De Minimis
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12

Inegalitarianism

21/3/2017

 
TOBY SILCOCK

Vol 11, Issue 4

We are Not Equal. 
Now by this I do not mean that there are some humans in this cohort who by constitution alone are more deserving of power and privilege than others, although there are some who see themselves otherwise. What I am stating is that, in first year, a veil can descend that, over the course of the degree, separates your new colleagues from their past and present context, their advantages, and their sheer luck. This veil, which it is seemingly passe to pierce, hides how deeply unequal is our School’s character is. It is my intention to humbly nudge new students into recognising this and other facts that our school, for its own self-preservation, denies. It is also my hope through this and future work to remind those who, for their own motives, have allied themselves with the institution that there are those, like spies, amongst you, who must henceforth give fewer fucks and demand that our School become more egalitarian, democratic and truly tolerant than it is.


​I have had far too many conversations, even with self-identified “progressives”, who by words and conduct assume economic equality to effectively be established, and for whom inequalities in our school are those only of “identity”, conveniently quite equitably divided between rich and poor. A childhood’s worth of material or cultural deprivation has been cleansed by the “welfare state” (that the speaker hasn’t accessed and is rarely deeply committed to), scholarships (with the attendant sting of charity and obligation), and “extra–curricular opportunities” (which the speaker has, with their greater resources, co–opted). By the magic of “objective” entry examination, we arrive at MLS ready to embark on a 3–year assortative process propelling the deserving into the upper ranks of the profession, and others into ignominious obscurity in some average–tier outfit (oh, we’ll get jobs, this is Melbourne). The fact that the vast majority of students are consistently privately–school educated, I suppose, is sheer coincidence.


This is, of course, utterly self–serving; always misleading, and often a lie. It precisely masks the fact that MLS is one of the few remaining bottlenecks Melbourne’s elite pass through on to the profession, business, politics, and other aspects of “public life” where one’s sense of the public good conveniently attends personal comfort, prestige and power. The School is so astutely conscious of its prestige and its history (honour board? Really?) precisely because we don’t just want to go to a law school, we want to go to one both that’s both elite and elitist.

Papering over such undertones with our false sense of deservingness obscures the manifold ways in which some students succeed simply because they are, quite simply, practically and socially better off than their colleagues. I leave aside how family background and private-school training deliberately cultivates and intuitive comfort in the world of the powerful. I leave aside how well “special consideration” truly compensates those with dependents or health issues, suffering grief, or indeed suffering those “external circumstances” apparently so deviant from the norm they warrant the term “special”. And it is proper to leave the experiences here of sexual minorities, first– and second–generation migrants, and of course Australia’s first peoples to those who can and do write better on them.


I can simply note that if your study, accommodation and living expenses are subsidised or funded by parents or relatives, it is quite obviously easier to succeed. Others must work, and work harder, for accommodation that is more expensive, colder, more neglected, of insecure term, and usually shared with indifferent or unhinged co–habitants (people often underestimate how living with sympathetic and friendly housemates, let alone family, lessens the emotional and practical toll of this course, especially in times of emotional distress). It is also, of course, further from the School, so you simply are penalised in time — both emotional and literal — by your  distance from (unrecorded) lectures.


Rent means work, and since government stipends (if available) for full–time students are set so as to ensure that students who don’t work but study full–time will live in poverty, you must study for our degree (which is, indeed, full-time work), at the same time as finding work simply to avoid poverty. Now, most students, rich or poor, work. Long gone are the days of the truly idle rich. But since more lucrative, flexible and well–paid work requires superior bargaining power to attain and thus superior connections and background, disadvantaged students are in work that is insecure, more demanding, more inconvenient, and for less pay (the irony of “flexible” work is its inflexibility, since your life is contingent on whether management wants you).


If your study is subsidised and you don’t have to work or pay rent, you can leverage that time into study, tutoring, competitions, and unpaid internships, “volunteer” positions, wildly expensive “international opportunities”, or indeed “giving something back” through service for our LSS. Anyone who believes that that makes no practical difference to one’s time at MLS and indeed future career and life is usually lying by conduct if not by words.
​


Now, well–off kids can and do badly. This attests not only how difficult it is to consistently succeed in the JD, but indeed why monarchies fail — even “good families” sire duds. This notwithstanding, it remains the case that an H2A to a privately–funded ex–Ormondian is not the same mark as an H2A achieved by a poorly–paid, self–supporting student with difficult employment, poor accommodation and no friends or mentors in the degree and profession. If you wish to set yourself against this claim, I don’t envy the monumental task of reality reconstruction before you.
​


So before you castigate yourself for apparently “poor” marks, it is not only helpful but necessary to ask whether the person against whom you compare yourself really had to deal with what you dealt with; whether they had help you didn’t; and whether they are more talented…and not simply the recipient of more consistently good luck.


