Image result for jewish yellow stars


Perhaps what we need is an “epistocracy”, where “votes are in some way weighted according to basic political knowledge”, says Brennan. In short, let’s have IQ tests and give greater power to the clever over the dumb.


Educated?  What does that mean?

The BBC’s assertion is that those who voted for Brexit and for Trump are uneducated, we’ll ignore the other smears about them being racists and bigots, let’s just ask what the BBC means by  ‘uneducated’.

We are told that such voters do not have university degrees and thus are ‘uneducated’ and by extension they also lack the progressive values that come from such an education, apparently…the humane values that underpin the progressives’ obsession with open borders, mass migration, extravagantly indulgent human rights and toleration of the intolerant to the dangerous detriment of the very progressive society that they supposedly represent.

But, a reasonable person might ask, is a degree in maths, sociology or english say ,the only indicator of a mind that is ‘educated’, one that is open to the world, one that understands not only what is happening but can draw rational, intelligent and informed conclusions, or indeed an indicator at all?  A mechanic or a dustman or a plumber are just as capable of assessing economic, political and social events as someone with a university degree.  They  have families, they need to earn a living, they need a home, they need schools and hospitals, they need safe streets and stability, they need to know the future is working for them.  They very definitely take an interest in what is happening.  It is the ultimate lazy journalism to stereotype them as ignorant, ill-informed and stupid people.  They live in the real world where the decisions of politicians have real consequences for their lives.  They do not live in some theoretical utopian dreamland where the BBC seems to live its life, where mass migration has no consequences other than to be a huge benefit, where Islam is a religion of peace, where money grows on trees and the EU is a generous benefactor doling out love and largesse to one and all and takes a kind interest in your views.

The real education is that gained by people living their lives, qualified by experience.  They can see the GP surgery waiting rooms full of migrants, they can see that their kids can’t get the school of choice because of the huge numbers of migrant children, they can see the houses their children can’t get because of the surge in migration, they can see their wages slashed as they are undercut by cheap imported labour, they can see their own culture and society beng maligned and undermined by an aggressive intolerant minority aided and abetted by the ‘elite’, they can see themselves being portrayed as racists and bigots, stupid and uneducated neanderthals abused,vilified and criminalised for being white.

Image result for union jack star

How long before they are made to wear badges just as the Jews were made to wear?  Perhaps little union flags as badges of shame, indicators of their stupidity, ignorance, racism and unacceptable views.  Think it won’t happen?  Think again…the BBC of course already operates such a policy in effect as it constantly labels such voters in such a way…but it’s not just the BBC that wants to label them and curtail their freedom of expression and indeed their democratic rights…

It was ridiculous to ask “ignoramuses” to decide on the future of the EU, said famed atheist Richard Dawkins. The public, being ignorant of “the highly complex economic and social issues facing our country”, should “have no say on our EU membership”, he said.

Leading philosopher AC Grayling denounced the politics of the “crowd”. “Rule by crowd acclamation is a very poor method of government”, he said, since most members of the crowd, dim-witted specks in the mass, are susceptible to “misinformation, distortion, false promises [and] tabloid urgings”.

That is, our minds are easily fried by demagogues and lying newspapers; we’re controlled more by sentiment than reason.

“Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant”, says a headline in Foreign Policy magazine. The piece, written by Jason Brennan, American professor and author of the The Case Against Democracy, says Trump owes his victory to “the uninformed”.

But this goes beyond Trump, says Brennan. The general public’s stupidity calls into question the whole idea of making decisions democratically. Perhaps what we need is an “epistocracy”, where “votes are in some way weighted according to basic political knowledge”, says Brennan. In short, let’s have IQ tests and give greater power to the clever over the dumb.

This isn’t an extreme view anymore. Being anti-democratic has become positively fashionable among the chattering classes.

We are no longer successfully “keeping the mob from the gates”, says Matthew Parris in the Spectator. It’s been a while since observers openly talked about “the mob”. Trump’s victory calls into question the wisdom of having “government by the people”, Parris says. So who should govern? Kings? Priests? Parris?

We have become “too democratic”, says Andrew Sullivan. The “passions of the mob” have become too great a player in political life. We need a better “elitist sorting mechanism” to prevent people’s “untrammelled emotions” from dominating political discourse.


The BBC goes  on and on about hate crimes linking them to Brexit and yet studiously ignores such hate speech that seeks to ‘ethnically cleanse’ Britain of white people and their culture, that seeks to introduce a McCarthyist approach to race and politics that makes certain races and political and social views unacceptable and makes being white a crime.

If this goes on much longer Brexit and Trump are just the beginning.  Europe will burn and the BBC as the chief propagandist will be top of the funeral pyre.



