"Like Trump, he has an exaggerated belief in national power and in his own country first, unfettered by international institutions or cooperative arrangements, even though many of those were set up by the American and British governments in the wake of World War II."
As soon as Brexit won, I heard pundits predict Great Britain would shrink to "Little England." I think Johnson will find his people-- not to mention Ireland and Scotland-- less than thrilled with his plans.
Without easy access to markets, will the country just become a Masterpiece Theater theme park?
i wonder if Johnson has even thought of that--like Trump, he's gadfly who may be able to spout poetry given his upper crust education; but if he can't govern himself, can he govern his country? (Trump can't spout poetry, but doesn't have to, as titular head of his "know-nothing" party).
That both admire Churchill is rich given his outsized character. Sir Winston understood sacrifice: something I doubt either modern leader will be guided by.
206
@ChristineMcM
Churchill also understood rhetoric; as one pundit once remarked, Churchill marshalled the English language and sent it into battle. His WWII speeches can still keep your attention, given the context of the time. I remember a British soldier who later said Churchill's speech about England fighting on the beaches and in the fields gave him the strength to carry on for his mates and his countrymen. A German General was quoted as saying the only country Hitler feared was England.
32
@ChristineMcM: Talk about "privilege" - first cousin of the Duke of Marlborough. Tough life. And he changed his political affiliation twice, opportunism rampant.
16
The flaw in your reasoning is that you seem to dismiss the reason why the British people voted to leave the EU. Certainly there are some macro trade advantages from being part of the EU, but that is completely negated by the fact that British life is dictated and distorted from Brussels. The British people want to control their own lives and want a governance and regulatory (micro) structure that best serves their needs, and is accountable from London. In the longer term this will best serve British interests in all respects, including having mutually supportive ties with the EU, the U.S., Canada, Australia, Japan, China, and the rest of the world.
5
Do you know how many companies are planning to leave the UK once Brexit is enacted? The international business community is full of examples and many are expecting a mass exodus. The UK will be a shell of its former self.
23
@Eric Schneide
Many have left already. Companies have transferred to Frankfort, Germany.
14
From 1999 to 2003, my family and I lived in the Thames Valley, while I worked in Reading, Camberley and the City of London. We loved the people we met back then. We availed most of our free time and used our annual 'National Trust' passes to explore most of the rich history and landmarks of this great land. Homages to Churchill's home at Chartwell and his father's estate at Blenheim were made with friends many times.
In the major cities, we saw how young, educated Brits were working hard to achieve a high position for the UK, and themselves, in the global community at the turn of the 21st Century.
In the countryside, we saw their older countrymen dwelling more on how it was, when "Empire" ruled, and wishing they could return to "the Raj" and what "used to be".
The gap was large between city and country folk.
The sun has long set on the British Empire. Boris Johnson tells the older generation he will revive it for them. These old people want desperately to believe him.
I feel sorry for the younger generations in London and other major cities who were hoping to make the UK great again.
With Boris, it can never happen.
489
@Joe Miksis Too broad a brush here.
I too have worked and spent much time in and around London, and while romantic to think the 'younger generation' is "working hard to achieve a high position for the UK", perhaps the comment is best ended without "for the UK" and simply kept at "for themselves".
19
@Joe Miksis
Humanity is a large bus. Stipulating that certain passengers should have a greater say in its direction and speed is an opinion, but rarely a sustainable one.
Our elders are on the outs now. We have bottled more knowledge, we say, in the best decade than in human history before it.
But that history is woven into memory and encoded in our brain’s very structure, taking the amygdala as one persistent reminder.
I am very modest in my declarations of supreme knowledge, as we should all be.
7
@Joe Miksis
I do not believe for one second that anyone you ever met in England - in the "countryside" or not, talked about when Empire ruled and the Raj, for god's sake
19
Boris has a good run as mayor of London behind him and is very much a free trader and solid parliamentarian rather than a control freak. The EU these days has become more like the old Hansetic League,a series of small sates along the North Sea circa the 11th-14th century that traded between themselves. Politically the EU has no history if real representative governments once you get to the Iberian states, south of the Italian Alps and the Adriatic states. There is a lot of smarts in the Brexit movement but like all major diversion will take to time develop and the din to subside. If Boris is not worth it he will lose the confidence of the House, or his Party or Cabinet and be dumped. The Westminster System makes sure all power resides in the House not overly so in one man ala some Republics. Churchill lost the confidence of the House after WW2 had to dissolve Parliament, go to the people and was defeated. May lost the the confidence of her party and cabinet who and threw her out.....the fate of many PM's.
