Having wrecked yet another radio and another shoe this morning after suffering the Nick Ferrari v Boris Johnson interview, I felt compelled to finally pick sides in the Conservative leadership election.
Personally, if it were not for the fact that he was a Remainer through and through and backed by Ken Clarke, I would have backed Rory Stewart, the outstanding candidate of the campaign and a man of considerable intelligence and charm, whose credentials surely make him perfect for the role of Foreign Secretary in a future administration. However Conservative Party members have a binary choice now, Bonking Boris or Jeremy May.
I don’t have a vote, but am rooting for BoJo.
Many thousands of Conservative members will inevitably follow suit and the reason is clear. The British have an antipathy towards narks and sneaks and the sort of behaviour exhibited by The Guardian and its informers who dwell in Camberwell. So what if Boris and Carrie had a late night tiff about spilling wine or smashing laptops? Did anyone pick up on the fact that Leyla Moran – the LibDems’ media star and the BBC’s favourite Palestinian-supporting lefty, actually admitted beating up her ex -partner only this year? Of course not. Did it ever, apart from obliquely, pick up on the late Jo Cox’s errant husband, forced to resign from his left-wing think tank through admissions of sexual impropriety? Of course not. Need we mention Jo Brand? Better not.
Enough already, the real issue is Brexit. The Remainers know that they have to throw a hell of a lot of muck now to get rid of Boris, so muck they will throw. Such is the hatred they hold for Boris they do not stop to consider the effect this is having on Carrie Symonds. Probably not many of you know that Carrie was, when only 19, kidnapped and assaulted by the twisted rapist John Worboys. Now, ask yourself this; if Boris was of the horrible wife-beating type, would someone who experienced real terror – such as Carrie Symonds – even be with him? I think not, but such is the importance of the war to kill off Boris –and Brexit – by the MSM and most of Parliament that anyone close to Boris, especially his girlfriend, is fair game.
Boris is not going to have an easy job as PM. As Rory Stewart wisely warned, Parliament are not minded to agree to No-Deal or even to Brexit at all, so investing our trust in Boris Johnson is a high-risk game. I too have my doubts about some of Boris’ credentials and fruity past, but a fruity past for PMs has, historically, been pretty much par for the course. Wellington, Disraeli, Palmerston and Lloyd George, all great men, also had great libidos and some questionable morals in the prurient minds of those who are without fault. The trouble is that those without fault are often bereft of original thought, instinctive behavior – oft necessary in crises – or charisma. Our shocking experience with the dullard Theresa May proves this.
I’ll leave you with a quote from Johnson’s own biography of Churchill, ‘The Churchill Factor,’ who clearly has been one of the most influential people that has moulded Boris’ character.
“Churchill matters today because he saved our civilisation. And the important thing is that only he could have done it. He is the resounding human rebuttal to all Marxist historians who think history is the story of vast and impersonal economic forces. The point of the Churchill Factor is that one man can make all the difference.”
I agree.
Hold your nose. Back Boris.
Boris has come in for some criticism for implying that ‘he’ could unilaterally apply Gatt 24 (XXIV for the purists) and perhaps rightly so. Some including the Governor of the BofE have pointed out, again rightly, that this is not possible and that the EU will have to agree to trade under these terms.
Assuming they do agree, does this not constitute ‘a deal’ and that the HoC insistence that ‘no deal’ be taken off the table is thereby satisfied? If they do not agree, what justification do they, the EU, have for that position, as there is regulatory alignment and precedence already in place?
Or does the HoC insist that there can only be one kind of deal, that is the one acceptable to the EU, the WA, which they themselves have rejected three times?
“Socialism / Marxism gives a false hope to those without the skills, charm and guile to lead which is why it recruits inadequates and the new minorities into its ranks but it ultimately fails as the basic truth is that nature is selective and hard.”
Indeed.
I am increasingly concerned that in this coming leadership struggle within UKIP we may be landed with yet another left-wing leader who thinks that Maggie was worse than Bliar…
Einstein’s definition of insanity comes to mind.
Mr Vachha, there were rumours that you are standing to the UKIP’s contest. Are you?
If I were asked to choose Boris or Jeremy (which, thank goodness I am not since I’m a proud Kipper) I’m afraid I should ask for a further choice: neither of the above. Sonya
Well I am not going to hold my nose and back Boris. Backing him is backing current status quo, agreeing to a two party system and at least being OK with the last 9 years of Conservatives governments. I cannot do it. I disagree with people saying that the Brexit is the most important issue of our generation – I can see at least 2 more important: replacement migration and law and order. Both of them could be solved even in the boundaries of the EU – compare these issues handling in Poland or Hungary. Man who is unable to take care of his own family surely will not be able to take care of the country. Lastly – at the beginning Theresa May also said all the correct words – but we all have seen as it was ended.
1. Never trust the Tory.
2. All other issues see point 1.
I must assume therefore that you approve of the EU’s Corpus Juris? Brexit is the necessary precondition that will enable or preclude all the other things that need to be done.
