<![CDATA[Alek Boyd - Blog]]>Mon, 19 Aug 2024 18:56:31 +0000Weebly<![CDATA[Electoral fraud in Venezuela is nothing new]]>Mon, 19 Aug 2024 16:43:24 GMThttp://alekboyd.com/blog/electoral-fraud-in-venezuela-is-nothing-new In the early hours of 16 August 2004, Francisco Carrasquero (then head of CNE) appeared on a  televised address in Venezuela to announce that Hugo Chavez had won a recall referendum on his rule. The results were: 59.1% of votes in favour of Chavez to remain as President and 40.6% against it. We were speechless. Chavez had won nearly 20% more votes than the opposing side, and yet, Carrasquero and Jorge Rodriguez (then CNE board member) refused to submit to meaningful scrutiny. No witnesses or electoral observers of any kind had been allowed in the tallying room at CNE’s headquarters upon closing polling stations. Audits that have been agreed in advance during protracted negotiations brokered by the OAS between Chavez and the opposition were not conducted. The Carter Center, which was acting as both a broker and electoral observer, failed to get Rodriguez to give an inch. In some of the polling stations were the audits did take place, Chavez lost with a margin almost identical to those reported by exit polls. After much protestation, an audit of polling stations selected randomly with software provided by the Carter Center was meant to be conducted a few days later. Again, Rodriguez imposed his own mechanism to select which polling stations were to be audited. By this point, the electoral material that was meant to be under constant guard by local and international electoral observers had been under Venezuela’s army control, well away from prying eyes. Peer reviewed statistical studies eventually showed that the result of the 2004 recall referendum announced by Carrasquero was, in fact, a statistical impossibility. The biggest electoral fraud Venezuela ever perpetrated in Venezuela was done by Hugo Chavez in 2004.

Since then, I have had countless discussions with people who insist -without evidence- that Chavez won legitimately. My argument, as explained to BBC World Service on the very morning of 16 August 2004, has not changed: without proper scrutiny, audits and witnesses corroborating that what was announced was a true representation of the vote, to take Carrasquero’s results as valid was an act of faith.  

Fast forward to 2024 and uninformed observers are led to believe that Nicolas Maduro just stole an election in Venezuela. For the first time. This is due to the largely ignorant reporters that have just arrived to the Venezuelan issue, but is hardly the case. There have been no fair, transparent, and subject to independent scrutiny elections in Venezuela since August 2004. Venezuela’s electoral system produces, to this day, whatever chavista authorities want. Jorge Rodriguez continues to exert absolute control over a system that was, as admitted by Smartmatic’s CEO, designed from the ground up according to Rodriguez’s specifications. The source code and technology used cannot be audited for “commercial reasons”, as admitted in a European electoral observation report. While Smartmatic is no longer running elections in Venezuela, that does not alter who’s in control. It’s always been an appendix of the regime.

Current head of CNE Elvis Amoroso appeared late on national TV on 28 July 2024 to announce that Maduro had won the elections with 51%. The results, according to Amoroso, were produced after tallying a little over 80% of the votes cast. Since that moment, chavismo has been scrambling to convince the world -without presenting a shred of proof- that Amoroso’s announcement is a true representation of the vote. Maduro basically wants to reenact what Chavez did in 2004. But Maduro is not Chavez, and apart from the usual thugs (Putin, Ortega, Xi, etc.), the world has moved on from the romanticism initially showered on the Bolivarian robolución. Venezuela was never a cause célèbre in international politics, but 8 million immigrants fleeing the place have made it so. Outside of war torn Syria and Ukraine, no country has seen a larger exodus of people in the 21st century. That is chavismo’s single most notorious achievement. Stealing elections is just par for the course.

There’s a few things in this new electoral fraud that have caught my attention. First, Amoroso announced results after allegedly tallying 80% of the vote. It was then announced that the CNE had been hacked -even though transmission of results takes place through phone lines (líneas muertas) that are not connected to the internet. The hack must have happened after having received roughly 80% of results. Initially, the opposition also managed to obtain copies of about 80% of the tallies, and quickly scanned and published results, which showed that Maduro had basically lost everywhere, even in Barinas, Chavez’s fiefdom and state of birth.
 
