07-12-2024, 11:55 AM
(07-12-2024, 11:41 AM)DJC link Wrote:I’m not sure that you can set age limits on leadership; Alexander the Great was 20 when he succeeded Phillip and Winston Churchill was in his late 60s when he guided the Allies to victory in the Second World War.I disagree.
It’s more about ability or capacity than age.
Those would be outliers not the rule.
Under 35 doesn't know enough about life and over 55 are too disconnected from the plight of the younger types. It's just too disconnected. It doesn't have to be hard and fast but you go outside those ages my rule would apply more often than your exceptions. I'm 41. The kids I work with have remarkably different challenges to mine when I was their age, but I can relate better to them than most people aged 20 years older than me. Most people of that era are too caught up in outdated modes of thinking that aren't so relevant either.
Before anyone calls this ageist, have a think about how we lived 30 years ago. Supermarkets closed at midday Sunday, we only had free to air TV. The internet was dial up if you had it at all. Windows 95 wasn't out, kernahan was our captain.
30 years is a long time. Have a look at what property prices have done in that time.
The world is a very different place and whilst some people are connected to it, most aren't. There's a huge divide. You want to be happier about it, trim it down to 30 and make it 60, but beyond that is way too out of touch.
"everything you know is wrong"
Paul Hewson
Paul Hewson

