What do you think?
Rate this book
A Revolution Betrayed: How Egalitarians Wrecked the British Education System
There are few subjects these days that cause parents more stress than the education of their children.
In his new book, Peter Hitchens describes the misjudgements made by politicians over the years that have led to the increase of class distinction and privilege in our education system. This is of course the opposite of what was intended, especially by former Minister of Education Shirley Williams and Margaret Thatcher, her successor in that role, who closed down many more Grammar Schools than Williams.
Given that the cost of private secondary education is now in the region of £50,000 a year and the cream of Comprehensive Schools are now oversubscribed (William Ellis, Camden School for Girls, The Oratory, Cardinal Vaughan), parents are spending thousands on private tutoring and fee-paying prep schools in order to get their children into these academically excellent schools. Meanwhile hypocritical Labour politicians like Diane Abbott send their children to expensive private day schools. So, what alternatives – if any – are there?
Peter Hitchens argues that in trying to bring about an educational system which is egalitarian, the politicians have created a system which is the exact opposite. And what's more, it is a system riddled with anomalies - Sixth Form Colleges select pupils on ability at the age of 15, which rules out any child who does not have major educational backing from home (heavy involvement by working parents or private tutors, for example) and academies also are selective, though they pretend not to be.
This is an in-depth look at the British education system and what will happen if things don't change radically.
In his new book, Peter Hitchens describes the misjudgements made by politicians over the years that have led to the increase of class distinction and privilege in our education system. This is of course the opposite of what was intended, especially by former Minister of Education Shirley Williams and Margaret Thatcher, her successor in that role, who closed down many more Grammar Schools than Williams.
Given that the cost of private secondary education is now in the region of £50,000 a year and the cream of Comprehensive Schools are now oversubscribed (William Ellis, Camden School for Girls, The Oratory, Cardinal Vaughan), parents are spending thousands on private tutoring and fee-paying prep schools in order to get their children into these academically excellent schools. Meanwhile hypocritical Labour politicians like Diane Abbott send their children to expensive private day schools. So, what alternatives – if any – are there?
Peter Hitchens argues that in trying to bring about an educational system which is egalitarian, the politicians have created a system which is the exact opposite. And what's more, it is a system riddled with anomalies - Sixth Form Colleges select pupils on ability at the age of 15, which rules out any child who does not have major educational backing from home (heavy involvement by working parents or private tutors, for example) and academies also are selective, though they pretend not to be.
This is an in-depth look at the British education system and what will happen if things don't change radically.
225 pages, Kindle Edition
Published November 24, 2022
7 people are currently reading
191 people want to read
About the author
Peter Hitchens
21 books301 followersPeter Jonathan Hitchens (born 28 October 1951) is an English journalist and author. He was educated at The Leys School Cambridge, Oxford College of Further Education and the University of York. He has published six books, including The Abolition of Britain, The Rage Against God, and The War We Never Fought. He is a frequent critic of political correctness and describes himself as an Anglican Christian and Burkean conservative.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
November 26, 2022
Controversial, arguing that the destruction of the grammar schools, driven by utopian egalitarians, has ultimately failed. Hitchens argues that selection by ability has been replaced by selection by wealth; and seeks to show that the idealistic promises of a grammar school education for everyone have utterly failed to materialise.
Ultimately this is a well-argued and well-researched contribution to a debate which is often driven more by ideology than data.
Ultimately this is a well-argued and well-researched contribution to a debate which is often driven more by ideology than data.
December 27, 2022
The False Demonisation of Secondary Moderns
Based on my experience, it's been a long held falsehood that those who weren't selected for grammar school were devastated by the decision, and, as a consequence, had their lives blighted by this early "failure," and were condemned to having their schooling conducted in Secondary Moderns.
