ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

A conspiracy against academic freedom (2 of 2)

<ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ class="standfirst">
September 1, 2011

Geoffrey K. Pullum's otherwise praiseworthy article, "Inflammatory language" (18 August), was marred by his comparison of David Starkey to the now infamous rose-quaffing Croydon looters.

Verbally inarticulate the looters may be, but their actions and the symbols they employed (not cider, not lager, but rose) were highly effective in shocking a nation of shopkeepers. They amply illustrated the sentiments of a growing number of people in the UK who find themselves equipped with only a half-decent education and facing the prospect of a lifetime's mindless, deeply unrewarding and poorly remunerated labour, all the while being told via every medium possible that identity and social standing can be achieved only through ever-increasing consumerism.

By contrast, despite his (outdated) Northern working-class "credentials", good education and privileged social position, Starkey talks like a hawk and acts like a poodle.

Kyra Pollitt, Edinburgh

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Register
Please Login or Register to read this article.
<ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ class="pane-title"> Sponsored
<ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ class="pane-title"> Featured jobs