Last week I was fortunate enough to have been invited by one of my friends to meet Mark Coote, Conservative Candidate for Cheltenham, at a pub in Cheltenham. As I suspected by reading much of his material he was a delightful person to be with. Quite personable and I can see how he would be a successful candidate.

With the seesaw of British politics in motion once again we can expect for David Cameron to be Prime Minister next general election. In which case having Mark Coote elected for Cheltenham would be of great advantage to Cheltenham. With David Cameron only being a phone call away how could Mark Coote be a bad thing?

The evening was spent discussing personal views, campaigning ideas and attempting to achieve a firm grip of Conservative politics. Lots of free beers were involved and by the end of the evening I was ready to sign up to the Conservatives. I know it sounds cheesy, almost manipulative with free beers being offered but I believed in Mark Coote.

I don’t mean to sound that I now no longer believe in Mark. He is a fantastic candidate but the question of helping with their campaign is really a personal one. Much of my experience within the PR sector has been related to social media for individuals and companies that want to ultimately sell.

Politics is different. Very different. Listening to why a political party is better compared to another uses a lot of language commonly associated with religious evangelism. What I witnessed at that table last Friday was political evangelism. In the same way I would resist the values preached by a Christian, Muslim, Jew or even Pagan… I felt the need to resist the Conservatives.

It does sound peculiar. Of course I have an interest in politics but my reasons for not joining the Conservatives could be regarded as theological in nature. For the same reason I have remained an Atheist almost.

As an Atheist it is possible to clearly observe(…)

A couple of weeks ago at the Philosophy society we discussed ‘The Prince’ by Niccolo Machiavelli which is really an instruction manual for a leader. The whole the book seems to be littered with hypothetical imperatives in which Machiavelli believed a leader should act. In this way he seemed to imitate Immanuel Kant but the focus on morality was less severe. Obviously these circumstances are subjective to the philosopher’s own ideas and time period in which the book was written. As the only PR student at the society I could see a lot of crossovers in which philosophy, dubbed as the “broad church”, also infiltrates aspects of PR.

In particular, conversation swerved onto the recent American presidentially elections and Barack Hussein Obama’s win. This then diverted to politics in my own country, Britain and the image of Gordon Brown. A couple in the group believed that Margret Thatcher was making a positive comeback even though when she was Prime Minister people seemed to hate her ideas. I could see how Tony Blair’s popularity fell in office but now he would most likely be preferred over Gordon Brown. It seems that a leader has his character judged rather than the ideas he stands for. When the next political elections transpire in this country the newspapers are likely to have headlines such as Brown vs Cameron and imitate the elections as some sort of battle. Political parties only really receive focus during local elections but even so the leaders of particular parties are still taken into account.

It is no wonder then that Public Relations serves such an important role. If it is possible to observe an audience and find their ideal leader and character traits then a political leader could be shaped to this ideal. In a strange way this is similar to Plato’s theory of the forms. A leader is given a form which coincides with a higher form in the audience’s minds. The idea of a colloquially spoken Margret Thatcher would(…)