Bookmark the permalink.

83 Responses to QBE

  1. Dover Sentry says:

    As Tony Blair and John Major said about the Brexit victory:

    “The tyranny of the majority”


    72% of voters in England and Wales voted for Brexit.


    • All Lives Matter says:

      And yet they also think Clinton should be president because she won the popular vote, based solely on California’s disproportionate population. THAT would be ‘tyranny of the majority’ – Brexit, a result backed by every area in England except Londonistan, is not. In fact, the popular vote method actually made the margin of victory less crushing than it would have been had we used a college system. We’d have been looking at around 80% in favour of leaving had we done so.


      • MartinW says:

        When anyone raises the question of the ‘popular vote’ in the US election, the BBC is careful to avoid pointing out that elections neither in the US nor the UK are determined in that way. Anyway, I wonder how many of the 20-30 millions illegal immigrants in the US (concentrated in California, and sanctuary cities) voted in the Presidential election. A large number, is my guess.


      • NCBBC says:

        This same argument popped up today, at church (CoE), that Clinton won the popular vote. When I proposed, what if Teresa May won more seats in parliament, but Corbyn won the popular vote, would that make Jeremy Corbyn prime minister?

        Hushed silence. Error, No Compute. Error, No Compute. The vicar, polite as ever, changed the topic.


        • GCooper says:

          And compare the number or UKIP MPs with the number of SNP MPs against the votes cast.

          So much for the ‘popular vote’ myth!


    • Dadad says:

      But what about all the people who didn’t vote, either in the USA or here ?

      Are they uneducated ? Or were they smart ?


      • NCBBC says:

        I dont know Dadad. What are they?


      • johnnythefish says:

        But what about all the people who didn’t vote, either in the USA or here ?

        Are they uneducated ? Or were they smart ?

        Who knows? Whatever they are, unless they had a very good excuse for not voting then they have no right to moan about the result (as many of our precious little Snowflakes did).


    • NCBBC says:

      Anyone who believes in AGW, aka as Climate Change, is obviously uneducated, and worse, easily swayed by gross propaganda, and thus ineligible to vote.


      • Tothepoint says:

        Whilst we are at it NCBBC…

        Anyone who believes that ‘Islam’ is ‘a religion of peace’ clearly does not possess any ability to educate themselves, as child raping serial killer and so-called prophet ‘mad mo’ set out his unchangeable life instructions to all death cult followers, mandating the submission of the entire planet to allah, and annihilate any resistance…..all this, 1400 years ago!! You would think 1400 years of slaughter and rape of the infidels would be enough time to work out the psychopathic warlord wasnt messing around!

        Anyone who believes that ‘gender dysmorphia’ is not a mental illness, and are willing to ignore everything we know about genetics, procreation, chromosomes…and allow science to be trumped by the feelings of a specific person, is clearly mentally ill themselves.

        Anyone who believes that the only important and deciding factor in determining what someone believes, hopes for, their aspiration and dreams for the future, and more importantly how everyone else has to treat them, is soley down to the amount of melanin that person has in their skin. Social conditions, family structure, discipline, education, culture, religion, have absolutely no impact at all on how a persons life plays out, and how successful they are…anyone who thinks this utter bullshit are dangerous, white hating morons, who need to be locked up for traitory against their own people


    • Amounderness Lad says:

      Rather the Tyranny of the Majority than the Dictatorship of the Self-interested, Elitist Minority. The latter can only create a return to the days of Serfdom with the general population suffering being subjugated to a small cadre of the modern day version of the Robber Barons.


      • Amounderness Lad says:

        Oh dear, today I must be one of those considered too stupid to be allowed a vote. My above comment should have appeared as a reply/comment on the post of Dover Sentry at 9:18 am. Why it didn’t appear there I haven’t a clue and if I try to copy it to there it is rejected as a duplicate post. If you check Dover Sentry’s post first mine makes more sense than it does here. Sorry about that, folks.


  2. Britannia Patriot says:

    And these are the people that gasp in shock if anybody so much as suggests that IQ is a factor in the various human races and intelligence…….so I don’t get how you need to have a high IQ to be able to vote but don’t need the same level of IQ to become an immigrant to our country. Hmmmm. I’m confused. This is a hard exam. Maybe I’m too stupid to vote?

