the questioning the disproportionate numbers of privately educated people in positions of power was akin to “the conspiratorial language of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, and the language of “Hitler and his henchmen.
There’s a much more concerted effort by [Oxbridge] admissions tutors to drive down the number of places given to independent schools,” he told the Times. “Privately educated pupils in the UK are also being accused of dominating the top jobs and stifling social mobility … it is all too facile to stereotype groups and ignore the fact that lawyers, doctors, writers and politicians are individuals.
This comes as Oxford is under the spotlight as it was revealed that 47% of its students come from private schools despite those schools only representing only 7% of the population. Oxford, to be fair to them has pledged to reduce or limit the number of applicants from private schools.
This isn't simply from a position of equality but in response the revelation that studies show the that the results that these students receive in GCSEs aren't reflective of their actual academic ability. When they get to university they don't do as well as state school pupils.
So Oxford are letting a near majority of its students from private schools when research shows that state school students do better at university. Even forgetting equality for a minute, why shouldn't Oxford seek to have the best pupils and reduce those whose school privilege may have lent itself to an inflated academic score?
Also why do people feel the need to attack people who seek to challenge privilege?