>The prospective students of Eton are then asked to imagine they are the prime minister and write a speech to explain how they would convince the public that they did the right thing.
If they disagree ... isn't that kinda the point? Eton's like, the future-PM factory, right? Do they honestly expect they're never going to have to give a speech defending something they disagreed with, or at least, had strong reservations about?
(And, as others noted, it's not fair to call this killing "protesters", but rather, "rioters".)
> Do they honestly expect they're never going to have to give a speech defending something they disagreed with, or at least, had strong reservations about?
This is .. low-integrity behaviour, though? It used to be part of the operation of both ministerial and cabinet collective responsibility that ministers had a responsibility to agree or resign. The gold standard of this was Claire Short, who resigned rather than support the Iraq war: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1429856/Clare-Short-quits-C...
Arguably the erosion of this has led us to the crisis of the present day.
If they disagree ... isn't that kinda the point? Eton's like, the future-PM factory, right? Do they honestly expect they're never going to have to give a speech defending something they disagreed with, or at least, had strong reservations about?
(And, as others noted, it's not fair to call this killing "protesters", but rather, "rioters".)