To think Brits dislike success?

[garlicmashpotatoes]

After many years of reading comments from posters on MumsNet and other forums, I get the impression that many Brits cannot stand to see people who have 'more than them' or achieve 'success' when they've worked hard to do so.

In America success is celebrated, and aspired to. Whereas in the UK it's often looked down upon.

Why?

The only thing scarier than the 'lucky' responses you received is that fact that these people can vote. Given that you are so lucky, I expect someone will be along soon to tell you that you don't pay enough tax.

You have earned and bloody well deserve all the success you have.

No one is saying that it's just luck. Not one poster said that. Just that you need some lucky breaks alongside hard work to properly make it, especially if you start right at the bottom.

I know. That’s equally as galling when we have a huge tax bill. All the way through the 70% tax trap into 45%. It’s ok though. I’m posh, privileged and greedy. It’s mainly because of the insane sort of posts here - we don’t flash the cash as such. Nice family holidays - we keep private. No hugely expensive cars on the drive. My accent is very “London” too.

What I’ve found is that the country hates nothing more than the average person doing well. I mean - it’s genuinely awful the bias you face and it is from people who are envious. The people who I know well who have done ok with my sort of background keep it very quiet in real life. People say oh but we just hate the people who are smug and what not. That’s not what happens. People are just full of envy and spite. It’s never hard work. No time for people like it.

This thread kind of explains why.

Would you listen to yourselves. It’s so difficult to imagine why people might dislike you … what with the empathy by-pass and the misplaced sense of injustice. Sheesh.

I have more than enough friends thanks. I don’t look to internet forums for fulfilment. Looking to forums for people to like you. That’s shallow and a bit sad.

YANBU. In my experience, both school and working, many peers were jealous.

It's utter madness. The irrational hate and jealousy is a sight to behold.

Britain's origins are feudal and we still have an aristocratic upper class who inherit their wealth and status.

The next level down, the so called upper middle class, also inherit their wealth and social status, so a 'successful' pleb can't make this level either.

The United States of America fought a war of independence to get rid of this set up and implemented their own constitution that enshrines the rights of the citizen.

This means that a 'successful' American can effectively buy his or her way to the very top of the social class structure because money is everything.

I don’t get it. It’s very odd. That said - MN has always been a funny old place. I’ve been here years on and off. There were always the old days of MN royalty. I NEVER understood that. Batshit if you ask me. Are you famous on an anonymous internet forum?

I have always wanted to know my children will be looked after if I pass. I’ve always wanted my children to have what I didn’t. You’d be surprised how that does push your work ethic when there are no tax credits or UC to top up. I do think reliance on the state for finance and advice is sort of the problem. No-one seems to be able to think for themselves.

MN has changed again in recent years. Older demographic and more state reliant. Very much an echo chamber during the day of all the same people who hate those higher workers funding society.

It does reflect society though. People put such an emphasis on how you come across online. How popular you seem online to the clique of the day. No-one cares. Genuinely. I work all day, post a bit on the evenings or weekends. I don’t come here to be liked. I come here to give my opinion as a public forum. It’s all a bit sad. The funny thing is though - you return home to lots of likes. So obviously a silent majority feel similar but can’t be arsed arguing with a brick wall.

Aww patting on the back party of two. How lovely.

How do you know that those disagreeing with your outlook aren’t a ‘success’? As far as I am concerned it is not envy, it just wouldn’t occur to me or my husband to go around blowing our own trumpet! British people can be quite cynical, miserable, that’s we are good at comedy, I don’t think it is terrible, I think all countries have different traits and that is fine, we don’t have to all be the same do we- what about a bit of tolerance.

What’s your point? Do clarify.

So many presumptions, people disagree with you so they are envious, really? That’s pretty funny.

I have a friend who has a holiday home, who goes overseas several times a year, and retired from work in her 50s - tbh she didn't have to work at all. I don't consider her having a hidden advantage, and I don't feel jealous - even though I am renting a flat and will be for the rest of my life. She also lost her mother when she was a child, so I consider myself luckier than her.