2
In wartime, citizens tend to keep their leadership in place because of the national peril they face. Churchill has been lionized & turned into a great defender of democracy in WW II with just tiny class-related flaws. Few recall Churchill's intervention in unnecessarily bringing the Army to the 1910 London "Siege of Sidney Street." The armed anarchists were well under control by London's police but Churchill saw an opportunity for personal PR – & he mucked up bringing in soldiers to make a bad situation far worse.
The 35-year-old new Home Secretary gloried in his earlier military days fighting in India & the Second Boer War (1899-1902). After the Siege, he was kicked upstairs to be First Lord of the Admiralty (1911-15) in his 19th century uniform.
In WW I he was responsible for the disaster of the Gallipoli Campaign (1915-16) & its immense loss of 170,000 British lives after which he left government, joined the Royal Scots Fusiliers on the Western front - a Very Short Atonement - & was back in government in 1917. Winnie loved action, glory, medals, & uniforms. He was always an imperialist, saddened by the loss of empire – hardly a democrat at all. Didn't know the meaning of the word.
Britain was already on its way to being a “middling provincial country” as soon as WW II was over. The post-war period in the UK underscored just how antiquated the country was. That the UK survived into its current modern identity is no thanks to Winnie & his ilk.
8
As a Brit living in the US, all I can say to Professor Buruma’s article is brilliant.
8
To clarify, Churchill and Roosevelt produced the Atlantic Charter in August 1941, nearly 4 months before Pearl Harbor and the German declaration of war against the US.
5
Many in the world only wish to look backwards and not forward. They seem to lack the ability to understand the present moment. In my opinion the only way we should look backwards is how we may regain our ability to live in harmony with nature. In the area of economics it is a simple truth technology has shrunk the size of the planet. Information and technology travel at the speed of light. That is a fact no laws may prevent. Closing nations off from other nations in terms of trade an economic development will only limit a nation's options. As I ride my bicycle through Los Angeles I constantly sense how our 1920's grid and housing plans no longer meet the needs of 2020. I'd love to bulldoze the city and start over with a greener plan. At 1 time we were the city of the future. Bigotry aside my issue with Trump and Johnson is they have a very narrow minded sentimental approach to solving problems. There is no embracement of 2020 engineering. They present the dumbest and most archaic solutions. It's mind boggling their supporters fail to see this.
4
I've been trying to figure out what really is behind the irrational and dysfunctional UK polity. I've concluded that the effects of the Mad Cow Disease outbreak more than a decade ago have landed and are presenting as chest pounding. (just watch Question Time or PMQs) You cannot be a great power if you don't honor treaties or binding agreements.
6
Whether a negotiated Brexit or hard crash, Britain is in for some rough sledding here. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
10
In Nicholas Shakespeare's "Six Minutes in May," Winston Churchill is shown to be a cocky and misguided politician blinded by his own ambition. He was viewed as a journalist who had no experience in politics before he joined the House. While he was in the admiralty he made pretty serious blunders for the British fleet in the Balkans and in Norway, leading to multiple lives lost and self-interested efforts to save his own nephew captured by the Nazis.
Yet, like Boris, Churchill understood the power of writing history to your favor. In a January 1948 speech, he stated: "For my part, I consider that it will be found much better by all Parties to leave the past to history, especially as I propose to write that history myself." in response to the mistakes he made in power.
Boris might be more blatant in his ways to manipulate his path to power, but they are more similar than some may initially think.
6
We live in the utterly crazy world.
There is nothing wrong with Trump and Johnson because they are just the logical continuation of the principles set up by Winston Churchill.
Can anybody be worse than Churchill? He was a politician who sent 250,000 British soldiers to die and get mauled at Gallipoli, in absolutely unnecessary and wrongful war. Do you remember why the WWI break out? Because a single teenager assassinated the heir to the Hapsburg throne?! If we used such principle as the justification for launching the global conflict, the humanity should have disappeared in the nuclear war after assassination of John F. Kennedy.