Since first announcement, the CNE has not published a single piece of proof backing up their result. The CNE’s website is down since 28 July, and continues offline as of this writing. My belief is that Maduro lost in roughly those 80% of voting stations that allowed public tallying to take place.

No independent monitor of web attacks has been able to corroborate the hack announced by Maduro’s regime.

According to the incomplete published count, Maduro got some 3.316.142 votes. These are, mainly, public employees, army, corrupt contractors and people whose livelihoods depend directly on chavismo. Otherwise, who can be insane enough to, still, vote for Maduro?

Enrique Marquez has been an absolute shocker. For decades he’s been perceived as a closeted chavista, a turncoat, someone two breaths away from selling his mother to advance his “political career”. But then, he organised a press conference and said that his electoral witness, who was with Amoroso inside CNE’s tallying room before Amoroso’s announcement, did not see any printing of results from any of the tallying that was taking place. Marquez went further and said that results announced did not come from tallying conducted under established protocol, but from Amoroso’s own office printer. It is a mystery why he has not been arrested yet, and it reminds of another episode in 2004, when Jimmy Carter said that Carter Center’s observers had witnessed the count only to be contradicted by then OAS Secretary Cesar Gaviria, who retorted saying that no witness had been allowed by Rodriguez into the tallying room.

In Venezuela the army executes elections, that is, days before a national electoral event the country is basically militarised, polling stations are taken over by the army days in advance. Once all electoral material, machines, etc., arrive in place everything is under the army’s control until conclusion of process, that is no one can take anything home without the army’s permission. Instructions were given that no tallies could leave polling stations, in clear violation of electoral rules stipulating that upon conclusion of vote count -which is public- witnesses with proper credentials have to be given a copy of the count for their records. Maduro has been rattled to his very core by the fact that, against specific orders to the contrary, the army let opposition witnesses take over 80% of the tallies, which ended up online shortly after the election.

Lula, Petro and AMLO are involved in a farcical mediation between Maduro and the opposition. Lula wants another election to take place, and then another presumably, until Maduro gets the result he wants. People have forgotten what Lula did for Chavez. I am therefore to be convinced that any of these actors have the 1) the will and 2) the pull to get Maduro to do anything against his wishes. Cristina Kirchner demanded Maduro to publish all tallies, she must have stopped receiving her per diem a long time ago...

In his recent derangement, Maduro published details of the secret Doha agreement with the U.S. administration. It shows that licenses granted to Haiti, Belize, Dominican Republic, Repsol, ENI. Trinidad, Shell, Maurel & Prom were requested by Maduro, rather than it being a lobbying effort of license recipients. It also shows that Alex Saab and Fat Leonard were, while not specifically referred to, part of negotiations.

Clause i)c) from Semana 2 shows agreement on inviting the Carter Center, and electoral observers from the EU and the UN to the presidential election. In a fantastic turn of events, the EU, unanimously, rejected Amoroso’s announcement and demanded publication of all electoral results. The Carter Center, in what can only be considered as a saving face manoeuvre given what it did in 2004, reported that Amoroso’s results could not be trusted, that the elections could not be considered democratic, and that there was no evidence of the alleged hack that took place. Then, the UN panel of electoral observers went further and said that elections in Venezuela lacked "basic transparency and integrity". But the CNE was not going to keep quiet about this, and it published, briefly on its Twitter account, a communiqué accusing the UN of disregarding its agreement with the chavista electoral authority, specifically the part about refraining from publishing anything about Venezuela’s elections, despite the final clause in the Doha agreement that establishes that none of what was agreed was binding!

In sum, as I am fond of saying, Maduro has been caught cagando y sin papel. He can no longer hide. He is a true son of Chavez, electoral fraud and all, though as usual, he got away with exactly what he wanted. He got Saab, he got his licenses and enough money to stay in power till his death. He was never going to respect adverse electoral results, and I don’t see him moving to Moscow anytime soon.

A surprising statement came from Tom Shannon, whom I met many years ago when he was “in charge” of Western Hemisphere Affairs at the State Department. In a rather extraordinary feat of clarity, he said that there are two possible scenarios left for Venezuela: 1) Maduro goes full Ortega and shows the finger to the democratic world (something he has been doing since he took over in 2013), and 2) Venezuelans become so incensed by chavismo’s latest electoral fraud that Maduro is chased out of Miraflores a la Ceaușescu. It seems that not being in government has worked wonders on Shannon.