Maybe it's time people just made the best of what they have, rather than envying those who have more.

Again, not envy, more a strive for equal opportunities for everyone- to do that you need to highlight the weaknesses of the system.

Why? My friend married into a family with a very successful business. The family weren't wealthy to begin with, but built the business up over generations. Anyone could have done it, most don't try.

There are far too many people expecting "the system" to help them, rather than try to help themselves.

It is like they side with the underdog and love the underdog so much that when the underdog does better than them is like they changed to the wrong team. In the meantime we are seeing a lot of people coming here with very radical ideas taking advantage of the fact that here they would be able to get away with it. They can hide under the underdog poor me lot. I never needed saviours to achieve my goals. I did not realised they saw me as the underdog because also there is a sense of superiority towards being from certain areas of the world.

I don’t think British people hate success, we just hate unearned success.

We actually celebrate success all the time, just look at tv shows like great British bake off and pop idol. Look at our worship of footballers.

When we know that success has been earned through talent or graft and is therefore aspirational, we are on board! Unfortunately, a lot of people who are succcessful in this country did not earn that success - their wins were borne of privilege (the creation of an uneven playing field, through legal, economic and political structures developed and upheld to maintain the status quo) and removing the potential for success from those more deserving.

This is why private schooling is so hated. It is the absolute epitome of an uneven playing field created through legal, economic and political structures. People, usually through inherited wealth, and helped along by a legal and economic system that makes it possible, are able to pay for their children to opt out of meritocracy and gain the contacts and social capital that will get them ahead of any peers who are just as bright (if not more), capable and hard working. In doing so, opportunities are removed from those lower down the social strata. Private school inhibits meritocracy and fairness. This is bad for our country in multiple ways. Firstly, because it means people are promoted beyond their competence, so our country misses out on vital skills, and secondly because the top jobs (politics, medicine, the arts) are dominated by an unrepresentative section of society who make laws, art and other decisions that impact on our lives.

I see a lot of Schroedinger’s private education apologists on here (for want of a better phrase)! People claim that private school education doesn’t matter because those who are smart/ hardworking will rise to the top anyway. Those same people send their kids to private school. Why? Because they know they can buy their way ahead and skip over those who would otherwise rise to the top.

No anyone couldn't have done it - because not everyone cares

People are different and a lot of people don't want that kind of success

They do want the ability to live with a roof over their heads and food in their belly and that's basic humanity

Trying to force everyone to live like you do - hyper ambitious and strongly money motivated just leads to a dog eat dog society and drives misery

Question for you? Is this why Diane Abbot sent her kid to private school? I read she was worried about gangs and that is nothing to do with academics or getting good jobs. She did it at a time where crime was much lower. There are a myriad of reasons people rather have a choice for their kids education.

The UK isn’t particularly meritocratic, and as a concept it is one that people don’t in fact have to opt in to. Ironically enough that term comes from a dystopian satire that skewered the very idea.

Personally I’m very leery of the state imposing a nebulous concept of ‘fairness’ at the expense of individual liberties. That doesn’t in fact have a history of turning out too well (but of course the imagined version usually works out perfectly, because you can never be as sure as with something that you know full well isn’t going to be tested in practice).

And the ‘private school doesn’t matter/kids will rise in any environment if they’re meant to’ argument normally comes from those who are against private education. Or the perhaps in favour of survival of the fittest.

I do see a desire to build up the underdog, but when the underdog is built up there is oftentimes the desire to tear them back down. Weirdly there’s a dislike of the class system, but so many are quick to reinforce it if against those seen as ‘getting above their station’. The upper classes apparently need wiping out, until new money needs to reminded that they’ll never be as good as old.

’Wiping out’ the class system invariably doesn’t wipe it out, as people are still inclined to organize themselves according to social hierarchy. The scenery gets changed, not the situation.