The politicians like Churchill saddled us with the WWI and WWII. How could you get inferior and weaker than Germany that lost the WWI and was economically destroyed? All of that unfolded and developed in short two decades!
How can you squander such colossal advantage?
The great leaders keep their countries out of the carnages.
The fools push them into the global conflicts because they encourage divisions, partitions, polarizations, animosity and hatred. The aforementioned sins are prerequisite for the worldwide wars.
The great leaders build the worldwide webs and relationships…
6
Churchill comparisons aside, it's at least beyond doubt that the PM actually knows more about Sir Winston than our ignorant president.
If Trump were asked to locate Dunkirk on a map, he would most likely look at England, assuming he could find even that island nation.
While Mr. Johnson rightly esteems Churchill's dauntless wartime leaership, one wonders if Trump is equally enamored of Churchill's genocidairre turn in starving to death as many Indians as possible during the subcontinent's fight for independence.
5
Yes, Trump will care — sort of. After Brexit, he is counting on the UK to “become a middling provincial country, whose fortunes will be subject to the whims of others”. Then he will try to browbeat Johnson (or whomever) into what he perceives as a “fantastic deal” on trade, knowing the UK does not have the same retaliatory powers as the EU when his proposals inevitably turn one-sided and nationalistic. And he would demand that Ambassador Darroch be extradited to the US to face charges of libel. That would be a huge inconvenience for him, but truth is a complete defense against libel.
2
Good luck, Mr. Johnson.
A Britain out of the EU and with Jeremy Corbyn running the place is just too scary to contemplate.
3
It's a completely different time now, and Boris, like Winston was then, is the right person for the job. And if they met, I'm sure they'd have a nice chat over a cigar.
5
Brexit supporters won the majority vote in their referendum based on contemporary lies exaggerating the expense of staying in the EU, magical benefits, and fear of being overrun by Syrian refugees on the dole, not nostalgia for the empire of yore.
Same here but our boogeyman is Honduras. Why don't we just invade every country south of Mexico and kill every young man we see? That will teach them a lesson about the real America, where it's patriotic to shoot up a place but not rebuild, patriotic to hate the poor but not help, useful to break up families but not keep track of where you put them and then have a great sweep of deportation because it shows how our leaders keep their promises.
I do not give my consent. What do I do beside cast my 2 cents in a vote?
7
Churchill is a hero in his home country and much of the Western world. However, he was not viewed as favourably in some of the British colonies, such as India. I remember reading his book My Early Life as a child and even then having an impression of him as an entitled, racist and arrogant aristocrat. No wonder people like Trump and Boris Johnson adore him.
8
England will soon be free of Scotland and maybe even parts of Wales and The North. Long live Queen Cardimundi!
The Celtic fringe, lead by a free and prosperous European Ireland will place 'Little England' right back where it was in 1066. '"Arold wi' 'is eye full of arrow on 'is 'orse wi' 'is 'awk in 'is 'and!".
Such a tired little country as it is now - hollowed out by its imperial past - will become a buffer state between The USA and Europe.
9
Winston Churchill would despise Boris Johnson. Guess what? Boris Johnson, descendant of in-bred European royalty, doesn't care. Like Trump, he is going to appropriate whatever works to enable his personal aggrandizement and authority.
5
BJ is relying on a promise from Trump that the US will enter a special trade agreement with the UK once it leaves the EU (which Trump desires because it will weaken Western Europe vis a vis Russia). But talk about a chump! Relying on a promise from Trump, whose relationship with truth and honor is the equal of Johnson’s.
7
What the German Submarines could not do in WW II, to isolate England economicly and surrender, this guy is well on his way to accomplish exactly that and the people watching with their mouth open! Shame...
6
This is ridiculous, the way the Times and its writers root for people to fail.
Neither Mr. Johnson nor the independent U.K. have even had a chance to prove themselves, but the wise and all knowing Times have already condemned them both to failure.
Here's another prediction: The Times and its opinion writers will fail to prevent another four year term for President Trump, no matter what nonsense they print.
11
Not only Winston Churchill's ghost but 99% of the Brits hate him.
2
Winston Churchill despised lots of people.
Gandhi, all people of color, the Dresden civilians he agreed to carpet bomb, the "feeble-minded."
Boris would have been far down on his list.