Another surprise of 28 July elections has been the amount of praise bestowed on Chavez. Commentators that became aware of Venezuela less than a month ago maintain that Chavez was good and Maduro is bad. Former chavistas, like the Venezuelan Goebbels Andres Izarra, claim that Maduro is, somehow, the evil version of chavismo. Defenders of CNE illegalities in the past, like Margarita Lopez Maya, now recourse to poetry and wrap themselves in the Venezuelan flag as newborn democrats. I won’t even address Eva Golinger’s opinions... Such bullshit goes unchallenged, of course, because there’s no depth, no historical perspective, no knowledge of the subject matter. Very few people have been keeping an eye, documenting and reporting on Venezuela since 1999, when chavismo came to power. Even less people have done so objectively when it comes to electoral matters, even though the elephant occupied the entire tallying room, hence no one could enter.

I still maintain that what will happen is what Maduro and his criminal clique decide to happen. One thing that seems clear to all is that change can only come from within. There’s nothing the international community can do to re-establish democracy in Venezuela. The Supreme Court's electoral branch has replaced electoral authorities and has been ordered by Maduro to "verify electoral results". This comes after a sentence years ago, by the very same Supreme Court electoral branch, ruling itself out from such tasks. Maria Corina and Edmundo are making all the appeals they can, of course, but the most important one, which is the one to the Venezuelan army, keeps falling of deaf ears. Democracy, freedom, rule of law, human, civil and political rights aren’t things that can interest members of a drug cartel raking billions every year.
]]><![CDATA[Thoughts on the UK's general election]]>Mon, 24 Jun 2024 14:31:43 GMThttp://alekboyd.com/blog/thoughts-on-the-uks-general-election
Picture
The year is 2024. The UK -by any measure a developed country inhabited by "well educated" people- is still grappling with Brexit, the single biggest act of self-harm that any democratic society ever brought on itself thus far in the 21st Century. The U.S. and the election of Donald Trump ran a close second. Russia's war of agression against the Ukraine (another example of derangement at the highest levels) can't be compared for two simple reasons: 1) Russia is not a democracy, and therefore 2) Russians were never consulted on whether they approved Vladimir Putin's plan to forcefully ostracise the country from the established world order.

Brexit brought about and imposed a cataclysmic economic decline. The imbeciles that voted for it were the first victims, of course, alas little satisfaction can be derived from that sort of karma. Millions of people are unemployed, under employed in the gig economy, on zero hour contracts and going hungry in this country. Then "Recent findings from UNICEF’s review of child poverty in 39 OECD and EU countries show that child poverty has increased faster in the UK than in any other country investigated."

Amazingly, nobody will mention it. No politician will say that because of the sheer stupidity and misplaced chauvinism of 52% of the British electorate generations are suffering, and will have to continue suffering the consequences. Leaders of the Tory Party, otherwise known in popular culture as the "party of the economy", have taken turns since 2010 to wreck the economy to extreme extents.

First it was George Osborne, with his attempt to "balance the books." Balancing the books, for Osborne, David Cameron & co, meant destroying societal safety nets like council housing, the police, education and health. Thousands were dismissed and budgets were guted at all levels. Repercussions arrived quickly: councils were forced into bankruptcy, 20,000 less police officers caused a huge spike in all types of crime across the UK, lack of nurses and funding for the NHS caused thousands of unnecesary health complications and deaths, and practically the totality of the UK's education system at primary and secondary level suffers from lack of staff.

David Cameron didn't have the guts to tell the Eurosceptics within his party to fuck off, and called for the Brexit referendum. That took care of the rest.

Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak made certain that Brexit would get done. For a time, the party's motto was "Brexit means Brexit" and "Get Brexit done". None attempted to salvage the failing UK economy. Quite the contrary, they made it a badge of honor to completely and utterly eviscerate any vestige of hope in getting a benefitial trade compromise with the EU. Their chancellors did nothing to prop things up internally. It was another case of doing the exact opposite, as demonstrated by Kwasi Kwarteng's mini-budget.

While this constellation of deranged sociopaths were busy destroying everything on their sights, COVID and the Russian invasion of Ukraine happened. A consequence of having such "gifted" leaders is that the UK ended up with one of the highest number of deaths. Many people died unnecesarily due to absurd policy decisions taken by a bunch of politicians that complied with none of the rules, while ensuring that billions of pounds worth of emergency procurement would go, without bidding, to their friends and donors.