Being in the EU have little to none in relation to how our police, judiciary and prison system are dealing with crime.
Being in the EU have little to none in relation to how the UK is dealing with immigration from the outside the EU – estimated total net immigration from outside the EU since 1991 – 4,773,00 ( http://www.migrationwatchuk.org).
The UK is facing number of issues and only few of them are related the EU. Supporting someone who maybe (only maybe) will solve our EU membershio issue and make other a lot worse is not my intention. If I can remind Mr Johnson’s idea about amnesty for illegal immigrants that are here more than 10 years from last year (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/24/boris-johnson-challenges-theresa-may-introduce-migrant-amnesty/).
estimated total net immigration from outside the EU since 1991 – 4,773,000
eaw? hate crime?
I’m with you, Boo-boo. The sentence “I don’t have a vote, but am rooting for BoJo.” shows how distracted we have become. If you (and I – and 66 million others) have no vote on something as important as choosing a national leader, there is something very wrong with our supposed democratic system, I suggest. Perhaps we should be rooting to change the system?
as you say but the only countries that stand up to the dictators are eastern europe with strong leaders, so its take a chance with Boris or suffer the result of keeping dictators i the way they want
RE the rejection by Karl Marx of the Great Man theory, it’s interesting to note that Marx himself was a great man who single-handedly changed history, although not for the better.
Re Johnson: it’s a stunning indictment of the Conservative party that Johnson has turned out to be the least unsuitable of their contenders to lead the UK.
JF
The Great Man theory, like Whiggish history, always assumes that there is a natural progression, largely due to the influence and dynamism of charismatic and powerful men, towards a ‘better’ ‘richer ‘or more progressive society- whatever that is. Of course this teaching of history – as taught in public schools for a couple of hundred years- has spat out scores of people like Johnson, who really believe that it is their destiny and duty to follow that calling. It has many times been proven true, much to the chagrin of those on the left and far left who, oft excluded by dint of birth or – more likely nowadays- by personal inadequacy, insist that the fate of society and progress (whatever that is) can be influenced by the organisation of the proletariat bribed with false promises . The catch as always is that some animals are more equal than others.
Socialism / Marxism gives a false hope to those without the skills, charm and guile to lead which is why it recruits inadequates and the new minorities into its ranks but it ultimately fails as the basic truth is that nature is selective and hard .
Our problem is that a Parliament used to years of peace is packed with very average lazy people, with only a few exceptional talents ( there are however exceptional talents in all parties ).
In times of great crisis -and I would put Britain’s current predicament in this bracket- we need a broad coalition of talent and fresh ideas to get us safely out the other side.
This is not a new concept. Churchill was a man of little detail but he knew how to build a team !. in WWII he relied heavily on Attlee to get things organised, he relied on the tough, charming but hard-socialist union boss Ernie Bevin to control wartime labour and businessmen like Beaverbrook to kick-start the vital war industries.
Rory Stewart was right saying that its going to take a more collaborative Parliament to get things through today, but at this juncture there seems to be little in the way of olive branches being offered to get that collaboration.
So instinctively, as has been the case historically, its likely that the Tories ( and probably the country in October ) will turn to Johnson to use his trump card- his natural charisma and leadership to pull together some sort of coalition of the wise to move the country on.
In times of crisis, nay-sayers like Corbyn and the LibDems will get nowhere, and nor will egotists like Nigel, who don’t believe in teamwork.
The question is ‘Can Boris do it?’ The answer has to come from the gut.
I have no idea why anyone would support the cadaverous Rory Stewart who is a rabid Remainer. Boris is the ‘least worst option’ and has the backing of the laudable Steve Baker, the most loyal and trustworthy Brexiteer of all who did not stand for the leadership because he would not have got the support he needed.
As for Nigel, I will NEVER forgive him for the malicious and despicable way he treated Gerard Batten, whom I support unequivocally, and the former may come to bitterly regret not reaching out to UKIP and others to consolidate the Leave vote when the crunch comes.
Stewart can’t be leader as he’s a staunch Remainer. My point is that he’s highly capable. Although Stewart has publicly stated he would not serve in a Johnson administration IMHO that would be a spectacular own goal. He would be good if he got inside the tent; outside he’s no use at all and his political potential will surely fade.
Johnson might end up, like Churchill, as a leader suitable and vital during an existential crisis but less able to cope in an era, post-Brexit, which I believe will bring a return to more consensus based political dialogue in the years that follow.
My personal belief now is that the same old adversarial politics, when both sides of Parliament can barely scrape a majority, is a disservice to our country and not what we the people want from Government.
Post WWII we went a good 15 years where things actually got done and we made progress. That takes compromise from all sides. However thats unlikely with someone like Corbyn running Labour or with a less than extremely able Tory PM.
We need Boris now to get to the stage when we can all start talking sense again.
Stewart would be far more at home in the LimpDem Party rather than the Tories.
Proof of this is the continual re-inviting of him to give his views on Radio 4.
I like Nigel.
I also like Boris.
Hunt gives me the creeps.
But then, so do most poliyuckers.