4
It seems quite likely that the "UK" will sooner rather than later lose its permanent seat at the UN. This permanent seat has been an anomaly for a long time. Now, as the UK is rapidly falling in the rankings of the largest economies (to outside the G20 in 10 or 15 years), no longer speaks as part of the EU, and likely loses either N. Ireland or Scotland, or both, the justification for this small insignificant rump state to retain a seat will not be there. Who in the General Assembly will vote for retention? The 27 nations of the EU or their former colonies? Not likely. England will have no friends.
4
Winston Churchill would despise this coward European Union, incapable of making any decision that leads to conflict. From rejecting Maduro as president of Venezuela to silencing multiple sexual assists in Cologne, to not knowing what to do with ISIS.
3
A silly article. Boris Johnson is a demagogue who may not last long. However, he is nowhere as vicious as Churchill who would have slaughtered millions of people to keep the incompetent British empire.
3
The writer states that Churchill supported "deeply internationalist ideas: cooperation between countries, free trade and political freedom for all". This is exactly what Boris supports as do all the Brexiteers I know. So, contrary to what the writer suggests, I believe Churchill would infact support BJ.
2
Interesting how people like this author know what a long-dead person would think of a living person. How does he do it? Amazing.
5
President Obama was right to return the bust. Churchill stood for what American Revolution was against.
However, coming to Brexit. There are two sets of people that Brexit appeals to. First, those who dream of Empire 2.0 and the British Raj and secondly the rural folks who despise hardworking Eastern European expats.
Boris Johnson wanted a platform to project himself to the national stage. So he chose Brexit and “independence from Bruxelles” as the moto. Like Trump, he did that to elevate himself. Both Johnson and Farage were shocked as the referendum won. Farage immediately withdrew his promise of GBP 350 million/week to NHS despite what the red bus said. [A plurality of 42% still believe in that].
Now he has to deliver. For the last two years he did not work towards a plan on a no-deal Brixit. He did not even try. He has no plans on how to handle the Irish Border issue. He has no plans on what happens when EU rules and regulations vanishes.
… but the clock is ticking!
2
Churchill was right about Germany in the 1930s. He was the right man for the job in WWII. However, he was then promptly swept out of power in the biggest electoral landslide in British history in 1945. The new government then ushered in great new institutions such as the NHS and schooling opportunities that are venerated by all UK parties to this day. The lesson I desperately hope is learned, is that even pretending to be Churchill should not work when what is needed is not war but addressing issues of infrastructure, climate, and jobs.
4
"Britain will become a middling provincial country". That's optimistic. Brirtian has almost nothing that other countries want. The great British marques (eg, cars like Rolls Royce, Jaguar, MG, Land Rover) were bought by foreigners long ago.
About the only thing the UK (or, more likely, England) wil be able to offer is a tax haven and financial dry-cleaning.
6
@Wolf Kirchmeir
So...exactly what they're offering now?
Outside of the City of London and major university centers, the vast majority of people who aren't nobility live in squalid conditions, dutifully paying sky high rents to their betters.
Nurses can't afford to live within commuting distance of the places they're supposed to work. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-36151927.
3
Attacking and hooting a man to such a degree before his assignment has even begun only serves to lower the bar of expectations to a point where his failure will be deemed a success and something approaching the status quo a smashing victory. Churchill, perhaps it's worth noting, is long dead so his opinion won't matter much, no matter how many busts of the man keep circulating across the Atlantic.
4
Well, perhaps it is true that the "Road to Mandalay" is praising colonialism, but there are differing opinions. At any rate, unlike DJT, at least Johnson actually reads and even remembers such quaint works as Rudyard Kipling. Indeed, at least the poem itself was in the target location.
Of course, that doesn't mean Johnson will be good for the UK (or what's left of it). Bad leaders can also read and recite poetry. Nevertheless, that might be a sign that there is hope that Johnson can learn and become a better leader than his current impression leaves.
2
Fantastic column and application of actual historical facts to present day. What an amazing antidote to the appropriation of his tidal slogans for their absolute opposite.
Unfortunately, most present day US and UK voters (and Murdoch owned media outlets) are historical illiterates.
What’s even more appalling is that what may be the largest bloc of Trump and Johnson supporters are old enough to have been alive or to have had family members alive during Churchill’s lifetime and WWII. And they remember nothing or choose to forget all of this.
