Two posters on this thread have referred to "the ruling class", and I genuinely don't know what the phrase is intended to mean.

We live in a democracy, which literally means "rule by the people". Nobody else "rules" us - not the monarchy and not even parliament, from which our representatives get thrown out if they sufficiently displease us.

Perhaps you have in mind the investment bankers, senior lawyers, senior policemen, "well-connected" individuals, freemasons and the extremely wealthy. I imagine that some of these people would like to rule us, and I suspect that many of them are not averse to pulling strings when they have the opportunity. But I cant accept that this group is responsible for the way our society has developed.

If he doesn't like the expression Ruling class how about "group think" because that is what the elite subscribe to. The people in power or with wealth and influence believe these tropes are taken for granted and wouldn't think to question them:

- Mass migration is good
- Multiculturalism is good
- Globalism and cheap labour
- Soft on crime and the causes of crime

To name just a few.

Women were the main cause of the changes in the 50's & 60's.

With the men away at war, as with WWI, but to a greater extent, women worked - in munitions, on the land, in factories, food production and offices as never before. When the men came home, many were reluctant to go back to the old domestic drudgery that had been, for the main part, their only lot in life, and certainly the younger ones without children grasped their opportunities and refused to give them back.

With the 60's and the coming of the pill, even more freedom came their way - no need to worry about 'accidents', shotgun weddings and ties to the kitchen sink to avoid social condemnation - they had control over their bodies - in fact they thought they had it all and made the most of it.

Gradually, their new way of life became accepted and the social norms changed accordingly - where once 'the mothers' watched over all the neighbourhood children (theirs and everyone else's), the streets were safe - a battalion of women confronting a stranger hanging around their homes deterred most - and the husband was the breadwinner with the last word at home, now you had the 'latchkey' generation, sexually liberated and financially independent women and the collapse of the old order.

With increased social awareness and the advent of benefits for all (50's/60's you still depended on your family or neighbours in a crisis as there was a stigma attached to 'handouts') the whole nature of society changed and then seemed to go on a downward spiral as the achievers achieved and the rest went to pot when they found someone else would pick up the bill......

......and no, I don't think we should go back to the old regime, just sort out the present one!

Their only loyalties are to whatever they think will retain their wealth and power.

It's as basic as that....it's quite simple really.....but I was still shocked when it finally hit home because we are all programmed to believe that the state cares about us.

Let's not overlook the hundreds/thousands who lived in slum accommodation, on low wages never knowing where the next meal was coming from, with ever increasing number of children to feed. It was still only the white collar workers who could afford houses...