Toby Silcock is a third-year JD student



More articles like this
  • The Spectre of Classism is Haunting Melbourne Law School
  • Time is Money: Fear of the Word 'Class'


The rest of this issue
  • An Update on the Corkman Pub
  • Dear White People of MLS​
  • Tricks of the Trade
  • Vote for Uber
Picture
Cartoon by Tam Charlwood
College kid
21/3/2017 07:11:14 pm

Not everyone who went to Ormond is wealthy; some students are very poor. To generalise that cohort as uniformly wealthy and opportunity-laden is akin to generalising the MLS cohort in the same way.

Mercutio
21/3/2017 09:19:03 pm

Perhaps I have a different reading than yours 'College Kid', but I think you yourself are reading in a generalisation that every single person who attended this Ormond is wealthy. Honestly, I don't even know where or what Ormond is, let alone the make-up of its students. But, for my reading, it appears the author is simply employing an example of 'a' ex-Ormondian who, in this scenario, does have private funding rather than a broad sweeping generalisation of an entire college population.

Then again, we interpret from our experience, so your experience is your own and I won't belittle it.

NPJ
22/3/2017 08:26:36 pm

Ormond costs ~20 thousand AUD per year. Let's say you knock out 75% of that on scholarship. It's still cheaper to rent. The only reason one wouldn't is because someone else is footing the bill.

No Shit, Sherlock
21/3/2017 10:10:29 pm

Are a lot of us class privileged at this law school, and aware that we benefit as a result? Yes. Most privileged people would agree with this fact. I'm one of those people.

For my part, I don't spend a lot of time looking at people more or less privileged than myself and keeping score of what my achievements are worth or not worth as a result. I don't think that's very productive.

I also think that the intersection of class privilege with other forms of advantage / disadvantage can be complex in a way that doesn't allow us to easily draw lines between classes as harshly (and frankly, as rudely) as you have chosen to.

I hope that if you write again when you will have some suggestions as to how inequity at MLS can actually be tackled, as opposed to simply stating the obvious.

Henry HL
21/3/2017 11:39:50 pm

Addressing your paragraphs in order:

1. This is not a personal letter addressed to you. Perhaps other privileged readers are not so enlightened.

2. No-one was suggesting 'keeping score' as an end in itself. It was a means to becoming more mindful of the impact of disadvantage. Something which you claim to share.

3. The fact that lines always have to be drawn more sharply than the blurry reality they try to capture is no reason to, instead, draw no lines whatsoever at all. That would be even less accurate. Besides, what was rude in this article. If anything it was too polite.

4. Identifying a problem is a necessary condition for the much more difficult task of identifying solutions, not vice versa. Insisting on plans coming first just creates paralysis.You wouldn't demand a detailed treatment plan from your doctor before accepting a diagnosis, you shouldn't expect any different in social change.

Privileged
22/3/2017 12:02:46 am

1. As I pointed out, most privleged people in the law school are aware of the fact they are privileged in some way. You're evidently skeptical.

2. Keeping score might raise consciousness for some. But it doesn't solve anything. Moreover, acknowledging we're lucky and fortunate is one thing, Being motivated to address inequity is one thing. but neither I, nor anyone else, should have to think less of themselves and their achievements because we have some level of privilege.

3. The blurry lines I refer to are that intersection I mentioned. An argument that fails to acknowledge that reality is weaker as a result. Referring to people as 'duds' and referring to privileged people as 'idle' is unkind, or at least unnecessary. That you think Toby was 'too polite' makes me wonder what you think would have been gained by actually using inflammatory language.

4. The problem or 'diagnosis' has been identified several times by this publication. That is genuinely a good thing. The diagnosis is accepted. Now I want to hear what is going to be done to find the cure.

@PRIVILEGED
22/3/2017 08:16:03 pm

Re 4.) You wanna hear what's going to be done?