In 1966, coming from a working class background, to my surprise, as I was never coached for the 11+, having recently changed schools, I, unwittingly, sat, and passed the test, so went to Enfield Grammar School, whereas many of my friends who didn't "pass," nor expected to, were content to go, as I would have been, "across the road" to Winchmore Hill Secondary Modern, where some were pleased, if not to say proud, to be selected for the 'X' and 'Y,' grammar school, streams of that Secondary School, where they went on to take and pass GCE O' Levels and CSE's, alongside the fun of metal work and car maintenance; experiences denied to us Grammar School boys. Also, they appear to remain, to this day, as far as I can tell, psychologically unharmed, by, what the Left now like to portray as the traumatic experience of encountering "failure" at such a tender age.
I went on to to teach in Comprehensives, for seven years, in East London, leaving to become a Chartered Certified Accountant in the Oil & Gas industry, and, owing to the paucity of education I encountered as a schoolteacher, I selected, by income, to put my own children through private schools, namely, Dulwich College and Alleyn's, (as I was not prepared to entrust their education to the state, for which my children remain ungrateful, indifferent to, and oblivious of what they avoided) where they both succeeded, academically, as far as the watered down syllabi allowed, with one of them graduating from a Russell Group University (Leeds), and the other eschewing university (which I think is a very good decision for most young adults today, particularly if it's not a Russell Group one), and relies on his well rounded social skills to make his way, along with a raft of mainly A and A* Grade GCSE O' and A' Levels.
Recently, I've been invigilating in secondary schools, and was surprised to see how little content the GCSE O' and A' Level papers contain nowadays, even compared to when I was teaching 37 years ago, so I have to agree with Peter Hitchens, much against my hopes when I started reading this book, that there is little chance of Grammar Schools returning, in the form they used to exist, largely, but not only, because teachers of today have not been given the chance to obtain the necessary education themselves.
Nonetheless, I would, without doubt, support any return to selection by ability, rather than income, at the drop of a hat, in the unlikely event the electorate were to be given the chance to choose, by the current crop of political elites, who, ostensibly, stand on either side of the imaginary divide between the two main parties.
A disappointing, and most depressing, conclusion, but, thanks to this book, I was able to arrive at it.
Based on my experience, it's been a long held falsehood that those who weren't selected for grammar school were devastated by the decision, and, as a consequence, had their lives blighted by this early "failure," and were condemned to having their schooling conducted in Secondary Moderns.
In 1966, coming from a working class background, to my surprise, as I was never coached for the 11+, having recently changed schools, I, unwittingly, sat, and passed the test, so went to Enfield Grammar School, whereas many of my friends who didn't "pass," nor expected to, were content to go, as I would have been, "across the road" to Winchmore Hill Secondary Modern, where some were pleased, if not to say proud, to be selected for the 'X' and 'Y,' grammar school, streams of that Secondary School, where they went on to take and pass GCE O' Levels and CSE's, alongside the fun of metal work and car maintenance; experiences denied to us Grammar School boys. Also, they appear to remain, to this day, as far as I can tell, psychologically unharmed, by, what the Left now like to portray as the traumatic experience of encountering "failure" at such a tender age.
I went on to to teach in Comprehensives, for seven years, in East London, leaving to become a Chartered Certified Accountant in the Oil & Gas industry, and, owing to the paucity of education I encountered as a schoolteacher, I selected, by income, to put my own children through private schools, namely, Dulwich College and Alleyn's, (as I was not prepared to entrust their education to the state, for which my children remain ungrateful, indifferent to, and oblivious of what they avoided) where they both succeeded, academically, as far as the watered down syllabi allowed, with one of them graduating from a Russell Group University (Leeds), and the other eschewing university (which I think is a very good decision for most young adults today, particularly if it's not a Russell Group one), and relies on his well rounded social skills to make his way, along with a raft of mainly A and A* Grade GCSE O' and A' Levels.
Recently, I've been invigilating in secondary schools, and was surprised to see how little content the GCSE O' and A' Level papers contain nowadays, even compared to when I was teaching 37 years ago, so I have to agree with Peter Hitchens, much against my hopes when I started reading this book, that there is little chance of Grammar Schools returning, in the form they used to exist, largely, but not only, because teachers of today have not been given the chance to obtain the necessary education themselves.