Russia's war of aggression prompted higher energy prices across the board. The decision in many European countries was to impose price controls, so that energy companies would not capitalise on extraordinary circumstance. Not in the UK, where successive Tory government allowed energy companies to act like a cartel, levelling prices up without regard for consumers. Again, the mandatory introduction of "price caps" managed the feat of boosting the profits of energy companies to unseen levels, at the detriment of the population. A normal household went from paying £50 / month to £300 / month.

Mortgages trippled. Insurance companies also copied very quikly energy companies' cartel behaviour and increased premiums to unexplainable levels. Post COVID, the "party of the economy" is fully responsibe for the UK's lack of growth compared to G20 / G7 countries. Recessions and inflation persisted longer than in similar economies, bringing a cost of living crisis that has affected virtually every household. Neither rents, nor food, clothing, and fuel prices have returned to pre-pandemic levels. None of it matters though, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak are said to have "overseen the largest set of tax rises since the Second World War".

Since 2010, when the Conservatives won the election, a series of scandals have demonstrated that this lot is not fit to govern. Corruption is as prevalent, brazen and rampant in the UK as it is in Venezuela. In fact, utterly corrupt Venezuelans have made the UK their favourite base, and some have even donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Tory Party, which pretty much like Switzerland, never saw a dollar it didn't like. Gone are the days when anyone could take David Cameron's "We've got some leaders of some fantastically corrupt countries coming to Britain... Nigeria and Afghanistan, possibly the two most corrupt countries in the world," quip seriously, in light of his own affairs with Lex Greensill.

Rishi Sunak recently called for a surprise general election without informing most of his cabinet, but some of his trusted advisors knew before hand and placed bets that could earn them, erm... "Since he stood to gain just £500, it is not so much the greed of it that stands out as the bovine stupidity of risking his reputation and jeopardising his boss’s campaign for such a relatively trivial sum."

That's the caliber of people proposing themselves as a valid alternative here. Stupidity, religion, fanaticism, ideology, chauvinism, racism, ignorance... these however are not character treats that will abandon parts of the electorate any time soon. The fact that the Tories -and others much worse like Nigel Farage- are still part of the conversation, are still invited and courted by the media, are still given platforms, and are still considered as alternatives makes me think that there's nothing "developed" about this country. It's as if people have forgotten what they have lived through since 2010, as if it never happened. A similar scenario would be that of my home country (Venezuela), where chavismo still presents itself as a viable option.

Beyond the Tories' austerity measures that pushed millions of families into entirely avoidable poverty, people in the UK seem to have forgotten that Boris Johnson tried to suspend parliament, that very parliament whose sovereignty and independence Brexiteers were purportedly so adamant in reestablishing. The Tories have also promoted and showcased some of the most racist politicians any developed, self respecting democracy has seen. How to forget Priti Patel, or Suella Braverman's (do note their names and ethnic backgrounds) views on immigrants? The Conservatives, it turns out, share another treat with Hugo Chavez: they think it is possible to turn fantasies into reality by decree. Indeed, Rishi Sunak (another quintesentially Tory name) is responsible for having made unlawful for courts to hear or challenge his government's decisions on deportation of immigrants to Rwanda. That is, in the Conservatives regime (i.e. the establishment) of one of the world's "leading democracies" the Executive eliminated separation of powers, invalidated the preeminence of the courts and voided its decisions on an issue that is only relevant to a tiny minority of people that don't have to worry about where the next mortgage / rent payment is coming from.

For those who don't know the story, one good day the Tories took a page out of Vladimir Putin's governance manual and decided that Rwanda was the ideal destination to deport immigrants that arrive in the UK. They then ruled that Rwanda was a "safe country". The courts, of course, took a different view and decided against the measure. The Tories' reaction? Invalidate court's decisions on the matter, decree that courts could no longer hear anything related to the Rwanda bill, and claim that the UK would decidedly ignore parts of the Human Rights Act and the European Convention of Human Rights that interfere with its Rwanda policy.

I am an immigrant. I can imagine myself, arriving in this country with my family in a desperate attempt to escape chavismo, and be deported to Rwanda by the "compassionate" Conservative government of Rishi Sunak. Absurd doesn't even begin to cover it...