Awesome. It's great news that you're interested in change. That's the first step.

Second step is to be that change.

So how are you gonna do that? By getting involved. For example, you might wanna start by getting involved in this:

"The City of Yarra passed a motion earlier this month to demand that all students in Richmond, Cremorne and Burnley had access to Melbourne Girls College and Richmond High.

"Yarra councillor Stephen Jolly said the changes were "classist" and excluded the poorest students in Richmond.

"Education apartheid has no place in the 21st century and that is what this is," he said.

"It is like the colonialists in Africa dividing off the best bits ... the public housing tenants have been locked out."

"The controversy highlights issues around the gentrification of popular public schools and the impact this has on disadvantaged students' access to a good education."

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/education-apartheid-melbourne-girls-college-zone-change-uproar-20170322-gv414p.html

@PRIVILEGED
22/3/2017 08:17:29 pm

Re 4.) You wanna hear what's going to be done?

Awesome. It's great news that you're interested in change. That's the first step.

Second step is to be that change.

So how are you gonna do that? By getting involved. For example, you might wanna start by getting involved in this:

"Poor students living in public housing will be locked out of the prestigious Melbourne Girls College, according to a peak tenants group.

"In a move described as "education apartheid", large parts of north Richmond, including public housing estates, will not be included in the school's zone from 2020.

...

"The City of Yarra passed a motion earlier this month to demand that all students in Richmond, Cremorne and Burnley had access to Melbourne Girls College and Richmond High.

"Yarra councillor Stephen Jolly said the changes were "classist" and excluded the poorest students in Richmond.

"Education apartheid has no place in the 21st century and that is what this is," he said.

"It is like the colonialists in Africa dividing off the best bits ... the public housing tenants have been locked out."

"The controversy highlights issues around the gentrification of popular public schools and the impact this has on disadvantaged students' access to a good education."

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/education-apartheid-melbourne-girls-college-zone-change-uproar-20170322-gv414p.html

Thank you.
22/3/2017 09:46:55 pm

Cool. This is interesting stuff. Thank you for being constructive.

NO PROBLEM
22/3/2017 10:47:04 pm

d(>_・ )グッ!

Christine Todd
21/3/2017 11:53:44 pm

The privilege of privileged folk is that they tend not to spend much time thinking about the detriment experienced by those that don't possess it. Or, as put here, keeping score of the worth of your or others achievements.

I got H1s last semester despite my mum dying in May and subsequently taking on new and confronting carer responsibilities. I'm personally immensely proud of my perseverance. But in the scheme of things my H1s sit alongside the H1s of someone not troubled by the same issues. There's not a lot of scope for how hard fought an 84 was.

This article merely invites people to inspect the privileges they might have been fortunate enough to experience each semester in their studies, and to be more aware, heck (am I going to far? Tell me if this is too big a concept) even supporting the people around them that may be taking a harder route.

For the life of me I cannot figure why such a brilliant group of people so keenly resist the adoption of compassion.

I still wonder.
22/3/2017 12:15:44 am

Why is the assumption in all of these comments that privileged people don't care, or don't think to care going unchallenged here? Why is there an assumption that privileged people do less to support their peers than others?

Are privileged people really all that parochial, out of touch and lacking in self-awareness and empathy?

I don't think so.

Name
22/3/2017 10:41:39 am

Is this a complaint or a statement of fact? Yes the playing field is not equal, but even if it was within the power of the university of law school to fix this (it isn't), it's beyond its responsibility to fix it.

Christine
23/3/2017 10:52:01 am

The assumption that others aren't aware of their privilege can often be based in observing inaction. For argument sake, name a way you feel you might have demonstrated that care or awareness of privilege other than in your own head e.g. those poor unfortunate souls.

It's not easy, is it? It's not meant to be. But if your first gut instinct is to defend yourself and your own sense of achievement than you're probably not far enough down the path. Accepting privilege means momentarily letting go of the advantages that have allowed you to achieve what you have, and thinking critically about what it is like to walk in somebody else's shoes, if maybe that path might have led to different outcomes.

I use my own example - I'm a carer for my 26-year old brother who has an intellectual disability. He has the IQ of an 8-year old. He is in frequent contact with a criminal justice system that he can't understand. The privilege of my intelligence and access to postgraduate legal education insists I look down on him - get a job, get a life, get off drugs, just stop committing crime you drongo. I'm using my own fortunate position in life to make a decision on what I would do in his situation, and I'm not allowing myself to see the world through his eyes. It doesn't work, and he doesn't thrive as a person unless I can lay down my privilege briefly and problem-solve ways of supporting his unique circumstances.