Nonetheless, I would, without doubt, support any return to selection by ability, rather than income, at the drop of a hat, in the unlikely event the electorate were to be given the chance to choose, by the current crop of political elites, who, ostensibly, stand on either side of the imaginary divide between the two main parties.
A disappointing, and most depressing, conclusion, but, thanks to this book, I was able to arrive at it.
June 8, 2025
contains interesting quotes and passages as a reactionary history, but i don't buy it. hitchens has little to extrapolate a lot from, and much of what he argues is personal memory combatting the changing focus and standards of education the world over. i'm sure there is something to selective education that could produce more equitable outcomes, but i'd be concerned about the already fraught geographical and individualist divide within britain that would be exacerbated by tiered education.
May 21, 2023
Polemical, oddly structured, an assertive but often careless argument, depending on rhetoric rather than facts at crucial moments.
April 28, 2024
Peter Hitchens is by far the best political commentator in the country IMO.
November 15, 2024
Between 1944 and 1965 the British education system was so good that, had it lasted longer than it did, it might have changed British society for the better and beyond recognition. Six Prime Ministers from working class backgrounds came through that system. Today, the British comprehensive schools are terrible. Half the children leaving comprehensive school cannot read at the standard expected of a twelve year old. What happened? Where did things go so badly wrong? Whose fault was it, and what mis-shapen ideology drove its destruction?
The grammar schools, which until 1944 had been selective and had charged fees, were made free of charge to children whose results in an examination given at age 11 and again, if requested, at age 13, indicated that they had the talent to benefit by them. The resulting system transformed the lives of those who passed the examination. For those who failed the examination on both attempts, the system provided 'secondary modern' schools.
Mr Hitchens provides ample evidence for the transformative effect of a grammar school education, as well as evidence that the education at the secondary modern schools of the day was substantially better than the education provided today by the comprehensive schools. The failure of the comprehensive schools was noticed after the first handful of comprehensives opened, and as the change from 'bi-partite' schools to comprehensives proceeded, so the uselessness of the comprehensives became more and more evident. Yet the switch to comprehensive schooling continued inexorably.
There's a lot of wasted paper in this book. I didn't read the 25 pages that list former grammar school pupils and their achievements, and my eyes slid over the 50 pages of detailed history. I never could do history. It is the polemic and the summaries of events and opinions that form the compelling subject matter, a history of abject failure that was treated as though it had been a success.
The grammar schools, which until 1944 had been selective and had charged fees, were made free of charge to children whose results in an examination given at age 11 and again, if requested, at age 13, indicated that they had the talent to benefit by them. The resulting system transformed the lives of those who passed the examination. For those who failed the examination on both attempts, the system provided 'secondary modern' schools.
Mr Hitchens provides ample evidence for the transformative effect of a grammar school education, as well as evidence that the education at the secondary modern schools of the day was substantially better than the education provided today by the comprehensive schools. The failure of the comprehensive schools was noticed after the first handful of comprehensives opened, and as the change from 'bi-partite' schools to comprehensives proceeded, so the uselessness of the comprehensives became more and more evident. Yet the switch to comprehensive schooling continued inexorably.
There's a lot of wasted paper in this book. I didn't read the 25 pages that list former grammar school pupils and their achievements, and my eyes slid over the 50 pages of detailed history. I never could do history. It is the polemic and the summaries of events and opinions that form the compelling subject matter, a history of abject failure that was treated as though it had been a success.
May 14, 2025
I really decided it would be a good idea to take a book with a conservative ass sounding title for the memes from a bookswap-adjacent thing and it wasn't. I see why a version so pristine would end up given away and then later presumably rotting for several weeks outside an east village bookstore lol
an interesting insight or two and like there's lots of stuff I could probably see/agree with more than most people that I share my politics worth because the complications my personal benefitting from pre-tertiary selection stuff and like generally agreeing with the idea that what's essentially the British version of zone schools is probably not great in the types of economic disparities it adds to education.