    The other point is that these anti-democrat, leftard scum cannot see their direct lineage to the National Socialists and their Communist forbears. If anyone is ‘literally’ Hitler, it is these types in the left.
    I am also rather astonished at the behaviour of the increasingly idiotic Richard Dawkins. I get his clear knowledge of his particular subject area, but he is talking out of his lefty arse on anything political. His anti God book was also tedious. Although I am not supporter of religion, I do see the benefits of a spiritual viewpoint shared by most of ‘your’ people as a glue to hold your society and tribe together. Proof of this seems to be the fragmentation and dismemberment of the west that we see around us.
    anyway, a bit off topic. This situation with the left is likely to lead to civil war because we practical people will not put up with these impractical people for much longer…


  3. Mice Height says:

    Yet the Regressive Left’s policy is to import voters from low IQ regions of the world, and exchange tax-payer’s money for votes.


  4. Demon says:

    The two points that immediately sprung to mind when reading this (other than the obvious ones) are:

    1. I am an atheist but am ashamed that Richard Dawkins thinks he speaks for me. Although I don’t believe in religion myself, I believe that everyone is entitled to believe what they like as long as it doesn’t interfere with other people’s beliefs.

    2. There is no such thing as “too much democracy”. There can be (and is) too much screwing of democracy by those who think they are our betters (BBC, MSM, Academia etc.) but they are undemocratic. True democracy where all sides are given the same fair chance is the ideal. There may be a theoretical point where too much democracy stops the business of running the government but we are far from that yet.


    • Dadad says:

      For a full and proper democracy, see The Harrogate Agenda.


      • NCBBC says:

        The Swiss have had Direct Democracy for ages. The Swiss decide on all issues if they want, including which fighter aircraft they want. Yes, it goes that far. Period.

        But this requires a populace that respects a decision once reached. The Swiss do. Its clear that people in the UK and USA, established democracies of long lineage, don’t.

        As Trump would put it, ” Sad”.


  5. Owen Morgan says:

    Somebody should point out to the oh-so-clever Jason Brennan that using “dumb” to mean “stupid” is incredibly offensive. In English, dumb means “unable to speak”: a misfortune, which does not indicate stupidity. It is the German “dumm” which means “stupid”. Brennan’s expression, “give greater power to the clever over the dumb”, obviously implies the German word.

    A metaphorical use of the English word, however, meaning “give greater power to the [self-esteemed] clever over those denied the power to express themselves” would be a more accurate version of what he is actually demanding.


  6. vesnadog says:

    “Educated? What does that mean?”

    It appears to mean the elites of this world can say outrageous things and be accepted as “Educated”. Take fort example a close friend of Dawkins, a certain Peter Singer! The following are just snippets for his world without Christianity/Judaism:

    From his books Rethinking Life and Death and Writings on an Ethical Life.
    Peter Singer is an atheist and is up there alongside fellow atheist R. Dawkins, and is considered a world-class philosopher and advocate of Atheism.

    Some of this guys philosophy, is in favor of infanticide, euthanasia and, not surpriseingly – animal rights!

    Another of Singer’s anti-God proposals concerns the right to kill the child even after birth!

    1. On how mothers should be permitted to kill their offspring until the age of 28 days:

    “My colleague Helga Kuhse and I suggest that a period of twenty-eight days after birth might be allowed before an infant is accepted as having the same right to life as others.”

    2. On why infants aren’t normal human beings with rights to life and liberty:

    “Characteristics like rationality, autonomy and self-consciousness…make a difference. Infants lack these characteristics. Killing them, therefore, cannot be equated with killing normal human beings.”

    Being highly educated tends to make him or her very arrogant, proud and out of touch with the real world in which they live!


    • NCBBC says:

      In todays dumbed down university education, a degree is a black mark.


    • NCBBC says:

      Singer’s proposal if followed, means that Singer himself should have been killed at a young age. Society should make that decision, as the mother is clearly too emotional to make up her mind. So too should both his parents, and then their parents etc etc. Clearly this Singer is a maniac, or suffers from brain damage.

      I would suggest the latter, which means Singer should be euthanized. Either way, Singer should be euthanised, humanely of course.


      • G.W.F. says:

        I have often disagreed with Singer and do not share his views, and even claim to have a stronger standpoint towards animals than he does.

        However, unlike the left he is prepared to argue every step of the way and throughout his life he has never backed out of an argument, attempted intimidation or ran to a safe space.

        His advocacy of post birth abortion, or killing unwanted babies, follows his utilitarian logic all the way. If the baby is not a person that can express preferences (Singer is a preference utilitarian) and no one will be caused to suffer by its death, then it should die. And not by withholding therapy but actively killing.

        My objection to this is long and based on my objections to utilitarian theory. As a preference utilitarian Singer holds that we should not inflict pain and suffering on any being that can experience it – this includes most animals and humans. However special protection should be given to beings that can express preferences, for they meet his definition of personhood. This includes humans with intact mental faculties and indeed higher primates, whales and dolphins. Fetuses, infants, and various others whose mental impairment excludes expressing preferences can be killed.