In the law school this inability to law down privilege for the benefit of those less privileged is not always easy to see, but it does occur. It's not always deliberate either, and I respect that. It was, however, blatant in the recorded lectures debate. Here, students just weren't keen on reducing the quality of their legal education (??) for the sake of a few students whose circumstances absolutely required that recorded lectures be made available. That is privilege and inaction. That is not seeing the world through the perspective of another. And until this year, that privilege denied access to a learning tool that could make a *huge* difference for an under-privileged group of students and their ability to achieve.

If you want tangible ways of supporting under-privileged people and/or students, I can list hundreds. But a core step is laying down your privilege (and that pesky defensiveness). Then we can talk.

Sorry, you've got the wrong end of the stick
23/3/2017 03:21:04 pm

Actually, it's not hard. Why you think that what you're talking about is a special challenge for privileged people is a mystery to me, other than it says something about your own personal biases towards the privleged.

Why you think opposing lecture recordings is inextricably a matter of privilege is beyond me. Then again, I didn't oppose recorded lectures, so go figurem I must be a unicorn.

Finally, I'd add that a choice not to unqualifiedly accept what you have to say is not 'pesky' and denialist but instead of a necessary feature of someone engaging in debate with you, and of someone objecting to your arguments and the presumptions that underpin them.



. Why you think it was mostly privileged people (for whatever reason) who were against the lecture recordings is beyond me.

Pull the other one.

dem typos
23/3/2017 03:26:39 pm

sorry, you've got the wrong end of the stick
23/3/2017 03:27:43 pm

Yeah, sorry about that. I'm too privileged to type coherently.

Christine
24/3/2017 10:51:53 am

I refer to defensiveness about privilege as "pesky" because it so often gets in the way of mature and constructive debate. As would appear to be evident here.

Keep fighting the good fight.

Christine
24/3/2017 11:10:51 am

Privilege and lecture recordings: a love story

Step 1: person A, without disability or life circumstances that detriment comprehension of class material, makes statements and decisions about whether person B, who has a disability, should be able to access an equitable learning tool. Person A can get to class and understands it, so should person B.

Step 2: person A, with their privilege of no disability and otherwise normal life circumstances, has enabled a decision to be made that detriments person B, who still suffers a disability *and* cannot derive benefit from the same class content as person A.

Step 3: privilege + opposing lecture recordings = not having an awareness of one's own privileged position in life TO THE DETRIMENT OF THOSE LESS PRIVILEGED.

Sure, not all people that opposed lecture recordings were privileged folk. But I can assure you, the arguments put forward resisting recorded lectures were inherently privileged ones, from the position of someone unfortunate enough to be person B last year.

Still fighting the good fight
24/3/2017 03:35:40 pm

There is nothing immature about pointing out that your attitude is prejudiced and problematic.

If a person disagrees with you, for whatever reason, you seem determined to assert that this disagreement is the product of privilege, and therefore would have no basis if the person but laid down their privilege.

The person arguing with you is thus forced (unfairly) to discharge the burden of proving that argument has persuasive force, and that it was not privilege that substantially contributed to the making of that argument.

You are asking for more than the admission that true awareness of privilege simply requires an individual to be self-aware, empathetic, thoughtful and to take their own lived experience with a grain of salt.

You want to derail arguments of others by implying privilege was a fatal factor. Or, you seek to undermine the arguments of other people on the basis they are privilged and therefore unempathetic to what, in your view, is the correct interpretation of a particular issue.

You assumption is that in the absence of privilege, people would necessarily agree with you. That simply isn't the case.

Check your privilege-checking
4/4/2017 06:59:23 pm

I swear that all comments on De Minimis articles fall into 1 of 2 camps.

1. CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE. Life isn't fair for some people.
2. Defence to CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE. What makes you think it's fair for me?

What does this legitimately do? Make people more "aware"? It's rhetoric, a game of who-can-be-more-genuinely-disadvantaged-and-righteous-in-this-exchange.

But this is a decent article, to maybe serve as a reminder for the self-castigators struggling with the inevitable social comparisons.


Comments are closed.
    Picture

    Archives

    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014

  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12