Britain, we are told, is a country of equal opportunites. This means that everyone is treated without discrimination, negative or positive, especially on grounds of colour, religion, ethnic backgound or gender.
The concept of equal opportunities is referred to most frequently in relation to employment, where it is purported that getting a job or being promoted is determined solely by objective criteria, such as qualifications and experience.
For many jobs, especially manual, clerical or junior administrative or management ones, that may well be true, although it is very difficult to prove discrimination in a court of law. However, in large swathes of the British "Establishment", such as the upper echelons of the civil service, the national media and academia, different sets of criteria operate, ones that are often invisible to outsiders.
One such set relates to the "old school tie" system. Actually, this is not so invisible and seems to be accepted by the British people as a fact of life which they cannot change. What it means is that if you went to the right school, associated with the right people, joined the right clubs and partook in the right recreational activities, you will find that many doors in the Establishment, whether in government, big business or the national media, swing open for you and glass ceilings shatter before you.
British-based readers of this blog will probably have their own stories to illustrate the workings of the old school tie system. In any case, one only has to look at the legal profession, the national media and the indigenous financial houses in the City of London to see evidence of it. It would not take long to spot the predominance of people from the public (i.e. private) schools and Oxford and Cambrige universities. Within this elite, a sizeable proportion would also likely belong to the Freemasons, a secretive society that is widely believed to have a presence in many important spheres of life.
Another, less visible set of criteria that seems to operate within the British Establishment and outside the parameters of equal opportunities relates to membership of the military, the police and the security apparatuses.
A careful observer of the core components of the Establishment, such as the national media, cannot fail but notice that former members of the armed forces and the police, and those with ties to the security services, have a far greater chance of getting employment and promotion in those core components than people competing solely on the basis of educational qualifications and experience. Whether this happens because of a misplaced sense of duty towards those who had previously chosen to work in the military and the security agencies or because of a deliberate policy by the state-run parts of the Establishment to employ otherwise unemployable former members of the armed forces and perhaps still serving security agents is difficult to tell.
The reader may wonder at this point why a supposedly rational society such as Britain tolerates these networks and corrupt practices whose cumulative outcome can only drag the country backwards. Personally, I am reminded of the way armed forces are structured and led in most Arab countries, where entire officers corps are selected on the basis of loyalty to the regime rather than merit. The result? One defeat after another by Israel.
The answer to the British puzzle may lie in the fact that the most important parts of the British economy are run by foreigners, not native Britons, who are virtually a minority in those sectors. Thus, in the National Health Service a substantial minority of doctors are from the Indian subcontinent and Eastern Europe, while in the technology sector it is the Americans, the Indians and the Chinese who are predominant. Even in the financial services and City of London financial institutions, the British are more or less a minority.
The reason for this imbalance is quite simple: the foreigners are better educated, more motivated and harder working than the native Britons. So, in a straightforward, free and fair competition for jobs in conditions of real equal opportunities, the natives would stand little chance of success.
Therefore, the only way the native Britons can remain in control is through bypassing free and fair competition and discriminating positively in favour of ethnic Britons with a particular educational background (public schools, Oxford and Cambridge Universities) and/or connections to the armed forces, the police or the security services, irrespective of ability.
