This government is not content with forcibly occupying schools in the Austro-Serbian-1914 manner. Nor indeed in the manner of that of R3 in post-1933.
I respectfully suggest that this government is determined to exclude from society, and if possible destroy physically even including the use of death, any children whose outlook and innate relpectiveness might prejudice the growth of a population of biddable pro-GramscoFabiaNazi helots.The (a)moral position is halfway achieved already, since today British children are, functionally, State Property.
Hence, “bullying”, a custom long in use by children (until they learn property rights and about liberty) but hiterto controlled adequately by real schools, is allowed and promoted pro-actively. This is actively accomplished in schools by plans known as “anti-bullying policies”.
“Bullying” is probably a primordial hominid-survival-mechanism, useful perhaps 300,000 to 1 million years ago, and probably co-eval with the reise of language as a skill. It may have had a utility in ensuring that the most aggressive and the most “celebrity-clubbable” juveniles (of either sex but mainly males – and who would be popular on account of their size/outgoing-nature/use of growls to threaten predators/warped-sense-of-humour/…etc) survived better in the presence of scarce gatherable resources, to reproduce, at the expense of the more retiring and noncommunicative ones in a group environment. By either killing the “geeks” or driving them off into the bush to be eaten by Short-Arsed-Bears, the survival of the more clubbable and aggressive juveniles could be helped.
My hypothesis may imply that “bullies” could be quite “intelligent”. This is not a problem for me, for most bullies I have ever met were at least not very much more dim than most normal people, and probably had other useful qualities if only these could be exposed and/or channelled.
Regarding “Policies” …. I relate the story of the Bishop who, when asked what was his policy regarding SIN, replied “I’m against it”. Schools today in the UK, for the benefit of our overseas reader, all have to have “policies” tod eal with “bullying”. these are often highly comples and deliberately unintelligible documents (we don’t want parents detecting that the verbiage means sod-all now, do we) which talk about the appointment of “peer mentors” (which is to say other children) to whom one should go on being bullied. Or that “The School absolutely does not tolerate bullying of any kind, and works with the appropriate practitioners, carers and organisations towards a strategy of agreement on how to co-ordinate the relevant activities, measures and experts’ skills in order to formulate a pastoral-care-pathway designed to eliminate the ….”...f***-it - I could go on.
In my day in the 1950s and just after, there was indeed bullying. My parents firstly tried to help me combat it by saying to the bullies: “But I will go to University and you will not!” Poor buggers my parents: they simply didn’t understand the mind of the English young male post-war bully. But schools had a more robust attitude happily. After a little time I was encouraged by the teachers, mostly ex-WW2 RSMs and redundant ex-Imperial ADCs from upper-Jipoopooland, to take matters into my own hands. I was not strong or large, but there were sharp things such as my teeth, fountain pens and compass-points, which it seemed I was not … officially … discouraged from using. So I did.
Injured bullies leaking blood were generally chastised by the nearest teacher and sent to Matron to be sewn up again and given permanganate swabs, plus a stern note to their _Father_ . It stopped after a few weeks, and I was not thereafter troubled.
Bullying will stop if recipients or “bullees” are permitted to retaliate with force. I believe that there are no conditions under which it will stop if the existing “policies” (which expressly preclude absolutely any retaliation by bullees) are allowed to continue. Since the kinds of people targetted as “bullees” are generally either not the product of the Labour-spawned underclass, or else do not generally conform to TV-driven “cultural norms” such as chavs, thugs, hairless-male-youths-who-crash-W-reg-white-Vauxhall-Novas-full-of-girls, and celebs, then “policies” for “anti-bullying” must be a deliberate attempt to wipe out, by self-harm, the young population of those reflective enough not to conform and agree.
I rest my case.
…sorry…the end of the poll-question should have said “The New Utopia”.