I have been living in this country for over 24 years now, and while it will come as a surprise to my longtime readers I have to say that I can no longer entertain sterile debates about rightwing-leftwing politics. There's only right and wrong. That's it. That's all. What I have seen here is a set of deeply flawed chancers, taking advantange of equally flawed institutions for personal benefit, just like in Venezuela. The UK is not different. Another government will be formed after 4th of July, unrealizable promises are already being made, a few will benefit but I fear the majority will unfortunately continue bearing the brunt of decisions taken by people that have no connection and no interest in reality. UK institutions will continue being populated by people like Paula Vennells, Rishi Sunak or Michael Gove. They might sound different, and wear a red tie / dress instead of blue, but make no mistake: once the rot gets hold, there's no coming back. The tragedy, for hard working people, is that the moral rot is like COVID and affects everyone, whether it is believed to be real or not.

Voto castigo (punishment vote) is a term used in Spanish to describe what's about to happen in Britain. It is always difficult to predict accurately the electorate's sheer disgust towards a ruling party after terrible successive governments. I think I can confidently say that if Venezuela had fair elections chavismo would be thrown out for very many years. Since the UK still has fair elections, the hope is that the Conservatives will be relegated to third position in the General Election, so that they can spend the next decade figuring out what went wrong, or not: for many, it would be a real pleasure to see them disappear altogether.

]]><![CDATA[UK about to enter Nicolas Maduro-type of era]]>Mon, 11 Jul 2022 10:39:15 GMThttp://alekboyd.com/blog/uk-about-to-enter-nicolas-maduro-type-of-eraIt used to be said many years ago that Hugo Chavez was an "electoral phenomenon". In the opinion of people that weren't clued in and thought that elections in Venezuela were similar to those in the UK, Chavez's streak of victories were not only legitimate but proof that he had a unique appeal to the electorate.

The Conservative Party in the UK has its own Chavez, otherwise known as Boris Johnson. Like his Venezuelan counterpart, Johnson's brand of politics is to lie, at every step, about every issue. Lying is Johnson's definitive magic potion, whether as journalist, politician, campaigner, party leader, friend or husband. Lying is what he does all the time. The problem with it is that, eventually, reality catches up.

The Conservative Party knew very well indeed what they were getting when they chose Johnson as party leader. It can not be argued that Johnson's unmistakable character treat was, somewhat, missed by the Tories. In a country's whose society is peculiarly keen on classism, on keeping records, and on using the most trivial minutiae to remind people of their background and station, the Tories placed every last of Johnson's blunders and pecadilloes on the back burner.

The man who won the largest majority since Margaret Thatcher's 1987 victory was seen, like Chavez, as an "electoral phenomenon". Moreover, the radical wing of the Tory Party -in my opinion its majority- was and continues to be ecstatic over what they call "getting Brexit done". Not only was Johnson a central figure of the odiously chauvinistic Brexit campaign that ended up bankrupting the UK, but once in office he became Little Britain personified, threatening to rip international agreeements, appointing a posse of underlings and carpetbaggers that saw him as a worth-following Messiah. Just ponder for one second about the kind of person who can have respect, consideration and admiration for Boris Johnson. That would be his cabinet. That would be -in large part- the Conservative Party of the 21st century in Britain.

Now that Johnson has been forced to resign over a "newly found conscience" amongst Conservatives, we are led to believe that his underlings are not only different, but better. Never mind the fact that Rishi Sunak's only claim to fame is to have carried water for Johnson, believe or not, he is seen as a "worthy succesor". Same applies to the constellation on non-entities taking part in the Tory leadership race.

Us Venezuelans have seen this movie before of course. Everybody thought that nobody could be worse than Chavez. We then got Nicolas Maduro. Conservatives in the UK are at that critical devil that I know juncture. The leadership candidates, all of them, are nothing more than Johnson's pussilanimous sidekicks. They are not different. They are not better. They have no integrity, nor credibility beyond the party's converted. They have been lying for Johnson all along, which makes them as unsuitable for public office as their idol.