@Bululu I’m not sure about Diane Abbots motivations re. Private school. The gang violence excuse doesn’t really ring true to me - I suspect that she probably just sent her kid to private school because her role as Mother (and therefore the urge to do what is best for her child, in the short term, takes primacy) is more important to her than her political stance. In her position, this is exactly what I would do too (I know, I’m a massive hypocrite). If I had a chance I would send my kid to private school (despite believing this is bad for the country as a whole) because it would give them, individually, the best chance in life. I am selfish enough to put my own kids above ANYONE and everything else. As I’m sure most people are. Which conversely, is why I believe private schooling shouldn’t be an option.

@InterIgnis I also am not a fan of the state restricting individual liberties in pursuit of fairness. However, I also don’t believe in the state actively building barriers to success. This is how I see the maintenance of the private school system in the uk (via charitable status, underfunding of state schools etc). There are some frameworks that have to be put in place by the state to maximise individual liberty. I’m not opposed to the idea of choice in education - I think there should be more choice in fact, to cater to individual needs. I just don’t think choice should be tied to parents ability to pay.

Im aware that the UK isn’t a particularly meritocratic society but personally I see meritocracy as an ideal and can’t imagine many people would be against this idea. Is there really anyone out there who believes that a persons station in life shouldn’t be down to individual merit and should instead be down to oppressive systems that keep others down? I am aware that ‘merit’ is am difficult to quantify, due to the the complexity of measuring each persons unique talents, gifts and benefits to society but as an ideal, to strive for, I think it stands.

This is spot on. Sucess on this thread appears to be wholly about wealth/money, this in my opinion is a huge shift in cultural values as success in the past was more likely to be if you were educated, were talented in an area of the Arts that is why the UK has produced amazing musicians, writers and filmmakers. Equally, if you were a talented sportsman/woman, ‘success’ looked like that it wasn’t having loads of money! Of course, everyone knew some people had lots of money through inheritance but it wasn’t attributed to their successful talents that is why it was challenged and was seen as unfair. Wealth inequality is worse than it has ever been so maybe that is why the pursuit of money to survive is stronger than ever.

Private schools aren’t going anywhere. They’re a well established facet of British society with a strong historical, cultural and legal grounding. Roughly half of them are indeed charities, by the legal definition of charity which is distinct from what many consider it to be. Stripping private schools of charitable status is not something that the government can easily do, and indeed Labour backed off from that idea for this reason.

That meritocracy is difficult to quantify is exactly the issue for me. Does it sound good on the surface? Yes. What are the details though? What is beneath the sounds-good-feel-good surface? How exactly do we establish an equal playing field where each person has a uniform experience and thus truly equal opportunity to succeed? How is that even possible, in fact? I’m a natural pragmatist, personally, and deeply suspicious of ‘ideals’.

I don’t believe people would be happy for those who achieve solely on merit (in a world where this was actually ever achieved), no. It would still be a cause of resentment (‘they have a genetic advantage! That’s not fair!’), and the usual divisions would form between those that achieved and those that didn’t. Those that achieved would of course want to pass their advantages to their children. A hierarchy would emerge, as hierarchies tend to do.

Individual choice, the private sector and the ability to pay for greater access to things are basic tenets of both capitalism and liberty. I don’t claim either to be perfect, but I do consider both preferable to the alternatives.

Britain is a country that culturally likes to embrace shittiness - look at comedians, many of the successful ones over the years have a lugubrious streak to them- think Jimmy Carr, Stewart Lee, Jo Brand, Bill Bryson, Billy Connolly, Hancock, Milligan,

I put it down to the weather and poor public services

If an American sends out a round robin of how great life is , their promotions and high earnings and all their families achievements that year- most of us would roll our eyes and think it really distasteful.

It's very much a cultural thing - Britain likes to build people up and then knock them down again. Many delight in people's downfall