Hacker News Reader

Comment by shatnersbassoon | Hacker News Reader

I keep on pointing it out, because people for some reason miss it: The person you know as Jacob Rees-Mogg is a schtick. It was developed by a weedy kid to combat bullying at school. He later found it was generally useful in life because people would 1). Remember him 2). laugh at him so he would gain a measure of acceptance. Those that hated him he could turn to his advantage, because he could play the laughers against the haters.

View on HN

I'm reliably informed by a contemporary at Westminster Grammar that he "wasn't that posh" until later.

I always find it irritating that politicians of all stripes who have gone out of their way to cultivate a particularly niche image are lazily described by the commenteriat as more "authentic" than those are quite happy to dress and speak like regular politicians and demonstrate their authenticity (or lack thereof) with the actual positions they hold

I mean, he did go to Eton and then Oxford, he is married to Helena Anne Beatrix Wentworth Fitzwilliam de Chair, , his father was Lord Rees-Mogg, he is absurdly wealthy, etc. etc.

So, despite what random commenters on a tech forum (or their friends) might have to say, I think the simplest explanation is that he just is posh.

Obviously, he plays into his image (He doesn't exactly hide this fact). But that doesn't mean his image is false.

Politics is full of people with well connected families and money who managed to attend Eton without coming to resemble the Rees Mogg "Honourable Member for the Eighteenth Century" novelty act.

Nobody is pretending he was born poor, we're just noting that that person who had the same level of privileged background as dozens of other politicians probably isn't more "authentic" than them because they're not regarded as caricatures...

My comment was a response to the implication that Jacob Rees-Mogg's character is an act.

You don't have to tell me what you and previous commenters had stated, because it's still right there in the comments.

> I keep on pointing it out, because people for some reason miss it: The person you know as Jacob Rees-Mogg is a schtick

> I'm reliably informed by a contemporary at Westminster Grammar that he "wasn't that posh" until later.

Rees-Mogg's character isn't an act so to speak, but it belies his true origins. He's not upper class - he's upper-middle, if we're being fairly strict in our definitions of British class. Being the son of a life peer isn't the same as being the son of a hereditary peer in terms of its conferral of social class. Rees-Mogg's father, William, was born middle class and was elevated to a life peer for his journalistic career, rather than being a titled hereditary peer.

Now for some useless internet anecdotes.

I was actually at Oxford with Jacob's nephew. Very humble chap, very likeable, and very liberal in his conservatism. Was always quite reluctant to spill the beans on Jacob though, which is fair enough.

Also interestingly is the continued existence of people like Hannah in the article. My tutor, a professor at Christ Church (informally seen as one of the most 'aristocratic' colleges), was 'busted' for running a secret dining society populated by public schoolboys, a number of whom would be described as being upper class. This is despite him coming from a relatively modest background up in Hull, and never entirely managed to shirk his regional accent. He didn't even read for his undergraduate degree at Oxford, heaven forbid! (Great guy though). Now it all makes sense as to why he was so inquisitive about my schooling and family background during our first meeting.

My cousin, who was also at Christ Church, knew a couple of the Bullingdon chaps. Heckling members of the public in the King's Arms because they didn't live in a castle was one unbecoming episode, as was another member turning up to a college party in a KKK outfit. From my understanding, traditionally upper class societies like the Bullingdon are strongly falling out of fashion and becoming much more underground, because of the toxicity surrounding them. While I was there, the Bullingdon club were caught assembling on their usual steps in Canterbury Quad in their tails, to take their annual photograph. They were promptly kicked out of college and told that they couldn't assemble in Christ Church again. As a result of this toxicity, they've had to expand their social reach to more non-traditional gents, in order to keep the club alive. Now more than ever, simply being from a wealthy family, rather than an aristocratic one, seems to qualify.

It's also right there in your own comment that he "plays up to it", which is pretty much the definition of an act. Many people manage to be related to life peers and even attend Eton without appearing to be auditioning for a role in a costume drama about eighteenth century aristocrats.

I didn't say that. I'm sure that's an honest mistake, but it's one that would be very easy to avoid.

As to the rest of your comment, I agree that Jacob Rees-Mogg is not normal. But that doesn't mean he's a phony.

I think most people do this to some degree - we are all affected by negative factors in our childhood which shapes the way we act in later life. So I wouldn't say he's a "schtick", it was a coping mechanism that has worked in his favour - I don't think that's a negative thing, it's not like his ultra-poshness is badly affecting anyone else.

I went to private school in the UK - there are loads of people like him.

I know at least 30 people who went to his school. Absolutely none of them are remotely like him. It is a schtick in that you can absolutely see him choosing to lean into it. And it's not ultra-poshness (in fact it's the opposite of posh), it's a form of dishonesty.

This feels truthy, but [citation needed]?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com