10
Boris Johnson is the perfect choice for Britain, even as a number of nations around the world choose right wing nationalist leaders who put their countries first before considering the fate of the planet. Jair Bolsonaro, president of Brazil, as reported in today's Times, puts his country first by destroying the rain forests that keep us from sliding into total ecological oblivion, at least for now. If he keeps this up, we won't slide into oblivion, we'll hurtle.
Vladimir Putin cracks down on dissent in Russia to a degree that Donald Trump must envy. Mr. Trump publicly invited Russian hackers to infiltrate Hilary Clinton's campaign (a challenge all but forgotten). Viktor Orban, president of Hungary, who controls that country's media and erodes democratic institutions and the courts, gets a positive nod from Mr. Trump. A grant from our State department for alternative media in that country was withdrawn.
Mr. Trump woos Kim Jon-un--a true and cruel dictator--while he cold-shoulders or even derides the democratic leaders of our traditional NATO allies.
So let's join President Trump in welcoming the "Britain Trump," as he describes him. It may be a form of--very short-lived-- comic relief. As Britain falters, we'll see how Mr. Johnson fares, and, as this article points out, whether Mr. Trump cares. It's a dog eat dog world of right wing nationalists.
6
Great Britian came to European Union out of economic needed.
Leave European Union by United Kingdom for Brexit swift economic decline!
United Nation security council seat, which will be hard to justifying on economic grounds. Push to replace with Germany? Japan? Italy? India? Brazil?
5
It's not just a one-country phenomena that the great leaders of the past would despise the leaders we have today---I believe that it is a world-wide phenomena that is affecting countries we once considered the most civilized---many European---both western and eastern---and of course our own America ---have moved and are moving to strong authoritarian leaders who are intellectually empty and full of self-importance. With Churchill we had a speaker of substance and an author of historical books that are still worth reading. And what would Adams, Jay, and Madison say about Trump and his Swamp advisers? In the present climate, intellectual attainments give way to leaders who can most convincingly make empty promises. We are now in the age of salesmen leadership, where presentation is what counts and actual content is irrelevant.
6
The post colonial doldrums ended with the U.K. finally joining the EU. The economic statistics are clear: only after the U.K. joined in 1973 did its economic growth catch up with the average economic growth of Italy, France and Germany from 1958 to 1973. The numbers are staggering. The U.K. played catch-up very well and surpassed the other big countries by 2013 in prosperity. But I also think the success of the EU revived British hubris. The Scottish have a very different take and experience. They also benefited - even to a higher degree - from the EU membership and they see what’s possible without being a British servant. They know how much EU money has helped them establish a prosperous, Scandinavia like country. Why go back to the times when they were treated like an appendix of England. And lastly the EU brought peace to the Irish islands. The oldest British colony became a de facto part of Irland via the EU conduit. And that’s why the backstop is so important and equally despised by little Englanders. They don’t want to lose their last and oldest colony. What would be left is Gibraltar, not enough to spark dystopian imperial dreams.
11
Boris Johnson is an outsized figure, all would agree, and one measure of such luminaries who are articulate and courageous is the animus they engender in their political adversaries. Abraham Lincoln comes to mind in this regard, with his single-minded devotion to his mantra "all men are created equal" and his political program assuring that the new nation remain intact and true to its founding principles. The personal animus Lincoln endured has not been seen to the same degree until recently, recalling that his political adversaries demonstrated their resistance in the radical form of secession.
2
I guess an inferiority complex drives people and Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson to compare himself to historic luminaries like Lincoln and Churchill. Imposters who believe in their own lies are the most dangerous.
1
Churchill reportedly said that " to Jaw-jaw is better than to war-war," which explains his proposal for a United States of Europe in the immediate aftermath of World War II. If you read the speech that contained the proposal you see no details. Churchill was above all an English nationalist and, if I may speculate, would never have allowed the forfeiture of British sovereignty that occurred in the last quarter of the 20th century. It is foolish to think otherwise.
I recently read Andrew Roberts' bio of Churchill "Walking With Destiny" and I highly recommend it. Churchill was a widely published writer all through his political career and his command of the language has never been equaled by any other politician with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln, who, however, never wrote a book.
6
As for Trump, it's Ronald Reagan who would have despised him. Trump is for the most part the antithesis of Ronald Reagan. Amazing that more Republicans don't realize that.