but like bro is just a lil too smug for my liking, only vaguely backs things up with stats, and just kind of states things off vibes as if they're agreed upon facts. Like I am 100% not qualified to give opinions on the specifics the book covered but there's no way all those claims are substantiated. but again, removing my personal disgust at the style choices of the author and the fact that it's just vibes, thought provoking enough that I'm not necessarily regretting reading it.
an interesting insight or two and like there's lots of stuff I could probably see/agree with more than most people that I share my politics worth because the complications my personal benefitting from pre-tertiary selection stuff and like generally agreeing with the idea that what's essentially the British version of zone schools is probably not great in the types of economic disparities it adds to education.
but like bro is just a lil too smug for my liking, only vaguely backs things up with stats, and just kind of states things off vibes as if they're agreed upon facts. Like I am 100% not qualified to give opinions on the specifics the book covered but there's no way all those claims are substantiated. but again, removing my personal disgust at the style choices of the author and the fact that it's just vibes, thought provoking enough that I'm not necessarily regretting reading it.
October 19, 2023
The book is written in angry tone, it could be argued that this a righteous anger, but it seems more like an anger written from a point of nostalgia. The unapologetic method used to describe selective education could bring about a conversation on the structure of the modern educational system. However, the data presented in support of this model is at best cherry-picked and at worst dishonest. Some examples of this misleading or potentially dishonest discourse are some of the accusations thrown about accusing critics of (pg. 163 "the boundary between dislike of examinations and the dislike of the schools that relied on them.") Paired with the obfuscation of his position with the book "is not an argument for grammar schools". Finally, he failed to acknowledge the extensive academic literature supporting the opposition and in doing so fails to properly address the obvious counterpoint.
November 5, 2023
This one feels a bit loose. His overall point is probably the right one: that you can have better education I'd you target it at those who need it, not at those who can't, and that trying to create a fully comprehensive, fully egalitarian system tends to produce the second outcome, not the first.
But he doesn't really make it in a very thorough way. He doesn't attbeot to tease out, for example, to what extent grammars produced better results because they were better vs better results because they selected the best pupils. Probably there's a but if both but he's not really saying what the magic is. What is it that they'd do right besides selection?
I went to a school that called itself a grammar but in fact was a fee-paying school in Blackburn, so I had to keep reminding myself what was under discussion.
Oh and I wouldn't have has a frigging clue who won the Battle of Plassey.
But he doesn't really make it in a very thorough way. He doesn't attbeot to tease out, for example, to what extent grammars produced better results because they were better vs better results because they selected the best pupils. Probably there's a but if both but he's not really saying what the magic is. What is it that they'd do right besides selection?
I went to a school that called itself a grammar but in fact was a fee-paying school in Blackburn, so I had to keep reminding myself what was under discussion.
Oh and I wouldn't have has a frigging clue who won the Battle of Plassey.
September 24, 2025
American here.
Picked it up because I like Hitchens's prose, which is direct, polemical, and bitter in tone - much like a cup of black coffee.
Being an American, there's little I can do to restore state-sponsored grammar schools in England— even though they sounded like a decent idea in that they were, as Evelyn Waugh put it, "a scheme to give free education to the deserving poor."
Given that admission, reading this book did help me. It put my own American state-sponsored public school education into perspective. I get the sense that the kind of education I received—hard to fail, easy to pass, low standards that keep falling lower, and a degree that proves I can keep showing up to a building for four years—is similar to the U.K.'s current comprehensive school program.
I guess that when the lights suddenly go out, it's nice to know the neighbor's are out too.
Picked it up because I like Hitchens's prose, which is direct, polemical, and bitter in tone - much like a cup of black coffee.
Being an American, there's little I can do to restore state-sponsored grammar schools in England— even though they sounded like a decent idea in that they were, as Evelyn Waugh put it, "a scheme to give free education to the deserving poor."
Given that admission, reading this book did help me. It put my own American state-sponsored public school education into perspective. I get the sense that the kind of education I received—hard to fail, easy to pass, low standards that keep falling lower, and a degree that proves I can keep showing up to a building for four years—is similar to the U.K.'s current comprehensive school program.