        Thinking through Singer’s position it is clearer than rights theory, dubbed by Bentham as ‘nonsense on stilts’.

        Singer’s case for infanticide was widely criticised, but when his book on the subject (which he wrote with Helga Khuse) went out of print, I took the initiative and republished it because I want his views out in the open so that university students and others can details the flaws in his arguments and counter them.
        We should note that in condemning Singer we are condemning a system of thought tracing back to Jeremy Bentham which underpins much of British morality and jurisprudence. Singer merely took these arguments all the way. And we don’t like it.

        Worth noting that Singer was a student of RM Hare at Oxford, and borrowed many of Hare’s arguments which I also reject. But Hare had respect for argument. I was with him at a visit to Auschwitz when he recalled his time in a Japanese POW camp and survived somehow looking like one of the skeletons we saw in the camps. He vowed he would make ethics practical and did so.
        In this respect Singer is a genuine follower of Hare. His arguments are wrong, but he will not avoid a battle, and for that alone he has my respect.


        • G.W.F. says:

          I have used the word ‘personist’ to describe Singer’s elevation of beings who are deemed to be persons.

          One of his critics pointed out that as Singer is a Jew, coming from a Jewish tradition, which he has rejected, his veneration of persons is a secularized return to the doctrine concerning the chosen people.


    • Nibor says:

      Rock a bye baby on the tree top .

      Yes let’s go back to the Dark Ages , when the Vikings left a newborn baby in the bough of a tree to see if it could survive .


  7. JosF says:

    “let’s just ask what the BBC means by ‘uneducated’.”

    Hmm To me that translates as People who dont buy the BBC’s lies and propaganda therefore they must be stupid be they a binman or a brain surgeon In the BBC bubble verse Meanwhile hear in the real world there are plenty of binmen and brain surgeons and everyone else who no longer buy the BBC’s {EU funded} lies and propaganda and go elsewhere for their news and current affairs. And increasing given the figures that I have seen for the increasing decline in newspaper sales and TV viewing they are applying the same principles to the rest of the MSM As well as the BBC as they awake and realise that they are being lied to


  8. Kaiser says:

    hmmm i totally agree , lets start by disallowing every remoaner from voting ever again as they are too stupid to understand the the very simplest of voting methods a referendum


  9. CranbrookPhil says:

    Tim Stanley last night on Radio 4 quoted someone saying if you are not a Marxist when you are eighteen you haven’t a heart but if you are still a Marxist at thirty you haven’t a brain.


  10. NISA says:

    On the question of alternative electorates:-
    1) The possibility of Surrey County Council holding a referendum to approve a 15% increase in the council tax will be interesting. Councils have generally avoided taking this route to increase their budgets, presumably in the knowledge that people don’t vote to pay more tax. However, I wonder if they are being unnecessarily timid. I presume that the referendum will be decided by the usual franchise, but that is a lot different to the number of people who directly pay the council tax.

    2) The elite presumably only would only seek to introduce voting based on education following the failure to get their way by the extension of the franchise to naive & idealistic 16 & 17 years olds.


  11. Alicia Sinclair says:

    This is intellectual eugenics.
    Not even intellectual-but outright discrimination, based soley on how many years you allowed your brain to be owned by the educating classes.
    If I had spent 22 years in State educational facilities-am I not twice the state stooge compared to somebody who only stayed(by compulsion) for eleven years?
    So twice the useful idiot, twice the privileged guilt ridden spoon-fed cretin who believes the BBC and reads the Guardian in the staffroom?
    So it`s ME who should not get the vote-because I`m feeble minded and dependent for my living and opinions upon the state? My vote is paid for.
    Unlike the eleven year-brain marinaded girl who left, took a job and paid her way in the real world-and whose taxes go to fund those who pimp off the state for twice as long as SHE did.
    This educational discrimination, this class based spite aimed at those who actually are NOT State stooges and pacifiers is truly evil. Need to take a few of the cabbages to court-this is discrimination and eugenics that Hitler and Stalin could only dream of.


  12. Guest Who says:

    Numbers matter to Aunty, except when they don’t.

    Suspect Don’s latest tweet may have put a patio heater amongst the snowflakes, comparing those who live in Washington with those who tune in on Planet Earth.


  13. John Bull says:

    I don’t know how these Left Wing Hacks can say that the Educated voted against Brexit and the Un-Educated voted for Brexit.
    Education takes many forms, such as you can have an Oxford don who is well educated but knows very little of life and the real world particularly if he’s been living in his own little full time protected university world with little or no responsibility.
    Whereas you can have another person who is not gained any knowledge of Greek mythology but has the experience of life in the real world and all the problems and hurdles and responsibly that involves.


