It was, apparently, Emo
Philips, an American actor
and comedian, who came up with the joke that, “When I was a kid I used to
pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work
that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.” But it is the English
Conservative and Unionist Party which has decided to adopt a variation on this
approach when it comes to dealing with racism and misogyny. Instead of trying
to eliminate racist language by Tories, their response to the outrageous (and,
to date, undenied) remarks attributed to their biggest donor has amounted to saying
that a rich Tory donor can say whatever he likes as long as he apologises
afterwards. And pays the party enough money. It all seems a bit reminiscent of medieval
popes selling indulgences.
The linguistic
acrobatics being performed by those who want to keep hold of the tainted £10
million are a wonder to behold. The miscreant himself claims that there was no
racist or sexist intent in the words used as though the words ‘black’ and
‘women’ were meaningless and added nothing to what he said. Then there’s the claim that he can’t be racist because he does business in
Jamaica. On that simplistic basis, neither were the slave owners; they were
simply businessmen trying to turn a penny or two. The suggestion by number 10
that his words were wrong, but he’s given an apology for ‘being rude’ and we
should all just move on sit oddly against a background where the government is
determined to ‘crack down’ on anyone who breaks the Conservative consensus
about what it is to be British. It invites us to consider that being racist is an
entirely acceptable part of their definition of British values as long as an
insincere apology is issued later by anyone whose words somehow leak into the
public domain.
The reluctance to
part with £10 million, especially after it’s already been spent, is, I suppose,
understandable for a party obsessed with the financial value of everything, but
principled it is not. Faced with the obvious car crash which was coming his way
the moment the words leaked out, Sunak had two political options open to him.
The first was immediate condemnation, accompanied by the return of the cash. Decisive,
even if untypical, action would have wrong-footed the opposition, but the story
(as a source of political damage to the Tories) would have gone away after a
few days. Sunak seems incapable of instant reaction, so his default option was
the second. That is to delay reacting as long as possible, and then try to
brazen it out in the belief that the news media would move on. Consciously choosing
the second option inevitably brings a third option into play, but it’s one that
politicians only ever fall into by accident. Starting out by trying to brazen
it out and then buckling under pressure is the worst of all in political terms:
not only does it look weak, unprincipled, and indecisive, it also concedes that
the original decision was wrong and the opponents were right all along. And it
looks at least possible that pressure
from his own side from people who have a genuine and entirely legitimate fear
of being brought down along with him may yet push him that way. Living
dangerously may be a lifestyle choice for some, but for Sunak it’s entirely
accidental.
No comments:
Post a Comment