would just tell the cops to F.O..
3) More hassle off the kids for the victim.

Effectively, there is *no* police force in the UK unless it's something to do with enforcing government social policy.

[Graviton]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Effectively, there is *no* police force in the UK unless it's something to do with enforcing government social policy.

Or gathering revenue from traffic volitions.

You would have better luck phoning and saying you spotted some cars illegally parked. They might send out a wagon load of em then.

[moonmonkey]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Yeah...and they actually thought sending criminals to paradise was punishment back then.

Next time you are in NSW visit Norfolk island, now that was a lovely holiday destination.

[vexborg]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I can tell you don't live in Britain.

1) The cops would show up three days later.
2) The kids would just tell the cops to F.O..
3) More hassle off the kids for the victim.

Effectively, there is *no* police force in the UK unless it's something to do with enforcing government social policy.

Sounds quite familiar... Sort of what we've experienced in Scotland.

[Dakarʒ]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Before Girls Aloud.

Ladies, you're damn right
You can't read a man's mind
We're living in two tribes
And heading for war
nobody's perfect
We all gotta work it
cuz fellas we're worth it
So don't break the law

Originally Posted by red rocket 

The way I see it, people should be encouraged to keep studying until 30, at the least.

Nowadays people want money, not knowledge.

*in the interest of being fully honest here, as much as enjoy a little knowledge, I have had quite my fill of the education system. Paying to learn never suited me.

[sek929]

I think people only "need" a diploma because they aren't willing to work hard, they'd rather eat cheetos and post on internet forums.

I dropped out of school last year and I still make 50 grand a year right now, there is plenty of money to be made if you don't mind actually working for it.

[Dakarʒ]

Well, unless you're in a blue collar industry, you obviously know something (or someone) a lot of people don't.