2
If England was America's mother, generating 13 children and trying to keep us, France was our father, advising "You can stand alone; we'll help you." Complication: a Protestant mother and a Catholic father. We, the children, trust Protestantism and distrust Catholicism. Protestantism is our social religion, even if we are Catholic, even Catholic clergy. We learned in history class in Catholic elementary school to trust Britain and distrust France. Recall the famous British newspaper headline when thick fog covered the English Channel: "Continent Isolated." When Brexit happens, Pro-Brexit British will fret "Europe Isolated," as if Britain holds Europe together. As British author and journalist Clifford Longley brilliantly argues in his book "Chosen People," the English see the role of God's Chosen People throughout history as passing from the Hebrews to the Christian Church, then to the Church of England, and, with the aftermath of WWI, to the United States. Since 1918, Britain sees its vocation on earth as helping God's Chosen People - America. ("W" winking atTony Blair). French commentators often speak not of "the British" or "the Americans" but of "the Anglo-Saxons," as if both are alike. "False!" we say. But wait: it is said that the highest rate of pre-mature return among American expatriate managers is to assignments in the U.K.
4
' The idea of Britain’s special relationship with the United States was also very much Churchill’s. His mother was American, so there were sentimental reasons. '
Boris Johnson, however, harboured no such illusions when he publicly renounced his US citizenship at the US Embassy two years ago. I dont think the America Firsters would approve of this!
4
Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as a farce.
Karl Marx, The eighteen Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
1852
Well, in the 1940s we got the tragedy: Winston Churchill. Now we are getting the farce: Boris Johnson.
4
you don't get it.
Britains importance, desirability and it's quality-of-life for it's citizens will INCREASE after Brexit.
8
How do you back up your assertion? You can’t and that’s why you resort to the fantasies that are unmasked by the author as imperialistic nostalgia. Brexit will turn Great Britain in to Small England losing Scotland and North Ireland and millions of people who rather live in Europe where opportunities are plenty
3
This has nothing to do with the article except that its author made mention of it. I am wondering what could have possibly have happened to the White House's bust of Churchill that it had to be sent out to be repaired? I didn't think busts on display in places like museums and the White House got damaged. Did Johnson or Nixon throw it at someone?
1
This almost nails it, when Britain leaves the E.U., it will become a middling provincial country, subject to the whims of others. There are only two mistakes in the article, I think. One is that Brexit is going to happen, it's not if but when, and when is in October. It is going to be a fumbling, badly done, hard exit. Boris Johnson will be in charge from now until then, and that's how he'll handle it, there will be no last-minute save from exiting.
But, Britain, or whatever's left of it if various segments leave it, will still have its nuclear armaments. So unlike most provincial, minor nations, it will have a guarantee against invasion. This leaves it roughly on the level of Pakistan, it won't drop to the level of Tanzania or Chile.
Regardless, leaving the EU will change it from Great Britain to Mediocre Britain, and Churchill would be furious. Personally, I feel like too many British chose this for me to care that they'll suffer the consequences of their idiotic mistake.
4
The British people voted in favor of Brexit. We shall see how it goes, but Boris Johnson may surprise you by his skill. As the Brits say: he deserves "half a chance."
4
The did not vote for Brexit. They were asked a question in a non binding referendum and a razor sharp majority supported the idea. Only voter manipulation and big fat lies pushed leave over the finish line. Nobody ever proposed a crash out that will put the nation at odds with Europe and the closest allies, will endanger the integrity of the United Kingdom and will inflict economic harm.
1
Neither Johnson nor Trump have any idea of what they speak. And we all suffer because of it.
4
I guess when you feel you can't control the present or future you reach back to the past. That's never good.
4
Johnson’s ‘do or die ‘ is surely a quote from The Charge of the Light Brigade. That did not go well for its 600 cavalrymen. ‘Someone had blundered’ may end up being Johnson’s political epitaph...