I guess that when the lights suddenly go out, it's nice to know the neighbor's are out too.
October 19, 2025
I hadn’t considered the development of education and school systems before reading this, I accepted the reality that faced me without feeling any sort of indignation. The authors descriptions of how ideology, usually half thought out ideology, has been the driver of change from the Butler act to the comprehensive system instead of academic progress and genuine equality of opportunity was incredibly evocative, equally the explanation of grade inflation was insightful. Hitchens’ polemic is persuasive, however, although it wasn’t the purpose of the book, the question arises of what a good school actually is, I don’t agree with abolishing examinations however I don’t think secondary modern schools becoming more like grammar schools was a sign of success. When reading such a strong argument I wanted to know the other side to it.
March 12, 2024
This is one of those books that is tough to review as an American because it is about something happening overseas in a way that doesn't match perfectly on to how education is done here in the US. Hitchens' prose and bite are great as ever, but I feel unqualified to really judge the merits of the book well due to my own ignorance on a lot of the issues.
This book does ask some good questions: what is the purpose of education and is that actually being achieved, or is the educational system just one more place where political goals must come first even at the expense of the student.
Wouldn't recommend it unless you live in the UK or have some affinity with Hitchens or what he is talking about. I just like the Hitch so I'm always here for him.
This book does ask some good questions: what is the purpose of education and is that actually being achieved, or is the educational system just one more place where political goals must come first even at the expense of the student.
Wouldn't recommend it unless you live in the UK or have some affinity with Hitchens or what he is talking about. I just like the Hitch so I'm always here for him.
January 30, 2023
Solid and extensive polemic by Hitchens, though fans will find little surprise in the arguments he has espoused for many years, and enemies will no doubt continue to turn a blind eye. As usual he lays his opponents arguments on the table respectfully before explaining why he regards them to be catastrophically wrong. A subject that is now rather unfashionable and little understood by the British public, but worth a read for anyone with interest in the debate over academic selection and social mobility. I found plenty that I previously didn’t know, but would probably get more pleasure from seeing the arguments thoroughly debated.
February 2, 2024
Interesting read about the life times and decline of the British education system. I say decline as it was fairly obvious to me back in my GCSE and a level days that the talk of dumbing down at the time had foundation. This book focuses on the loss of grammar schools and there ideology of those that wanted this - there was no reason to do it from an educational standards point of view. The main reason is egalitarians who didn't like the fact that it churned out conservative minded people. What a shame and a waste and ultimately loss for the poor.
March 17, 2025
Peter Hitchens shows how revolutionaries and ideologues ultimately destroyed something that actually was good for society. As he points out the revolutionary left did this by co-opting non radicals on terms they could agree to. A good history of what happened as Labour destroyed and tories did nothing to prevent the destruction of grammar schools and hijacked education not as a tool of training people to live in the world they actually live in but as an act of social engineering.
March 5, 2023
My least favourite of his books so far.
April 22, 2023
I don't like education but I sure like Peter Hitchens.
May 7, 2023
Enjoyed reading about an issue I didn’t knew existed and being given a history lesson about how good intentions (or perhaps beliefs) can lead to suboptimal results.
April 21, 2024
An engaging and thought-provoking book, researched with zeal and written brilliantly.
December 27, 2022
Interesting, engaging and insightful
This is a good book, though seems lighter fair than Hitchens usual authorship. There are some extremely valid points, but I am not convinced by their rigour as yet (I need to re-read). I am sure that many will find the holes in the various arguments that Hitchens’ makes, but essentially, he pokes and prods at the issues surrounding the education system in, I assume, a valid attempt to provoke the argument. This is a worthy cause.
This is a good book, though seems lighter fair than Hitchens usual authorship. There are some extremely valid points, but I am not convinced by their rigour as yet (I need to re-read). I am sure that many will find the holes in the various arguments that Hitchens’ makes, but essentially, he pokes and prods at the issues surrounding the education system in, I assume, a valid attempt to provoke the argument. This is a worthy cause.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews