what’s wrong with blasphemy? part five. the bit with alan moore in it. stewart lee discusses blasphemy and its place in comedy with various political and religious types. and alan moore.
On February 24, 2010, In Uncategorized, by admin
what’s wrong with blasphemy? part five. the bit with alan moore in it. stewart lee discusses blasphemy and its place in comedy with various political and religious types. and alan moore.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
This is THE Alan Moore?…wow…
I LOVE Stew’s initial comic outtake on Allen. He takes Allen seriously without taking what he does seriously. All respectful piss take. I do recognise the attitiude of the interview overall so dont blow up at me please
I admit, I speak from a US perspective, and have a bias to thinking union teachers are self-centered, incompetant, money-grubbing crooks. I will entirely concede that the British system of education (or practically any in Europe, for that matter) is far better than what exists here in the US. Because of it, Americans are – rightly – mocked for their ignorance of teh world by Europeans (and indeed people in former colonies of the British Empire that inherited British standards of education).
It’s entirely possible to go to a state university in the US and have the entire tuition paid for. And (strangely) the average cost for state tuition is less than that for the per-annum cost of teaching a secondary or elementary school student (about $10,000),
I have no problem with people “helping each other out” – as long as the benefit is for the children rather than a kleptocratic union. Instead, the unions are ensuring their members are paid top-dollar to provide a substandard education.
As for college well yes, universities are great, but its not compulsory and you have to pay alot for it. We have league tables for secondary and primary schools, so there is a competitive element, with regular government inspections to ensure quality teaching and facilities. We are ensuring every child has a good balanced education. If the repercussions of this are that the best of the best students arent challenged as much then thats a small price to pay. We like to help each other in the UK
I really dont know what you have been reading, but it isnt like that. The teachers have a natiobn cirriculum set down by the government which they must stick too. the NUT is like any trade union for any profession wishing for better standardsw for its members. Its not like the NUT are this secret organissation plotting to dumb down children and rinse the government for money. But dont worry you have that kind of thing in US dont you, dare i say it?
I would rather have parents be given the ultimate choice as to which schools their children attend, and not a self-serving guild of teachers. I would rather schools compete with each other to offer teh best education for children, rather than be maximized by a guild to serve the interests of unionized teachers.
Because we already have a functional choice-based educational system, and it works quite well. It’s called college.
so you would rather have more faith schools?
A problem only arises is one wants the best education for students. If the welfare of union teachers is the goal, however, disposing of schools that compete with the public system and increasing the pay of union teachers (so they won’t strike again) is certainly the right strategy.
I might add, that if union teachers rather than parents get to choose what teachers “deserve”, you can expect teachers to get a lot more for a lot less work in the near future.
Daily mail readers from outside britain. brilliant, just what we need. The removal of the grammar schools was intended to increase the state school spending so that everyone could receive a better education. Obviously public schools exist (the irony being they are the most private of private schools) for those that can afford it. Teachers have finally got the pay rise they deserve, whats the big issue cruel?
basically if you don’t read the guardian you’re a reactionary piece of shit
(Incidentally, so as not to give the wrong impression, my understanding is that British teachers normally make about £25K-£35K a year, based on seniority. This likewise includes a very generous vacation package.
Dunno where the £100K figure comes from – I assume this is for leading administrators, and/or senior union leaders…)
Perhaps the people writing the articles I’ve been reading on the British educational system are ignorant of the details. They don’t seem to be.
I’ve also heard that the NUT (I assume, pun unintended) is entirely against academies (the equivalent of our charter schools) because they won’t have as much power over them, and have recently gone on strike because the yearly pay increase for their guaranteed jobs wasn’t high enough.
Correct me if I’ve made any errors.
(cont’d from Daily Mail article)
“There are 300,000 pupil support staff in British schools, double the number in 1997. As a result of higher staffing and higher pay, the total bill for teachers’ pay this year will be nearly £20 billion.
And that’s without even allowing for their generous benefit package, including holidays most private sector workers couldn’t even consider, and a final salary pension scheme that currently costs the taxpayer £10 billion a year and rising.”
-EHAmory
“Resources going into education have doubled since 1997, but much of that money has been sucked up by teachers’ pay.
After allowing for inflation, the average salary for a classroom teacher has risen by 15 per cent, and of a head teacher by 26 per cent, since Labour came to power.
Over 200 head teachers now earn more than £100,000 a year. Despite static pupil numbers, teachers also have a great deal more help in the classroom.”
- Edward H. Amory, Daily Mail Online (22/04/08)
When Churchill was dropped from the UK school curriculum last July, one had to wonder if patriotism itself was next. Now it’s official.
The Institute of Education, a leading educational body, has warned teachers not to instill pride in students when speaking of great moments in British History
“To love what is corrupt is itself corrupting, not least because it inclines us to ignore, forget, forgive or excuse the corruption. And there’s the rub for patriotism” – Mark Loftin, Amer. Thinker
1. Almost no teacher in the UK has the chance to teach ‘socialist rubbish’: the curriculum does not allow it since relevant subjects are either not touched on or not treated in a way that is ammenable to political factionalism.
2. Teachers in the UK do not get better health packages through union pressure since (thank God) the UK has a national health service and pretty much no one even thinks about asking employers to pay for health insurance, let alone strikes on the issue.
Thanks, I will have a look for that.
My mistakes must be very great. Please, enlighten me – where have I erred?
Your post shows an overwhelming unfamiliarity with British Education and labour conditions. best to educate yourself before you comment.
He does a routine about his resemblance to the fat version of various people including Morrisey. It very funny if you can find it.
Stewart Lee is a very funnny and articulate comedian but I have to ask, does anyone else think he now looks like Morressey?
Sorry, but I’ve already done the reading on this – in particular, I’ve read and dismissed Kozol’s rubbish – and have concluded that the best way to decide what schools are superior is to let the parents choose.
That the public school teachers are so adamant that this never, ever, ever be allowed ot happen seems to me perfect proof that they know just how bad the public schools really are by comparison. That, and the fact that so many teachers send their own children to private schools.
I did better than that – I transferred from a miserable public school to a very good Catholic school. The Catholic school managed to do a much better job at teaching with perhaps 1/3rd to 1/4th of the funding per student common in the public system. One of us even became a US congressman (mind, that isn’t the case any more – the faith school has so many people trying to get in, that they can charge a fee per student almost comparable to what the public schools get).
actually your conclusions about why faith scools do better are fundamentally mistaken and quite stupid. do some proper reading into it.
the main reason they do better than state schools is better funding and the ability to apply a selection process and weed out those they dont want.