6
I hope everything works out okay for the UK but if the Brits continue to blather on about a resuscitated Commonwealth (led by Britain, of course) then they can shove that where the sun will never shine upon it. My ancestors left Britain in 1822 and came to what was then Upper Canada and I am forever thankful to them for doing so. What the Britons, especially the English, need to understand is that they are no longer an empire. Britain is simply a group of mid-sized European islands with a good future if it can ever recover from losing its empire. The Brits (again, the English in particular) suffer from post-imperial hubris, a hangover from the days of glory. I'm glad that Britain colonized North America otherwise I wouldn't be Canadian, but the "Brexiteers" like BoJo need to understand that Britain made the right decision in the mid-1970s to join the EEC and later the EU. Brexit is a sick joke being played on the British people by the Tory Party and now BoJo the Clown has taken centre stage to make it an even greater farce. I wish the people of the UK the best of luck, they're going to need it!
8
The authors point about Lindbergh is inaccurate and misleading, albeit oft repeated. Charles Lindbergh was a patriot and an isolationist, as was his father before him during WWI. Before December 7th, 1941 most of America favored staying out of the war, and Lindbergh was highly skeptical of Roosevelt’s affinity for Churchill. The America First Committee counted John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford as members. After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the committee immediately disbanded and members such as Lindbergh committed to the complete victory over Nazism and Fascism.
History is important. Smearing and revisiting heroes does not help us come together and understand the present.
@Jim Lindbergh was award the Service Cross by Goering in 1938. He had 2 german mistresses that he had multiple children with. He wanted America to negotiate with Hitler.
Many Republicans were also fond of the Nazis, thought they were "OK". Much like the Trumpers of today.
You are the one ignoring history.
3
The two nations that made English the de-facto international language of Planet Earth appear to be crashing and burning right now. The destruction of the language by dishonest politicians will be its demise.
3
Cast your eyes to the future...the United Kingdom is no more....Scotland has decamped to the EU, Ireland is finally United, only poor Wales decides to stick with the English, if for no other reason than all the vacation dollars that flow westward. As for England: the NHS is finally privatized, extreme financial deregulation has made London a no-go zone for serious businesses to have a headquarters there - both Oxford and Cambridge are bought by Gulf Arab and Chinese investors. There are however three new Trump golf courses and the Royal family supports itself by selling knighthoods like Bic Macs. Hail Britannia! Payback hurts.
6
While Boris Johnson may wish to style himself after Churchill because of Churchill's bull dog determination to fight the good fight against the forces of evil, that singular pugnaciousness was virtually the only thing to recommend the man.
It was only because Churchill was fighting a monstrous evil worse than the evil of British colonization that anyone reveres Churchill today. It certainly isn't for his watercolors, although he did write well.
FDR told Roosevelt he wasn't interested in fighting to save Britain so it could continue to enslave dark races abroad, while Churchill said he was not going to preside over the destruction of the British empire.
A segregated American army, whose soldiers and airmen died in Europe went back to an America where they were half persons. A despot who said "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths a statistic" did more to defeat Hitler than Churchill and FDR combined.
Evil was defeated by countries which were significantly less evil, but which were terribly flawed themselves.
We need not emulate or even celebrate Churchill; we can celebrate his determination to defeat a greater evil.
2
Winston Churchill despised Mahatma Gandhi. History is an objective judge.
2
@Anita Subramanian
Churchill hated anybody and everybody with color in their skins.
2
Putin’s spokesperson may have correctly described post-Brexit Britain when he said, “Britain is just a snail island that no one listens to.” Just read Cameron’s exaggerated response, full of century-old glories, to see the world is moving on. As an ex-pat who has lived in England for 10 years, I fear most English don’t understand this - or,worse, don’t care.
4
Oops! He said “small island” - although “snail island” may apply too.
1
"The United States can afford to indulge in bashing international norms, at least for a while, because it is a huge country, with a powerful domestic economy, unparalleled military strength and great natural resources."
In fact, in my view, the United States cannot afford a leader like Donald Trump, who may share Johnson's buffoonery and some conceits, but not his education.
Yes, we have have everything on the list, but each is under threat in its own way with our current, shambolic, reckless and bizarrely ignorant president.
Trump has taken a multicultural, multiracial and religiously diverse country, true regardless of the percentages, and worked hard to turn it into a divisive wrestling pit.
He has taken the growing economy he inherited that he deemed "very bad" or some equally reductive nonsense and with his signature on an incoherent and top heavy tax bill juiced it for the short term along with increasing a deficit geometrically without little to show for the majority of the huge population.