    • johnnythefish says:

      We have seen it with lefty trolls who have visited this website in the past.

      Whilst intelligent and articulate they are at the same time completely lacking in logic and common sense.


      • Beltane says:

        I think a significant step towards growing up is gaining the ability to distinguish between intelligence and wisdom.


  14. crist says:

    The white working class, particularly males, are underrepresented in higher education. So having already disadvantaged them, such a policy would also effectively disenfranchise them.


  15. NCBBC says:

    “Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant”, says a headline in Foreign Policy magazine. The piece, written by Jason Brennan, American professor and author of the The Case Against Democracy, says Trump owes his victory to “the uninformed”.

    Hang on. Clinton won the popular vote. So her supporters are more uninformed then Trump supporters.

    Once again we see, that perfessors are unqualified to teach, as well as vote.


  16. RJ says:

    “Perhaps what we need is an “epistocracy”, where “votes are in some way weighted according to basic political knowledge”, says Brennan. In short, let’s have IQ tests and give greater power to the clever over the dumb.”

    I’m not quite sure of the argument here. Are we to repeal the whole of the 1832 Reform Act and allow the oligarchs to select MPs to represent their Rotton Boroughs, or should we just go part-way and allow every university to elect an MP, with two each for Oxford and Cambridge?

    How are we serfs supposed to understand our betters when there is such a lack of clarity in what is being proposed?

    Now I shall have to find my French Dictionary to look up the meaning of “A la lanterne”.


  17. johnnythefish says:

    So how will Dawkins, Brennan, the BBC and their authoritarian ilk explain why 43% of ABs voted to leave?

    What is lacking in their education, personality and upbringing that made them decide getting out of an undemocratic, sclerotic, failing economic and political experiment would be a good idea?



  18. StewGreen says:

    EDUCATED = “Non apostate”
    All the Anti-Trump rally crowds lacked was the stones in their hands to complete their ritual stoning of Trump.

    I was trying to think about the craziness our our MSM banging on about
    – The size of Anti Trump Crowds (when they previously kept silent about Trump rally crowd size)
    – How he can never be redeemed* cos he spoke crassly about Billionaire groupie women in a PRIVATE conversation (*even tho 97% of men excluding me have spoken similarly)

    ..And I realised of course it’s what you see in the politics of Islamic nations.
    “Ah that politician built the roads and put in the electricity
    BUT BUT he once, once implied something slightly derogatory about the Prophet !


    • BBCReject says:

      Rather arrogant all this talk of ‘educated’ and ‘uneducated’, and rather pathetic to be honest – clutching at straws again.

      I may not be particularly clever, but I’m certainly well educated (HND, BEng, PhD among other qualifications), and yet I voted Brexit and probably would have voted for Trump if I was American too. Perhaps I’m just a freak? Well, no, a number of my generally intelligent and very well educated friends and colleagues, of all ages, also voted Brexit and have spoken favourably (or at least neutrally) about Trump too.

      Why then do we buck this much spoken of trend for the ‘educated’ to vote Remain/Clinton? The only reason I’ve been able to come up with is that we’re all scientists and engineers, and maybe the masses of the ‘educated’ voting for Remain/Clinton were arts graduates of some kind?

      It’s interesting to note exactly what percentage of graduates are in the hard sciences and engineering, and what percentage in the arts. I’m not about to say those who graduate in arts degrees are less intellectual than those who graduate in science, or engineering, as I don’t think it’s true in many cases, but ‘Mickey Mouse’ degrees (the BIG growth area in tertiary education over the last 20 years) are entirely arts based. If I was a not particularly bright school leaver who had been conned, sorry ‘encouraged’, into higher education would I chose a degree in let’s say Applied Physics and Mechanical Engineering at a Russell Group Uni, or a degree in let’s say Interpretative Media Studies at Brighton? Especially as the first might well require 4 Bs including Physics and Maths, whereas the second would let me in with 2 Ds no subjects specified, and could probably be persuaded to accept that E in Hairdressing at a pinch?

      Would be interesting if they did relate voting weighting to IQ, I’m not sure the result would be what Dawkins (senility is tragic) and chum think at all. Dawkins is just another kind of ‘has been’ celebrity thinking people want to listen to what they have to say and their views are somehow more relevant than the dustman’s… he’s no better, in fact, than Madonna, or Geldof.


      • Diane-abbotts-penis says:

        Well one of my Mrs mates was banging on about leavers and being enriched by the RoP and she has an MA in Interfaith Studies….enough said I think.


