X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Blogs Coffee House

Boris Johnson: Everything about you is phoney

22 February 2016

12:45 PM

22 February 2016

12:45 PM

Rather rashly, Boris Johnson published The Churchill factor: How one man made history last year. It was without historical merit, or intellectual insight, but Johnson did not intend readers to learn about Churchill. The biography was not a Churchill biography but a Johnson campaign biography, where we were invited to see our  hero as Winston redux.

Both ignored party discipline and conventional routes of advancement, after all. Both were great company. Churchill stayed in the wilderness for years making a fortune from journalism, and so has Johnson. Churchill was a man of principle and so is…

Hold on. That doesn’t work. It doesn’t work at all. For when we talk of principle, the elaborate scaffolding Johnson has erected around himself, the scenery and props, the spotlights and the cameras, fall with a thundering crash. All that remains on stage is a jobbing actor who can play any part convincingly except himself.

The cult of Churchill can be remarkably selective. Certainly, Churchill and others fought appeasement. But he was also the most implacable of diehard imperialists. Churchill meant what he said – and was prepared to suffer when his beliefs were out of fashion.

Johnson believes in the advance of Johnson. That’s all there is. There’s nothing else. Most politicians, and many of the rest of us, are ambitious, of course. But politicians normally hope to advance a cause as they advance themselves. Johnson would have you believe that he is breaking with the establishment, risking all, because of his sincere conviction that we must advance the cause of saving Britain from the European Union.

His colleagues do not believe him. Nicholas Soames called him a liar on Twitter yesterday. Jerry Hayes called him a ‘copper-bottomed, hypocritical little shit.’ The wonder of it is that they may have been understating the case for the prosecution.

After the Times fired him for making up stories, Johnson ended up as the Telegraph’s Brussels correspondent. Once there, he was seduced by the most corrupting desire to afflict a journalist: the urge to give readers what they want. His tales of the EU punishing the rubber industry for making undersized condoms or ordering the straightening of bananas were so flimsy that, like dandelion puffballs, they collapsed with the first puff of scrutiny. They were a hit with his right-wing readers, but no one who knew him at the time thought that Johnson believed what he was writing. David Usborne, the Independent’s man in Brussels, told Johnson’s acidic biographer Sonia Purnell:-

He played the Telegraph game brilliantly [and] compromised his intellectual integrity to get on. I assume that he has done that in the rest of his career.

Curiously, when he entered parliament in 2001, Johnson stopped playing the right-wing nationalist from the Telegraph foreign desk and presented himself as liberal Tory. Chris Cook, an aide to David Willetts, told Purnell:

He was clearly not on the right wing, but actually quite europhile in Tory terms. He liked to come into our office to gossip and bitch about the right-wingers he thought had screwed up the party.

[Alt-Text]


As Mayor of London, Johnson has never called emergency conferences on the alleged EU tyranny, which surely must have fettered him, if it was as oppressive as he is now claiming. He never allied with Daniel Hannan, Charles Moore, Nigel Farage, George Galloway, Bill Cash and the rest of the ‘out’ crowd. The subject was of no interest to him – until he returned to Parliament to concentrate on the sole subject that does interest him: the leadership of the Conservative party.

If you doubt his slipperiness, examine today‘s supposed declaration of support for withdrawal. It  is not as unequivocal as it seems. The crucial line ties Johnson to a fantasy pushed by Dominic Cummings and Matthew Elliott of the Tory campaign group Vote Leave.

There is only one way to get the change we need and that is to vote to go, because all EU history says that they only really listen to a population when it says no.

We will vote to leave, in other words, but we will not actually go, because the EU will give us more. The Ukip wing of Euroscepticism has spent the past few months mocking Vote Leave’s illusion that we could leave but not leave. And I have to say that it is right.

To Johnson watchers, his shiftiness is no surprise. At Oxford he ran for the presidency of the Oxford Union as a Tory. He lost to a state school boy called Neil Sherlock, a liberal, who secured victory by mocking the old Etonian’s sense of entitlement.

In 1985, Johnson tried again and won, but now and all of sudden Johnson was a liberal too, who was opposed to Margaret Thatcher and in favour of proportional representation. Johnson has ‘no core beliefs’ an understandably flabbergasted Sherlock concluded. He would do anything.

The same disease afflicts him now. Charlatans from Donald Trump to Piers Morgan invite us to forget about our own concerns and revel vicariously in their career-advancing machinations, in much the same way that TV crime capers invite you to celebrate conmen and despise their gormless marks. So I beg you do not admire Johnson’s manoeuvres as he climbs to the top over the bodies of his colleagues. Just understand them lest you find yourself his mark one day.

From his point of view, he has positioned himself perfectly. If ‘out’ wins, Cameron and Osborne are finished and he is the next prime minister. His potential rivals Theresa May and Sajid Javid honourably put country before personal ambition and decided that, their deep euroscepiticsm notwithstanding, they could not tear Europe apart when Putin, Islamic State and unstoppable flows of refugees, menaced  the EU, and a revived SNP menaced the union. Johnson lack of scruple has therefore given him a huge competitive advantage.

If ‘out’ loses, he is laughing too. Parliament has been the one place where he has failed. At Eton, Oxford, the Telegraph, the BBC and London’s City Hall he has always got what he wanted. In the Commons, he vanished without trace when he first became an MP, and hasn’t made much of an impression since he returned in 2015. Quentin Letts of the Mail put it well when he said of Johnson.

The Commons sees through you in a way that other institutions don’t. It could see through the accent, and the fact that he was trying to ventilate false anxieties about matters in which he wasn’t really very interested. The reaction was quite often silence. You see, Boris isn’t angry. You’ve got to be angry: you’ve got to feel things as an MP, but there is no soul, no church in him. No belief. Most people don’t just go into politics out of vanity, but maybe he has.

Now he has come out for ‘out’, however – or is at least is half in and half out of the closet, like a nervous drag queen – surely previously unimpressed right-wing MPs will give him enough votes to put him through to the run off, where he will win with the support of members, who according to today’s Guardian,overwhelming oppose Cameron.

As I have said before, Johnson bears few resemblances to Churchill, and far too many to Winston’s shifty sidekick Brendan Bracken, who became propaganda minister during the war. Bracken too was careless with the facts. He invented stories about his childhood to con his way into high society. He was an energetic manipulator of the press in both Churchill’s interest and his own. (Whenever he gave dinner parties he instructed his butler to make up a story that the prime minister was on the phone and announce the news loudly to his guests). Evelyn Waugh couldn’t stand him, and in Brideshead turned Bracken into Rex Motram, who marries the wealthy but naïve Julia because ‘he wanted a woman; he wanted the best on the market, and he wanted her cheap; that was what it amounted to’. Inevitably, he betrays her, within in months of the honeymoon.

‘Rex isn’t anybody at all,’ Julia concludes of Mottram/Bracken. ‘He just doesn’t exist.’

A fine line, which applies as well to Johnson after this week’s performance. But I prefer a snub the historian Piers Brendon credits to an unnamed journalist who met Bracken in a 1930s club. Growing ever more infuriated by Bracken’s trickiness and double-dealing, the unknown hack cried

You’re phoney! Everything about you is phoney! Even your hair that looks like a wig – isn’t!

Bracken had a mop of red hair to match Johnson’s mop of blond. The next time I see our future prime minister I will give it a good hard yank, just to check.

 

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close