Thomas Burridge, LPUK, Elections and Age
Much of the coverage I've seen about Thomas Burridge's candidacy for LPUK in Norwich North has centred on his age (18, fact fans) rather than the fact that he is a PPC for a party that offers genuine change for the UK. I guess that's inevitable, and this post isn't really going to change that as it is going to focus on, well, age.
Let's dismiss one argument I've seen straight away - that it doesn't matter who LPUK puts up in this election because they ain't gonna win it. Yeah, the chances of the party winning in Norwich North aren't tremendous. And if Burridge is going to be an MP, then it will probably be after another election, when he is older. But no party should ever allow itself to be represented by someone that it wouldn't be proud to have in power. If a party runs candidates without caring who they are or what they stand for then they are jaded, old, cynical and not worthy of running in that election. Hopefully, Burridge isn't the LPUK candidate because they are certain of losing. Rather, he should be the candidate because they hope - against hope - to win.
The argument against Burridge is as obvious as it is tedious - at 18, he lacks the experience to be an MP. Well, I do have to say that at 18 I'd have lacked the experience to be an MP, but I'm not Thomas Burridge. Which is the point. Just because some people are not ready to be an MP at 18 doesn't mean all people aren't ready at 18 to be an MP.
Besides - as is always trotted out when the question of age comes up in debate - just look at what 18 year olds can do. Drink, fuck, drive, vote, die in a war, leave school, leave home - the list goes on. We trust 18 year olds - who at that age are seen as adults - to do an endless list of things. So why shouldn't we trust them to be a credible candidate for election to Parliament?
Finally, I'd like to point out that this is a historical moment not just because of the candidates age, but also because he is standing for a party just starting to fight elections and take their radical ideas onto the national stage. Donate, join or just support - but this candidacy is the first step in what will be a long but hopefully ultimately successful bid to get a radical alternative to the staid, self-serving status quo into power in this country.
Labels: Elections, Libertarians, LPUK
posted by The Nameless Libertarian @ 9:30 am
10 Comments
10 Comments:
"Yeah, the chances of the party winning in Norwich North aren't tremendous"
Ladbrooks has us at 500/1. True story.
Are we still at 500-1?
Might stick a couple of quid on if we are still at those odds...
Just because some people are not ready to be an MP at 18 doesn't mean all people aren't ready at 18 to be an MP.
Yes it does, just as Obama is playing at being president - he hasn't got what it takes.
I'm sure Thomas is a perfectly nice, decent, honourable, intelligent and atriculate chap.
BUT.
Just as I said on LPUK blog, I think this is a massive triumph of hope over experience. The sort of thing you'd expect from idealistic (a.k.a. unworldly) lefties.
LPUK has a big enough fight on its hands to get its core message across and is literally sending a boy to do a man's job. The public won't wear it. If Ian PJ or similar was standing, the odds would now be down at 100/1 of shorter, in my view.
Even in the big picture, if little matey gets elected at some election in the next 5 years, he'll still be a career politician who hasn't done most of:
- Bought a house
- Been married
- Had children
- Been divorced
- Been bereaved
- Been made redundant
- Been involved with the justice system
- Had personal exposure to the issues of health, pensions and social security.
- Had any experience that could possibly relate to national defence.
- Been subjected to a prolonged proctoscopy from HMRC.
I just don't get it and if I was a wavering voter, in a seat where the person against whom people hold a grudge has gone - so this isn't a Martin Bell scenario - I wouldn't see any reason change party allegience, let alone gamble on a total unknown who quite frankly, intelligent and eloquent or not, doesn't know shit.
AJ
aljahom
You're right, Burridge won't have had many of the experiences that you list - either now, or in five years time. However, that doesn't mean a great deal other than he is young
A lack of life experience doesn't mean you're not capable of being an MP; just as having life experience doesn't mean you are automatically right to be an MP. After all, Gordon Brown - who is getting on in years and has had many of the experiences you mention - arguably still isn't fit to be an MP (let alone PM).
Perhaps the lack of experience would concern me more if Burridge was standing for the Thomas Burridge Party. But he isn't. he is standing for the Libertarian Party of the UK, and if elected, he'll have the Libertarian Ideology to back him and help guide his decisions. I firmly believe that the Libertarian Party will live or die by the power of their ideas and how well they express them, not by the age of the candidates. So I understand your concerns, but I don't feel they are enough to warrant anyone not moving from the parties of the bloated status quo to the representatives of a movement that will give freedom back to the people.
TNL
TNL
I'm not disagreeing with the principles by which your argument is constructed. I just don't think the reality will adhere.
My POV on this is through the prism of the 'typical voter'.
They won't go for it. I believe this is a serious tactical error. IMO.
AJ
We'll have to see how it plays out with the voters. I agree with the idea that this may prove to be counter-productive, since the debate isn't about our policies but rather the candidates age.
But then again, would anyone be talking about LPUK at all in this election if Burridge wasn't such a young candidate? I despair of gimmicks in politics, but they can work.
Whatever the reasoning behind his selection, I think he (and the party as a whole) need to grab what attention they have gained and to get down to selling what he stands for and move the debate on from his age.
TNL
I meant to say on the LPUK blog:
Even in the big picture, if little matey gets elected at some election in the next 5 years, he'll still be a career politician who hasn't done most of:
- Bought a house
- Been married
- Had children
- Been divorced
- Been bereaved
- Been made redundant
- Been involved with the justice system
- Had personal exposure to the issues of health, pensions and social security.
- Had any experience that could possibly relate to national defence.
- Been subjected to a prolonged proctoscopy from HMRC.
So what? Do you think those drones that have been to uni, spent 10 years as a party apparatchik and then parachuted into a safe seat are any better?
Anyway, this is as much about getting publicity as a realistic chance of winning and what better way than someone so you and with a slogan of the "debt generation"?
Thanks guys, I'm seeing your points.
I'll admit I didn't look at it that way (vis. a publicity 'in-road').
I hope it works.
AJ
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home