  19. Justin Casey says:

    Now that Trump is President is it okay for me to draw attention to this little snippet of information relating to the previous incumbents life prior to politics??


    • StewGreen says:

      I don’t think an unsubstantiated image proves such an extraordinary claim
      Yours is probably from this wacky page

      It’s already on a Conspiracy website with a DIFFERENT name instead of Obama’s


      • Justin Casey says:

        Perhaps it is….. However….. after reading this article ….
        I felt well…. why not??
        In particular may i draw your attention to this passage which is directly underneath the first picture on that page… as follows…
        “Crowds on the National Mall just before Donald Trump’s inauguration in 2017 (left) and Barack Obama’s in 2009. Photograph: Reuters”
        Throughout this article the author has repeatedly used the phrase ..
        “just before Donald Trump’s inauguration” and then followed with a comparison picture of Obamas` inauguration which was obviously taken DURING and not prior… Using pictures sourced from Reuters it almost makes it look bona fide doesn`t it? How is it that thier readership can be fooled so easily??? An edited phrase here, an omission there, and an entire article based on fallacy……
        The time lapse picture was so obvious…. By omitting any mentioning of designated times for the Obama picture from 2009, just a vague reference of `prior` and the same for the Trump picture they have once again published content which has no actual content… Are people (even Gaurdian readers really that f**king stupid they can`t see it too??)

        As usual commments on the page are disabled so nobody can call bulls*t …..


        • engineerdownunder says:

          But the whole story is manufactured nonsense. There will be many factors determining who attends, not least the weather forecast and transport links. But anyway it is of no import how many people attend the Inauguration. Trump won the election and is President.

          The BBC bizarrely want to portray that he has lost all support already. That the wimmins march is more numerous than his support. BS.


        • NCBBC says:

          Lets see what factors were present at this inauguration then Obama’s.

          1. More access to TV and online, via a smartphone

          2. Blacks are a majority in the DC area. For them to attend the inauguration of the first Black president, would be history itself.

          3. Many people, who would have thought of attending, would have been put off by the left and Democrat supporters, of threats of riots and violence. A promise they delivered. Who would like to take their family to such an event, when one can watch it on TV or Smartphone?

          The figure we should be looking at, if it matters at all, is how many people watched the inauguration ONLINE or TV.

          In any case, this is all trivial. This is the left as usual, grasping at straws – in this case fictitious ones.


  20. Diane-abbotts-penis says:

    It doesn’t compute. I’m educated (HNC, BSc and MSc), I’m youngish (34) and have a ‘middle class ‘ job (consultant engineer). According to Albeeb I should have voted to remain?

    What gives?


    • boohanna says:


      You were manipulated by a Putin brain-ray.

      Not your fault.


    • NCBBC says:

      Sorry Dianne

      Your degrees are inappropriate, and unfit for purpose, for making political choices. You need re-education in Social Studies, Political Science (the real stuff), or Media Studies.


  21. Diane-abbotts-penis says:

    The mistake of course is to confuse academic achievement with general intelligence.

    They aren’t necessarily the same!


  22. StewGreen says:

    The 30 million women march : who voted for Trump


  23. Spacemonkey says:

    Ever since democracy was first devised, 2500 years ago in ancient Athens, it has had it’s vocal critics. Plato was notable for his objection to democracy, and his argument against it? The people are too stupid to govern themselves. Not much has changed in the last 2500 years, has it?


    • ToobiWan says:

      I think quite a bit has changed from the Athenian model, S, some might argue not for the better either. For one thing, under Athenian democracy, we wouldn’t have Merkel in charge in Germany (or the EU); May as PM in the UK, even Thatcher wouldn’t have figured and the likes of Hillary wouldn’t have even got as far as the elections as women were not allowed in politics.
      Others who were disenfranchised were slaves and foreigners.


    • boohanna says:

      Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” is very instructive I feel.



  24. Arthurp says:

    Also remember – 43% of white college Graduates voted for President Trump. Yes that was down on the number that voted for Romney, but it is by no means ‘very few’.

    Trump of course did very well amongst Latino voters (for a Republican) and not too bad amongst African Americans (for a Republican) – something the BBC haven’t yet managed to spin.

    (I gather that Canadian female snowflakes are amazed that they aren’t being allowed into the US to protest violently against the President – who would have thought it!)


  25. Nibor says:

    Well if only Pik Botha had waited he would have seen the intelligentsia come round to the Apartheid way of thinking .