The UK is about to enter a very dark period. The Tories have demonstrated, amply, that the welfare of this nation is not their priority. Like Chavismo, the primordial consideration is to remain in power, whether that means giving the reins to someone like Johnson, or Theresa May, or David Cameron. The Conservatives haven't had a decent leader since Thatcher, and even that is questionable. They have no care for country, society, nor for the economy. As the monumental economic disaster unleashed by Brexit unravels, the Tories can never claim again only they can be trusted with fixing the economy. Their insular and retrograde mentality, in fact, have destroyed the UK's economy. It will be decades before it gets back to where it was or should be.

For Johnson, it was all in jest. Inconsequential. The leader behind the largest number of COVID deaths in Europe, breaking lockdown rules, Brexit, appointing a serial sexual abuser as party whip, lying to Parliament, allowing rampant corruption and gutting institutions has no remorse, neither do his sycophantic minions and party colleagues. The Tories are the scum of the earth, just like Chavismo.

]]><![CDATA[Public education in the UK equals Government-sanctioned discrimination]]>Mon, 19 Sep 2016 11:46:17 GMThttp://alekboyd.com/blog/190916-public-education-in-the-uk-equals-government-sanctioned-discriminationA debate about grammar schools is currently dominating the UK's public sphere. PM Theresa May seems willing to take Michael Gove's "education reforms" even further, by letting already established schools become grammar schools. For those unfamiliar with Grammar Schools, do read the clarification: in theory these are schools that put academic achievement at the top of the agenda.

The UK also has a well reputed private education system. As with many things in this country, they've taken the definition of public and turned it into its head, so when someone is referred to as a "public school" boy / girl it actually means privately educated. Most senior UK politicians, regardless of ideology, were educated in private schools. And then went to Oxford or Cambridge, something the vast majority of students in this country will never be able to do.

Comprehensives is the name given to schools that are neither grammars, nor private. It has been claimed that as much as 90% of children in Britain attend comprehensives.

As a father of comprehensives' pupils, I can attest to the monumental failure of primary and secondary public education in this country. It all started many years ago, when our eldest made a comment about the unfairness of handing homework "...when such and such never hand in any..." We then found that, as a matter of standard practice across all comprehensives, pupils are classified broadly in three groups: those who do well, actively participate in class, learn, do homework, etc.; those in the middle that scrape by; and those who while going to school everyday never hand in any homework, hardly participate in class, and so on. We also found that when it came to homework, assignments were given according to perceived capacity: that is homework for the first group was different than that of the other two groups. This government-sanctioned discrimination wasn't something we were expecting. Even coming from a developing country, where every pupil gets exactly the same homework / treatment, and it is down to the student and its parents to either perform, or seek extra help in order to progress to the next level.

This issue brought the second, monumental, failure of the UK's public education system into perspective: no pupil repeats a year. Ever. Not learning what is supposed to be learned at a given year according to the national curriculum has no consequences for the "less able" groups. They are all herded along, taught about "fairness", about how it isn't about winning but about "taking part", and other such PC nonsense that, basically, squanders their potential and causes almost irreparable damage to their life expectations. Thus, a huge amount of students "progress" along primary and secondary school. Progress itself is impossible to quantify, for exams are never taken. In primary school, only once we heard about some kind of academically rigorous tests being taken (SATs). Only once, in six years, and only in the case of our youngest due to changes in policy. In the case of our eldest, no meaningful test were ever imposed during the entire primary education period. How are parents then supposed to know whether children are learning, and where they're at in the learning process related to different subjects? This brought the third dramatic realisation into view: school reports were never about academic performance in maths or geography, but about whether children participate in class, whether they are kind to their peers, respectful to their teachers, wear the uniform correctly and show up on time.

Our eldest went without proper school exams until she was 16 years old, when GCSEs had to be taken. For 16 years, in none of the schools she attended, anyone ever thought appropriate to prepare pupils for GCSEs. No one in the Ministry of Education ever thought that, perhaps, it'd be good to introduce in the curriculum some kind of exams technique subject. Not even as an extra curricular class. And so, after 16 years of getting meaningless reports about how she was "a pleasure to teach", nearly 40 different tests were crammed into a three-four week period. The stress, on millions of teenagers, is almost unbearable. Fear of failure is, all of a sudden, shot into their young lives, for without a successful performance in GCSEs no progress into AS and A levels can be contemplated. Having heard for 16 years that "it's OK to fail", that "life is fair", that regardless of academic performance "you'll be OK", the prospect of not making it becomes all too real. An example of this are schools in whose prospectuses one can read claims like "over 90% of our students attained A grades in at least two of the chosen subjects..." What no school will print is that such levels are, in some cases, product of a brutal policy of throwing out non-performing AS students, rather than the result of good teaching. In a case known to our family, a third of a class of AS students were dismissed. The dismissal took place late in August, leaving students about a week to either find a new school on their own (old school doesn't bother with finding suitable places elsewhere), or dropping out, which is what most do.

