(US title: How not to be a politician/ NL: Op het scherpst van de snede)
Recently it has been difficult for me to really concentrate on one book: for instance, I got rid of the book "How to Kill My Family" after a few chapters out of sheer frustration - another one of those books where the cover is much more interesting than the content - and I devoured a bunch of adult short stories written by Roald Dahl, only to realise that I saw them already adapted for TV as the series "Tales of the Unexpected" in my childhood. Nothing wrong with those stories by the way, but I don't need to write a review about tem, there are already plenty of those.
But over the past few days I have been reading the political memoir of the British ex-minister Rory Stewart, in which he looks back on the tumultuous Brexit years and his futile battle against Boris Johnson, but also gives a sad insight into how British politics works, and how that has often driven an idealist like himself to madness. Political memoirs, especially from lesser gods, often have a limited shelf life. But "Politics on the Edge" has everything to become a classic. The author is a former moderate Conservative who had a varied career as a diplomat, aid organisation founder, and professor. Stewart's period in the House of Commons and as a minister from 2010 to 2019, marked by the brexit battle, offers a fascinating insight. His candour about his political rise during the parliamentary expenses scandal, in which he was elected because of a remote constituency, adds depth to his story.
Stewart is at his best when he writes about the 'clownery' of party colleague Boris Johnson. A 'chaotic and tricky confidence artist' he calls him, 'entirely unfit to be prime minister.' For example, Stewart, whose portfolio included Africa, presented Johnson with an ambitious plan to open new embassies in African capitals and hire hundreds more people. Johnson responded enthusiastically and gave his approval: "Brilliant! Get on with it, Rory!" Pleased, Stewart walked out, convinced he had got it done. But once outside, a sober top official told him the agreement meant little. 'The official explained that Boris Johnson was happy to agree with the last person he had spoken to - even if this contradicted the last instructions he had given - and so officials could not be expected to act on his apparent approval.'
Stewart also describes how he was responsible for as many as six portfolios in four departments in less than four years. He says it is typical of the amateurism and superficiality of British politics, in which cabinets are reshuffled every so often by the prime minister.
Stewart describes how Brexit caused divisions within his party, with centrist figures like himself seeing their influence diminished in favour of the right wing.
The climax of the story is the battle for the leadership of the Conservative Party in 2019, in which Stewart presents himself as anti-Boris and achieves some success with an energetic campaign. Despite his efforts, Johnson remains popular among party members and becomes prime minister, expelling Stewart and other rebels from the party. Stewart ends his memoir with a dry observation that he is no longer a Conservative. These days, he presents a political podcast with Alastair Campbell, sharing his experiences and offering a critical perspective on the state of British democracy.
Stewart's prose is both accessible and engaging, making complex political concepts understandable to a wide audience. Whether discussing the role of government in society, the nature of conservatism, or the challenges facing the modern conservative movement, Stewart's writing is both insightful and thought-provoking. One of the book's strengths lies in Stewart's ability to navigate through the nuances of conservative ideology without resorting to simplistic caricatures or stereotypes. Instead, he engages with the ideas and arguments presented by various factions within the conservative movement, offering thoughtful critiques and reflections.
A valuable book, written with great humour despite its ultimately pessimistic conclusions about the workings of contemporary politics.