    • Lucy Pevensey says:

      How is it that people who have never read the Koran, the biography of MohamMAD or studied Middle Eastern histories & traditions feel they are “educated” enough to inform us of the nature & structure of Islam?
      Why is it that they think they are qualified to contradict & reject the assertions of those who have?


  26. EUTV says:


    If they don’t want the uneducated to vote perhaps they denounce those that called for any resident EU citizen to vote in the referendum. I’ll hazard a guess most of those unskilled imports are also uneducated too.

    Come to think of it, won’t be many voting Labour next time – its the party of the working class surely?


  27. Lucy Pevensey says:

    I suggest, dumbed-down democracy.

    Democracy eradicated in it’s current form and returned only to those who are educated & intelligent enough to support the hive mind.


  28. Lucy Pevensey says:

    “We are no longer successfully “keeping the mob from the gates”, says Matthew Parris

    The mob? Queue George Orwell (yet again) 😉
    Law-abiding voters = mob.
    Violent demonstrators = intellectual.


  29. Martin Pinder says:

    It must be remembered that the ‘educated classes’ have caused untold misery to humanity throughout history & have no monopoly of virtue. The ‘Committee of Public Safety’ of the French revolutionary ‘Terror’ was composed of ‘educated’ people. The Bolshevik central committee was composed of ‘educated’ people. A lot of the Nazis were ‘educated’ people & so on & so forth. So all this business about ‘educated’ people being better able to judge what is good for us is a load of nonsense. Do-Gooders abound, but they never worry about whether their ideas actually DO any good.


    • GCooper says:

      And never forget: Pol Pot was an ‘intellectual’.


      • Up2snuff says:

        And the Minister who dismantled Grammar education in the UK, thus disadvantaging tens or hundreds of thousands of clever but relatively poor, ‘working class’ children, was the intellectual – elite educated – Anthony Crosland MP.


        • Jump says:

          Ah yes, Antony Crosland, educated at Highgate School (founded 1565) and Trinity, Oxford (founded the previous year).

          And what did he do as Secretary of State for Education to increase opportunity for those who’d not enjoyed the kind of schooling he received? Retain grammars and start funding secondary moderns properly? Nah. According to his wife’s biography, Crosland is supposed to have told her, ‘If it’s the last thing I do, I’m going to destroy every fucking grammar school in England. And Wales and Northern Ireland.’

          All in the name of social engineering, though. So that’s alright.


          • 60022Mallard says:

            I very fortuately just missed comprehensivation in my county from 1973.

            Strangely those who did not should now be the ones at the top of businesses etc., allowing for working your way up.

            Is it any surprise the egalitarians bemoan the backgrounds of “those at the top” when mixed ability classes, prizes for all, the bright will improve the less bright canards failed to produce improvement at the bottom, and almost certainly held back those at the top of the state system leaving the field clear for the privately educated?


  30. cb says:

    The notion that only the uneducated voted for Trump is fake news. According to CNN’s exit polling, the breakdown of the college graduate vote in the US election is this:

    All graduates – Trump 44% Clinton 49%
    White male graduates Trump 53% Clinton 39%
    Female white graduates Trump 44% Clinton 51%

    Although Trump loses in in two of these demographics, his share of the vote is substantial. The share of the ethnic graduate vote of course heavily favoured the Democrat candidate, as it does in whichever case you care to look at.



  31. cb says:

    The notion that only the uneducated voted for Trump is fake news. According to CNN’s exit polling, the breakdown of the college graduate vote in the US election is this:

    All graduates – Trump 44% Clinton 49%
    White male graduates Trump 53% Clinton 39%
    Female white graduates Trump 44% Clinton 51%

    Although Trump loses in in two of these demographics, his share of the vote is substantial. The share of the ethnic graduate vote of course heavily favoured the Democrat candidate, as it does in whichever case you care to look at.



    • Guest Who says:

      ‘Uneducated’ joins such ignoble throwaways as ‘proportionate’, ‘reasonable’ or ‘fair’, though all of course are idiotically conjured up by the establishment as desperate catch alls when their usual stunts fail.

      ‘Uneducated’ is as facile as it gets. What’s it supposed to mean? What’s the bar? Has Mishal got another tally running?

      Maybe that tribe in PNG have not had the benefit of a PPE or single A level entry into Oxford, but it’s likely some members have a whole lot more common sense than Ed ‘stone’ Milliband or Polly or Di. And especially Emily Desperate.

      If Westminster and W1A are measures of decision making wisdom, those making the claim are having a laugh. That’s why we still have secret ballots.


  32. Up2snuff says:

    It’s a little unwise – no, it’s downright foolish – for some so-called elite liberals in the mainstream liberal media, to knock – or worse, disparage – and insult those who voted for Trump as being unaware, ill-informed and uneducated whether in US politics or in their general education, because if they themselves actually knew anything at all about US politics, they would realise they were attacking their fellow Democrats!

