Send in the clowns

"There is a world elsewhere." Thus says the eponymous hero of Shakespeare's tragedy, Coriolanus, as he turns his back on the murky world of Roman politics and goes into self-imposed exile.

Boris Johnson, with his much-vaunted classical erudition, no doubt casts himself in such a role; his fall the result of the ignoble scheming of lesser mortals. But Johnson's demise is no tragedy, or even farce, it's pure soap opera. A telling coincidence, then, that his resignation from the House of Commons should coincide with the prosecution of one infamous exponent of 'clown government', Donald J Trump, and the death of another, Silvio Berlusconi.

However he may flatter himself, Johnson is no tragic hero, certainly no Coriolanus or Julius Caesar. In order to qualify the prerequisite must be the possession of nobility of character, which is then fatally compromised by a temperamental defect, leading to disaster. In the cases of the two Roman generals, the tragedy consists in their stubborn and inflexible pride. Their inability to compromise with grubby everyday reality leads inexorably to their downfalls. But Johnson has no such redeeming features; he thrives on grubbiness, he is all flaw and no nobility. His is not even a tragi-comedy. When he does raise a laugh (for he can be very entertaining) you may be sure the joke will always be on us.

In the psychodrama that has characterised Tory politics since the EU Referendum of 2016, Johnson has loomed large. Whether in the fore- or background his has been a destabilising and chaotic presence, a Lord of Misrule, a court jester, a lurking assassin. Never once has he exhibited statesmanship, trustworthiness or capability. Never once has he put country or party before self interest. His is a narcissistic, selfish, egomaniacal personality which should never have been allowed anywhere near the levers of power.

Unfortunately, his rise was sustained by a claque of adoring supporters for whom he could do no wrong and his fall may only be temporary - delapsus resurgam as he would no doubt have it. This represents the downside of the democratic system. Trump, Berlusconi, Putin, Erdoğan, Netanyahu, Modi all came to power by ostensibly democratic means. Democracy is an inherently fragile system which basically relies on the goodwill, trust and honesty of its players to operate effectively. Characters who have no intention of playing by the rules, and in fact see them as a weakness, can so easily subvert the system to their own ends, always with damaging results for their countries. 

Johnson is such a character but, perhaps more by luck than design, the ponderous British system appears - finally and after much grief - to have seen him off. So far at least, but for how long? Like Donald Trump, he may yet stage a surprising comeback and then fool enough people to vote for him.

One thing is clear, though: vote for clowns and you get a circus.


Popular posts from this blog

On old age

"The fact is that when I come to think it over, I find that there are four reasons for old age being thought unhappy: First, that it withdraws us from active employments; second, that it enfeebles the body; third, that it deprives us of nearly all physical pleasures; fourth, that it is the next step to death."  Writing his essay,  De Senectute (On Old Age), in 44 BCE, Marcus Tullius Cicero went on to refute these four supposed reasons in characteristically robust and forthright manner. Cicero wasn't one to sit about moping in his own old age; he remained actively engaged in the political life of the Republic whose survival, in the face of tyranny, he championed so fiercely.  Cicero was nine years younger than I am now when he met his untimely end yet he considered himself already an old man; or, rather, his society judged him to be so. His second point about age enfeebling is more germane. Physical decline had not yet impacted him but, six years on from my retirement, I
Read more

Born to rule

When, ten days ago, I posted my piece about the manipulated image of Catherine, Princess of Wales, and her children (see Snap Judgment) I didn't know of her cancer treatment. Had I known, I would have adopted a gentler, though I hope no less critical, tone. But I didn't know, and nor did any of us outside the immediate royal circle, which rather goes to strengthen the case against the monarchy. For Kate and her family the diagnosis of cancer (as yet unspecified) will have been a devastating blow, as will the chemotherapy she is currently undergoing. On a human level, of course I sympathise and extend my best wishes for a full recovery as, indeed, I did at the time of her father-in-law's diagnosis. It is particularly cruel, then, that on top of all this she has been obliged to record a video statement to reassure the public. As if she didn't have enough to contend with already. But such is the unpalatable obligation placed upon any royal personage - noblesse oblige. Whic
Read more

Working to rule

An avowed republican I may be but news of King Charles III's cancer diagnosis is nevertheless a cause of sadness - I might not want him, or anyone else, as my king but I wish the man no harm.  However, Jonathan Swift's opinion that "health is the greatest of all possessions; a pale cobbler is better than a sick king" serves as a timely reminder that ill-health in the monarch is not simply a personal matter, it has constitutional implications. To be blunt about it, Charles' death, in constitutional terms at least, would be no great problem; the king is dead, long live the king. The succession is assured and the crown would pass immediately to the Prince of Wales, who would be pronounced William V. The ship of state would sail on. A long-term or debilitating illness, on the other hand, could have far-reaching consequences for the institution of the monarchy at a sensitive time, coming so soon after the death of Britain's longest-reigning monarch, Charles' mo
Read more