EDUCATED in IGNORANCE

Ed Milliband has won the vote for party leadership of the Labour Party.  I’m not loyal to any particular party and my previous voting has been based on my own situation contemporary to those elections.  As an example, during my days as a student I voted for the Liberal Democrats who advocated free university education for all.  Such was my short sighted world as an undergraduate.

  There has been a lot of media coverage of Ed’s success (particularly at the expense of his brother David).  What strikes me most however is that we are currently in a situation where the entire parliament consists of almost exclusively of unelected members.  Now that statement applies in varying degrees to different members.  But in its pinnacle form I would contend that the Coalition Government does not have a clear mandate to lead the country.  My reasoning for saying this is if you were to give everyone who voted for the Liberal Democrats (as I did) if, knowing that the Liberals would get in to political bed with the Conservatives, would they change their vote; I believe a majority percentage would change their decision.

  Let’s face up to the truth; Labour did worse than any of us were expecting.  Many people who had previously been voting Labour decided to shake their fists and show Labour how bloody disenchanted the public are with their performance.  Trouble was, who else to vote for?  No sane, regular, Labour voter would vote Conservative; it’s just too big a jump in ethics.  Liberal must have seemed the only feasible option at the time.  It was a safe bet wasn’t it?  The Liberals and their policies that lean ever so subtly to the left (but we have to whisper it so as no one starts burning women as Communists again) surely wouldn’t find common ground with the Conservatives – the old enemy.

  It seemed like such a convenient plan; the voters would move to the Liberals in reasonable numbers but Labour would still do well enough for a Liberal / Labour coalition.  Labour, being the lesser of two evils and the Liberals pushing through some reforms to the system with little resistance.  It was obvious to us all it seemed – clearly not to Mr. Clegg.

  But I don’t really want to gripe or dwell on the outcome because what is done is done.  What I want to talk about is the motivation, wisdom, knowledge, judgements, etc that led many people to stop voting for Labour and move to other parties.  The Conservative Party didn’t just spawn a lot of new voters for itself; a vast number switched from Labour, to another party.  On what basis did many of us make that decision?  On what basis do we make our voting decisions in general?

  My own vote is cast based upon my own research into the policies of each party, watching the debates and reading the news.  I can’t admit to ever reading a party manifesto.  I think it is important to do this and this is why: when I was first eligible to vote I voted Labour because my parents said that it was a good choice and not to vote for the Conservatives.  On that occasion I did as was suggested but it was only afterwards that I realised I didn’t really know for what I had voted.  The more I thought about it, no one had ever taught me about voting or politics and that’s despite how integral and important they are to our lives.

  Little has changed since I was at school.  I am forced to question why we are not taught basic politics in Secondary schools.  The current situation seems to be that we go through the education system and then once 18 we are able to vote; with the exception of those curious few who might read about politics, the rest of us are fed on the scraps of mass media.  So many people have only the BBC news and the press on which to base their opinions and eventually their votes.  Now is it not concerning to think that voters might be basing their decisions entirely on the reporting of newspapers like The Sun or the Daily Mail?

  In private schools, pupils are taught basic politics; taking as my local example, Leicester Grammar School.  Students at Leicester Grammar are taught politics as part of their Personal and Social Education classes.  These lessons would be broad and generalised but none the less an introduction to the idea of British politics.  Guests are also invited to speak to the students.  Politics as a subject is then offered as an AS Level qualification to all Further Education students but all FE students (regardless of subjects studied) attend a one hour General Studies Lecture.  A lot of these are political in nature; members of the Green Party might come and discuss their role in Government, debates held on the troubles in Palestine, and speakers representing a variety of QUANGO’s.

  I was not lucky enough to have a private school education so I received no education in politics at all.  Might that represent a class divide or can we just lay it squarely down to our poor education system?  I do not like to resort to class based arguments in political discussions (you run the risk of sounding like a deranged Marx scholar).  What angers me is that throughout secondary education I received at least one hour of every week studying Religious Education.

  I want to make a brief clarification.  I am an atheist but I am not anti faith.  I love mythology and stories and books.  I am passionate about different cultures and beliefs.  I am only ever anti religion when it interferes in lives and governments and education on a systematic and state-like basis.

  So my issue with Religious Education; why are we taught it?  Would it not be more prudent to school our population in basic politics from an early age?  When I finished secondary school I could tell you the story of Diwali almost from memory but I couldn’t tell you the key policy differences between Labour and the Conservatives.  I can safely say that my knowledge of Hindu festivals has never served me in any way.  Does religion have a place in the education system of a liberal and multicultural nation?  That is perhaps a question for another day.

  I do not think we can say we live in a democratic society where the general population is kept in the dark on even the basics of British politics.  The average person is introduced to politics via the media that is in most cases biased to one party or another.  For want of a better word we are controlled and kept ignorant and compliant.  How can you change the system if you don’t even know what the system is?  That is perhaps the only class divide here; those lucky enough to have a private education are arguably more likely to work in politics because they were introduced to it an early age and have more of an interest.

  If politics was taught in secondary school young people would understand politics and be better prepared to vote once they reach the age of 18.  I think it would combat voter apathy because people would feel involved and in touch with politics from an early age.  Also, a basic knowledge at an early age would encourage students from less wealthy backgrounds to study politics at FE and Higher Education levels, moving into politics as a career.  It would reform politics as we know it in Britain and we would see real change, not just superficial change.

  For now we continue with an unrepresentative government, formed by an unrepresentative voting system, voted for by a deliberately uninformed population.  But hey, why I should I care when I can tell you the story of how Ganesh got his Elephant head?