Boris Johnson appeared at the COVID Inquiry on 21st October. I’m a firm believer in people being able to dress and appear as they want. However Mr Johnson is a former Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party appearing at the Inquiry in the former capacity.
He has clearly lost his comb again (a deliberate Johnson strategy) and his latest attempt to grow a beard has clearly not worked.
John Crace reported in the Guardian
He sighed loudly. Lost his place from time to time. Got confused over dates. Queried whether the evidence in front of him was correct. His answers became more vague.
Those who have been around on the left for a while may remember the 1960s and 70s slogan ‘the personal is political’. It meant in one way that politics was about more than what went on at Westminster. It was (and is) about womens rights, and liberation, LGBTQ+ rights, sexuality and beyond.
It also meant, and as a reminder that it was not a new politics, that politics was as much about changing yourself as it was about changing the world. It drove William Morris made- in the 1880s.
As a reminder that time moves on and the slogans of one generation can appear in a later one in a related but different context Freddie Hayward writing in the New Statesman argues that for Trumpians the personal is also political.
For Trump politics is about his grudges, his whims and of course his business interests. All of these can have a political front page but behind that lies personal interest. So for example, the Gaza ‘peace deal’ is of course politics, but behind it lie the personal interests of those centrally involved such as Kushner and Blair.
Emily Chung has published some important new research on Engels 1844 social investigation into the Manchester working class in the Historical Journal (free access). She argues that while the middle class went to church the working class were to be found in the pub.
However Engels the Manchester businessman was to be found not in church but the pub. His favourite pub is thought to have been the Thatched House in Market St, knocked down for the Arndale Centre
Royal Titles: The Ruling Class has survived for centuries because its ruthless
The political controversy over Prince Andrew’s titles continues. He has agreed not to use them (officially) but the Royals (aka the Firm) apparently have had no plans to actually remove them from him until now.
According to letter writers to the Times (21st October) this would be a fairly simple matter.
The reality is that the ruling class has survived over many centuries because it can be ruthless.
Consider for a moment an event on the other side of the class divide. Its summer 1972 and five dockers have been sent to Pentonville jail for allegedly breaking Tory industrial relations law. No sooner had the TUC called a General Strike than an unknown State functionary, the Official Solicitor, appeared to secure their release. The Strike was called off.
In 1917 legislation was passed to allow the King to set up a Privy Council Committee to identify enemies who had fought against Britain in the First World War. Queen Victoria had married a German, Albert. Several descendants held Royal titles while fighting for Germany. A 1919 report named four people who were duly purged of their titles.
Andrew has not of course been fighting against Britain, rather he fought for the country in the Falklands, but the real issue in 1917 was people who were bringing the monarchy into disrepute and from a ruling class perspective Andrew is doing that.
The former England cricketer Geoffrey Boycott, a controversial figure for many owing to non cricket related activities, is 85 today. Tariq Ali, also a controversial figure for some, for entirely different reasons is 82.
The juxta position in the Times Birthday column reminds however that they do have something in common. Both are fierce critics of cricket teams. In the case of Geoffrey Boycott is often though far from exclusively England and for Tariq Ali likewise for the Pakistan team.
On the wider scale of course Boycott is firmly in the imperialist camp while Tariq Ali is a leading anti-imperialist.
The letter below appears in The Times 21st October and it is very ‘Times’. Historically the English ruling class have taken the view that French cuisine is superior to English (see Winston Churchill’s Cookbook) and this extends to giving French names to traditional English puddings it seems.
A subsequent letter (22nd October) suggests that a Christ’s College, Finchley in the 1960s it was known as ‘stodge and slop’. Perhaps this explains why a French name was preferred.
As far as I can check the Mail and the Telegraph have been quiet but Trafalgar Day usually provokes call for the abolition of the early May (May Day) Bank Holiday with the suggestion that October 21st would be a good replacement.
I doubt the Government is likely to agree for several reasons. Having more Bank Holidays doesn’t fit when the zeitgeist is that people should be working to boost the economy.
The idea of a later Bank Holiday has however been a popular one in the tourist industry for a long time.
From the late 1940s there was pressure from the leisure industry, industry itself and the TUC to soften the focus on a summer holiday period that was very much around the end of July and early August including the Bank Holiday. It was felt that encouraging a wider spread of holidays was a good thing.
That was why from 1965 the August Bank Holiday was moved from the first Monday of the month to the last (except in Scotland)
No doubt the proposal would be to have an October Bank Holiday to mark Trafalgar Day (21st October) just the kind of patriotic flag waving occasion that would appeal to all the main parties.
Trafalgar Day marks Nelson’s victory against the French and Spanish fleets in 1805 but flag wavers beware.
In 1803 Nelson gave evidence in the trial of the revolutionary Colonel Despard who was found guilty of treason and hung. Nelson spoke up in support of Despard.
John Crace the Guardian’s Parliamentary sketchwriter is often to the point albeit sardonically. At the moment Maccobi are saying, reading from a copy of the Netanyahu playbook, that they won’t sell tickets for the Villa game as their fans safety can’t be guaranteed. Or as the Krays might have said about Villa Park, nice stadium you’ve go there.
The culture secretary, Lisa Nandy – along with her shadow, Nigel Huddleston – were adamant that this was all about antisemitism. That the fans were being banned because they were Israeli and not because the club was world famous for having a hardcore of travelling fans who made Millwall fans c1980 look like angels. That it wasn’t the safety of local people that was the issue but the safety of the Maccabi Ultras. Really, they were all sweethearts. We should just learn to live with their lovable violence and racist chants.