I remember we went to a school meeting once, when secondary school was about to start, and we were given this spiel about how parents, teachers and pupils were to communicate to each other through a notebook that was to be shared by all three parties, and in which all impressions, information and comments were to be made, as a form of record keeping, so that parents could know, at any given time, how children were performing academically. When shortcomings about certain topics of a particular subject became evident, we called for a meeting with the respective teacher who had the chutzpah of informing us that repeated questions during class, something we have always encouraged as the best way to clarify doubts whenever these arise, was "disruptive". When we explained to our daughter, during the meeting with the teacher in question, that she was actually getting paid to teach by taxpayers, and that her primary responsibility was, indeed, to teach, this cause a further public humiliation taken on somebody who was simply trying to understand something. So it's OK to "actively participate", just don't do it too often because it's "disruptive".

Having missed any potential issue written in the infamous notebook, we asked one of the nice teachers whether seeking private tutors would sort some of the shortcomings. "Noooooo!" he said, adding "she'll be alright I'm sure". How can these idiots tell whether a student will be alright, or not, considering the above? The fact is they can't. Predictions of performance are made on the basis of the three-tier group system described, a system that starts early in primary school and carries on to end of secondary. The possibility of improvement is a consideration that has no place in such long-termed system. For another wicked aspect of this irrational system is that application to next level, once students reach end of secondary school, is based on predictions rather than actual marks. Students willing to get onto university upon conclusion of AS and A levels (pre university), get to apply for universities based upon predicted rather than actual grades. University applications need to be sent through a system called UCAS. Applications for entry in September of following year must be made in October of previous year at the latest. Candidates must choose topics of study as well as universities. Conditional offers are made on the basis of predicted grades. Predicted grades are given before October deadline, while actual grades are given in August, by which time is too late to apply for entry in the coming month. Predictions-beating students have to either go through clearing (basically pick left over vacancies), or contemplate a gap year. Needless to say that a life can change in nine months, but such probability is of no one's interest. Students are condemned to apply based on the very subjective criteria of a bunch of teachers that can't be bothered to do their jobs properly.

The system is so dysfunctional that we have actually got reports claiming proficiency in German, to give one example, when children aren't capable to even count one to twenty in that language. Sports, music, and foreign languages aren't given any consideration in the public education system. German teachers don't speak German, sports teaching is done by people who once ran a sack race, and if parents want their children to learn any instruments, or even the basics, they have to go private. Then one hears politicians talking about foreign language shortcomings, or the alarming obesity and increased risks of heart diseases, but none seems prepared to improve the education of 90% of children in this country. As far as Central London is concerned, no comprehensive inter-school leagues, in any sport, are organised, and apart from a once-a-year sports day, sports education is largely letting children lose in a large space for half an hour at a time, so they can shout, run about and play. No systematic approach exists to get children into football, or cricket, or any athletic discipline. 

When comprehensive-educated children get into university largely thanks to committed pushy parents, they immediately realise that nearly everything taught at primary and secondary level is useless. Life is but a competition. Fairness is an utopia. Winners take all and rule the world. It's not OK to fail. Lack of education condemns most people to a lifetime of poverty and misery, apart from ill health.

The ruling class in the UK is incapable of seeing this reality. It's completely alien to most of them, regardless of party affiliations. The saddest thing is that discrimination is, effectively, a government-sanctioned policy. In the current setting, comprehensive students, all 90% of UK's students, belong to the "less able" group. Privately educated and grammar students have a clear and obvious advantage. The best universities fill their quotas with the first two groups, and the third is left pretty much to their own devices. It'd be impossible to argue that every student is capable of gaining a place and shining in Oxbridge, but every student should compete on an equal basis. As it stands, the government's policy is to ensure that the system will always favour the 10%. An Eton-educated, "less able" son of a Russian thug will always be favoured over a bright comprehensive pupil by UK elite universities. Employers in the City of London can clearly tell the difference...]]>