    Trumps nomination as the Republican candidate, came about – in part – because registered Democrats may have voted for him where their Primary was an Open Primary. Then, in the Presidential Election it was obvious that Democrats either voted for Trump in large numbers or stayed home and did not vote for Clinton.

    These self-aggrandising ‘Elitistas’ are actually starting to split their own Party, if American & registered Democrats, or, if not, they are just making themselves look much more stupid than the lowest IQ voter who voted to Leave the EU on 23 June. It is amazing to think that it was the Republican Party that looked like it might break in two as recently as three years back.

    Any poorly educated or ill-informed voter entitled to vote in the EU Referendum who actually voted for Brexit obviously knew at least one thing about the EU and it was something they did not like and they therefore voted to Leave. In the same way, every Trump voter knew something – if it was only that Trump was worth a chance, a gamble – that made them turn up at the Polling Station to cast their vote for him.

    Oh, just one more thing. The ill educated, non-politically informed Brexit and Trump voters knew one other key political fact that Brennan and Parris do not know or have forgotten: democracy is for those who turn up.


    • Nibor says:

      Absolutely U2S .
      In an very very extreme view of your hypothesis , it’s like voting Nazi or Stalinism . Because you vote one to keep the other out , doesn’t mean you totally , unequivocally support the one .
      But Trump is more than those two negatives .

      For a start , how is combatting drug dealing a Bad Thing ?

      From tomorrow the Guardian and Observer is half price at WH Smiths . I will buy the print edition of the BBC and see the Polly world of inverted logic .


  33. Stella2 says:

    “Uneducated” is a calculated insult aimed at those who are demonstrably educated and intelligent and who refuse to compromise logic for hive mind. Direct the slingers of this insult to John Redwood of All Souls’, Oxford, Boris or Gove.

    It is also intended for the not-so-confident middle classes who want to seem intelligent and well-informed but aren’t sure whether they actually had a top-notch education. Radio 4 is a well-used catapult for it: “This is what you must think, or you are clearly one of the lumpen uneducated masses!”


  34. Richard Pinder says:

    As a Mensa member with an IQ of 164, and an education on European Union Governance that comes from reading books such as “The Great Deception” by Christopher Booker and Richard North, I find that this education can only produce a Brexiter out of a Mensa member.
    I have no idea of the percentage of Brexiteers in Mensa, but from the well informed comments in the Mensa Magazine, its quite obviously far higher than amongst ignorant BBC Journalists, but then reality is always in contradiction to left-wing views on reality. For instance, from knowledge gained from test examiners at Oxford University, if you needed to pass an IQ test for Mensa, to qualify to vote, then only 17 percent of Oxford students would be intelligent enough to vote. Of the 83 percent, some with prejudiced and biased based subjects such as the Arts and Humanities, would have IQ’s lower than the average of 100, these would be unemployable in jobs other than say, the BBC. So I assume that almost all Oxford University graduates with an IQ lower than average would end up employed by the BBC. Also this would mean that Jews (average IQ 104) would be more likely to qualify to vote, and Blacks (Average IQ 85) virtually disenfranchised. Also the two Labour MP,s identified as high IQ by Mensa, both voted for Brexit, as well as the most intelligent Hollywood Star, voted for Trump.


  35. 60022Mallard says:

    Loved the bit about “tabloid urgings”


    Seems that Guardian and Independent readers suffered most from the problem, while others were able to make their own minds up!


  36. Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi says:

    A point that I don’t think anyone has made so far is this: all the time that enough of the electorate was voting in what the BBC/illiberal Left considered the right way (e.g. 1997, 2001 & 2005 UK General Elections) then the ignorant masses weren’t such a problem, though there were always a fair few ‘Fascists’ who read the Daily Mail, or watched Fox News in the USA, to worry about.

    Once the elections started to go the wrong way, as people woke up to the betrayals by Blair, Obama et al (i.e. UKIP winning the 2014 EU elections, Miliband not winning in 2015, Brexit and then Trump in the USA in 2016) then the problem of ignorant electors had clearly reemerged.

    Ignorant voters are not a problem – even if they ignore Whitewater, the death of Vince Foster, Benghazi, Huma Abedin, the Clinton Foundation, ‘Fast & Furious’, Monica Lewinsky and other ‘Bimbo eruptions’, Chelsea’s marriage into the Mezvinsky family, the Podesta revelations on Wikileaks, etc. etc. – PROVIDED THEY VOTE HILLARY OR OBAMA AND DEMOCRAT.