This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/02/charles-kennedy-lib-dems-truly-authentic-politician

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Charles Kennedy, a truly authentic politician who rose above the crowd Charles Kennedy, a truly authentic politician who rose above the crowd
(34 minutes later)
Authenticity is the most elusive but the most precious of all qualities in modern democratic politics. Very few politicians are blessed with it. Lots of politicians pretend to possess it. The lack of it causes many careers to stumble and not even get off the ground. But Charles Kennedy had it naturally and he had it in spades. He was one of the very few politicians of the modern era to whom ordinary non-political people instinctively related. People liked him and were right to do so. It gave him a special status in public life right to the enormously sad end.Authenticity is the most elusive but the most precious of all qualities in modern democratic politics. Very few politicians are blessed with it. Lots of politicians pretend to possess it. The lack of it causes many careers to stumble and not even get off the ground. But Charles Kennedy had it naturally and he had it in spades. He was one of the very few politicians of the modern era to whom ordinary non-political people instinctively related. People liked him and were right to do so. It gave him a special status in public life right to the enormously sad end.
At his best, Kennedy had the ability to rise above the crowd and speak for his times in easily expressed and easily understood language. His ability to cut through the evasions and cliches of modern politics was a quality so many others struggle to emulate, often without success. He also had a great and natural sense of humour, unusual in a very private man such as he. It made him one of the few politicians who could master every form of television interview or appearance without looking awkward.At his best, Kennedy had the ability to rise above the crowd and speak for his times in easily expressed and easily understood language. His ability to cut through the evasions and cliches of modern politics was a quality so many others struggle to emulate, often without success. He also had a great and natural sense of humour, unusual in a very private man such as he. It made him one of the few politicians who could master every form of television interview or appearance without looking awkward.
Two such memories stand out and show him at his best. The first was his apparently effortless ability to put into words some of the most complicated issues of modern UK identity politics, when he described himself as comfortable with himself as a Highlander, a Scot, a Briton and as a European. It worked because it was true. He was as the same man in Fort William and in Brussels. He didn’t need to put on an act to be consistent. Whatever Charles’s inner demons, he had a facility of mind and speech that others could only dream of. Two such memories stand out and show him at his best. The first was his apparently effortless ability to put into words some of the most complicated issues of modern UK identity politics, when he described himself as comfortable with himself as a Highlander, a Scot, a Briton and as a European. It worked because it was true. He was the same man in Fort William and in Brussels. He didn’t need to put on an act to be consistent. Whatever Charles’s inner demons, he had a facility of mind and speech that others could only dream of.
The other was his decision, as leader of the Liberal Democrats, to oppose the war in Iraq. This was self-evidently the right decision on principle. But it was a big call for the Liberal Democrats. It took the party out of its comfort zone. Kennedy wasn’t a natural street politician in the way he was a natural studio politician or a parliamentarian, and he swithered about the decision. I like to think the Guardian editorials urging him to put himself at the head of the anti-war campaign helped to push him over the line. But he did it, and in 2005 he was rewarded with the best election result which the Liberal Democrats had ever seen – and possibly will ever see. When he was tested he did the right thing. It was the mark of a leader. The other was his decision, as leader of the Liberal Democrats, to oppose the war in Iraq. This was self-evidently the right decision on principle. But it was a big call for the Liberal Democrats. It took the party out of its comfort zone. Kennedy wasn’t a natural street politician in the way he was a natural studio politician or a parliamentarian, and he swithered about the decision. I like to think the Guardian editorials urging him to put himself at the head of the anti-war campaign helped to push him over the line. But he did it, and in 2005 he was rewarded with the best election result the Liberal Democrats had ever seen – and possibly will ever see. When he was tested he did the right thing. It was the mark of a leader.
He will be remembered as a Liberal Democrat, but he was always a social democrat too. His early political career as a member of the SDP was a consistent thread through the rest of his career. Charles was a Highlander and a Scot and all the rest of it, but he was also an anti-Tory. His political comfort zone as a Liberal Democrat was on the left of the spectrum, not the right. This never made him a great flirter with Labour, not least because as a Scot he was a lifetime witness to Scottish Labour’s authoritarian and now ultimately self-destructive ways. But it always meant he was unhappy with the way events propelled Nick Clegg’s party into coalition with the Conservatives.He will be remembered as a Liberal Democrat, but he was always a social democrat too. His early political career as a member of the SDP was a consistent thread through the rest of his career. Charles was a Highlander and a Scot and all the rest of it, but he was also an anti-Tory. His political comfort zone as a Liberal Democrat was on the left of the spectrum, not the right. This never made him a great flirter with Labour, not least because as a Scot he was a lifetime witness to Scottish Labour’s authoritarian and now ultimately self-destructive ways. But it always meant he was unhappy with the way events propelled Nick Clegg’s party into coalition with the Conservatives.
Charles started young and somehow seemed to stay young, even when he got older. He has been a figure in parliamentary politics since the 1980s, when he won the Highland seat, centred on Fort William, in which he had grown up. He was leader of his party at 39, young even by today’s standards. Likewise, his death at 55. But he packed a full political career into those years and he will never be thought of as a might-have-been. Charles started young and somehow seemed to stay young, even when he got older. He has been a figure in parliamentary politics since the 1980s, when he won the Highland seat, centred on Fort William, where he grew up. He was leader of his party at 39, young even by today’s standards. Likewise, his young, untimely death at 55. But he packed a full political career into those years and he will never be thought of as a might-have-been.
His private life was darker, and his problems with drink lay at the core of his failure to retain political power. His marriage broke up and his behaviour became unpredictable. He was always bitter about his overthrow. It meant among other things that he was unable to play the role for which he would otherwise have been ideal, as a leader of the anti-independence campaign in the 2014 Scottish referendum. That not even he was able to retain his seat in the May election said something about Scottish politics, something about the collapse of the Lib Dems and something about Charles’s diminished political allure. But there won’t be a single person in politics feeling anything other than sadness and loss today – and there are few political passings of which that can truthfully be said.His private life was darker, and his problems with drink lay at the core of his failure to retain political power. His marriage broke up and his behaviour became unpredictable. He was always bitter about his overthrow. It meant among other things that he was unable to play the role for which he would otherwise have been ideal, as a leader of the anti-independence campaign in the 2014 Scottish referendum. That not even he was able to retain his seat in the May election said something about Scottish politics, something about the collapse of the Lib Dems and something about Charles’s diminished political allure. But there won’t be a single person in politics feeling anything other than sadness and loss today – and there are few political passings of which that can truthfully be said.