To be descendant from immigrant is only relevant if you are a bigot with a potential impact on him becoming PM.
Despite the fact he comes from just about the most modest background possible. Which is surely something aspirational.
Nothing bigoted about that. And I don't see why someone's good fortune in life should be despised, just because they're an MP. Self-made wealth? Why not get angry with Alan Sugar, Richard Branson, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and so on?
The South Asian diaspora that migrated to Africa in the 1930s and then on to the UK in the 1960s faced many hardships, but economic woes were not often one of them. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many of them have gone on to hold positions of power: Priti Patel, Suella Braverman, Shailesh Vara to name a few MPs.
The reason why this group hasn't had economic woes is because they work harder than everyone else. I know a few families with this background, all of them came here with nothing, all their kids went to private school, they just worked harder and spent nothing. One family I know: three kids, all private school, their parents slept on the sofa and floor of their living room in a tiny flat, mother worked two/three jobs, dad worked 5am-10pm every day...if you didn't know what it took, they are privileged...but all anyone sees is "private school"...must be rich.
GPs and pharmacists didn't make that much money back then. Drawing sweeping conclusions about someone because of the school they went to (particularly given that Sunak was massively successful after school) is weak, it is the kind of narrow-minded viewpoint that the left constantly claims to be a victim of (in the UK).
When I was a kid, my neighbours in the 70s were exactly who you're referring to. An Asian-Ugandan couple who worked and worked and spent everything on their two daughters, who were a bit older than me. One went to a grammar school, the other to... private school, because that's what they could afford. In fact, the daughter that went to private school was the only kid in my area that did.
Besides, isn't it more ambitious and impressive to have worked one's way into a position of political power without the silver spoon and elite connections? Look at Angela Rayner, a single mother and former care worker; Michael Gove, who worked his way up from an Aberdeen state school; or Dennis Skinner, who worked for 20 years a coal miner before representing Bolsover and giving Enoch Powell a run for his money in Parliament.
There are many connections made in youth can continue to benefit you for the rest of your life. 33 PMs (of 56 in total) attended one of just 3 secondary schools, and 30 attended the same university. [1]
No one I've seen is commenting on his intelligence, but it is fair to question whether someone who has lived their teenage and adult life in and around the classical instituions of privilege (which are only accessible to and accepting of a minority) is a great choice for running a country having a cost of living crisis.
And I'm not sure where the idea that GPs didnt make that much comes from - £75k (adjusted) in the 90s was (and still is) a lot of money [2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_the...
Correct, because the UK has highly-selective schools and has two universities that are much better than the rest. If you just transport someone into Oxbridge, they do not automatically become a success, it is just totally backwards-thinking.
Background makes no difference. Discriminating against someone because they are rich is not any different to discriminating against them because they are poor. Honestly, it is actually a little disturbing to see people conclude openly that because someone went to X school they must be a certain kind of person...awful.
And if you look at the chart, you will see when GPs began to earn a lot of money. I am not quite sure you understand what inflation-adjusted means if you are talking about it being a lot of money, it is the same value then and now...but paying for Winchester would still have been a substantial expense (he had siblings, he has said in interviews that the pressure on him to get a scholarship...which he didn't get...was immense).
Basing it on the school he attended, which he had little influence over, is indeed nonsensical. Base your opinion on what he's said and done since instead. You'll probably come to the same conclusion though.
Original claim (touristtam):
> He is a billionaire with a rich wife that hasn't been on a working class family wages for a very long time if he ever was. He cannot fathom the hardship that he is about to unleash on said working class.
Counter claim (DrBazza):
> he comes from just about the most modest background possible
Counter counter claim (Me):
> his father was a GP, his mother ran a local pharmacy, and he attended a very privileged boarding school
Rishi himself is on the record as making statements such as "I have no working class friends", "I always consider myself professional middle class", and "I tell inner city state school kids to apply to Oxford and talk to them about people like me, and then I shock them by saying I went to Winchester".
I'm not sure of the exact proportion of children attending public school per year in the UK, but I'm willing to bet it's a fraction of a percent. Both his siblings also attended private schools.
Rishi didn't have a "modest" background. He just didn't. Yes, his grandparents could be said to have grafted their way out of the working class. Yes, his parents worked hard to put him through a good education. That's exactly the point: he's never suffered and he doesn't know what being working class is like. He's been in the upper half of the middle class for his whole life.
[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/rishi-sunak-contactles...