Daily Archives: 4 March, 2008

A classic example of an Etonian

by Brigidjones

 Maragert Hodge thinks the Proms are “divisive”; David Cameron, meanwhile, reckons that the Proms are alright. He cites her as being “a classic example of a Labour politician not really getting some of the things that people like to do to celebrate culture and identity and a great British institution.”

 I feel the urge to cite Cameron as being the classic example of someone who went to Eton. Why on Earth would I want to watch the Proms? I can’t play a musical instrument, I have never had lessons at school in classical music, and despite my mother’s best efforts to get me into it I find most of it a dull intrusion upon my eardrums,  in much the same way I am sure Mr Cameron would find most of the things in my CD collection.

 The Proms are no more a bastion of British culture to me than a night out in a club would be to him. I’ve got to agree with Ms Hodge on this one.

Sometimes I really hate territorial politics

by Brigidjones

 A potentially controversial statement; allow me to explain.

 In student politics, more specifically elections to union or guild executives, the usual system of having one official candidate from each party does not apply. For the second year running, there are two BULS members running for our Guild presidency. Also, both the candidates for Vice President Welfare are Labour Party members. For many other positions, there are no Labour members on the ballot paper. This makes it impossible to pick candidates along party lines- something I would refrain from doing anyway in non-party political elections.

 Picking candidates based on religion also is a shit reason to pick people. I am an atheist, and I was raised in a Christian based society and educated in a CofE school, but would still happily elect a Muslim, Jew, Bhuddist etc over an atheist or a Christian if I thought they would do a better job. I would never, ever expect someone to support me in a student election just because I carried a party membership card, came from a particular religious background, because of my gender, sexuality or the colour of my skin, and I think to do so shows a severe weakness of argument and character.

 I know an awful lot of people will disagree with me very strongly on this, and some will think I am having a dig at particular people- I really, really am not. I just can’t help but get frustrated sometimes though at the rubbish reasons a lot of people use to choose who to vote for. It should be about who can deliver the best policies, and nothing else.