As for natural resources, beyond favoring oil, gas and coal and ignoring alternative energy to our future detriment, his administration has been on a deregulation free-for-al, poisoning the air, water and health of the nation.
I can't speak for the military, but I doubt they're thrilled to give part of their budget to a ridiculous border wall.
Britain has not mattered as a great power since 1946. Leaving the EU will only make you less relevant than you already are. Why would you pin your hopes on a trade deal with a man who knows virtually nothing about trade, economy or heck anything really, when you're already member of the largest trade bloc in the world? Brexit will be a self-inflicted wound that you can ill afford.
4
Here, in Australia, many people are in a state of total disbelief that someone like Boris Johnson could possibly become Prime Minister of Britain. The lies, the lack of any basically demonstrable ethics, the charlatan look of the carefully dishevelled hair...
We were devastated when Donald Trump became President of the United States, and also continue to be in a state of disbelief as his policies appear to be geared to ripping apart alliances and devastating what anyone would consider to be the norms of due process in the conduct of his Presidency.
Trump and Bojo - what a great pair to promote their self serving agendas and personal narcissism to the world!
4
Boris Johnson perfectly symbolizes the world free press.
He lies, but the free press lies too. He is reckless, but the free press is reckless too. He does it because he cares about you and the free press acts in the same way too.
Read any newspaper today and you will find the tons of the lying ads distorting the facts and reality. Even worse, you will find those newspapers supporting and vouching for those lying politicians brainwashing the population that the wars will make you safer and spread the peace.
I repeat, allegedly the wars are going to spread the peace, but you wonder about Boris Johnson?!
Did Donald Trump and Boris Johnson push us into the Iraq War, the Syria War or the Libya War?!
Did two of them arm Egyptian general Sisi who killed thousands peaceful protesters in the streets just because they demanded the results of democratic elections to be upheld?!
The politicians and the leaders preceding Boris Johnson were doing exactly the same.
If we weren’t primed for the endless stream of lies by our mass media, would the lying and outrageous politicians be acceptable to us?
What was the prerequisite for having Trump and Johnson as the elected leaders?
2
As much as I dislike Boris Johnson, I find the deification of Winston Churchhill as offensive. His disregard for British subjects in Colonial India led to widespread famine in Bengal. He was the fervent defender of an empire ruled by the white man. Less We Forget.
2
After Brexit, the only good thing that will come out of Britain will be Jameson's whiskey.
1
Robespierre,
when there is a politician, that Boris Johnson is mimicking, than it is Maximilien de Robespierre. Johnsons disdain for liberalism is alike Robespierres despice for the aristocracy. They are both made out of these upper-class mold, but fancy themself as leaders of a lower class, of citizen who feel downtrodden. They imagine themself as chieftains of an horde of mavericks, that want's to tear down the establishment of professional politicians.
Johnson will end like Robespierre. After a period of 'La Terreur' his own people will either get frustrated or feel threatened themself. They will rebel and depose their failed cheerleader without cleaning up the mess they made.
In France the terror ended finally with a real defining leader - Napoleon. And maybe in britain there will emerge a similar able politician to mend the strife, someone worthy of an churchill.
2
Criticising Mr. Johnson is appropriate, although I disagree with Professor Buruma's assessment.
Claiming that the long dead Winston Churchill would "hate Boris Johnson" is necromancy at best and childish invective at worst.
During the leadership contest, Boris Johnson insisted he could be trusted with "the great Lady Britannia". He now sees himself as helmsman steering Britannia out of EU waters, after winning the Iditarod sled dog race as a musher.
Brexiteers’ yearning for “splendid isolation” is as suicidal as their decision to leave the EU without a deal. Their global influence will be greatly reduced – economy will shrink, and most people will be worse off.
Johnson is a fawning admirer of Winston Churchill, but will never be in the same league as his idol. But it doesn’t prevent him from identifying himself with his hero, like showing shocking callousness and contempt for other ethnic groups and cultures.
Churchill's racism was wrapped up in his Tory zeal for empire, one which also irked his wartime ally, Franklin D. Roosevelt. However the two statesmen managed to forge a special relationship, as an episode confirmed.
During a Christmas visit by WC to the US in 1941, FDR called on him in his White House quarters and found him naked after his bath, pacing about the room. He was about to leave, when WC replied: "The Prime Minister of Great Britain has nothing to hide from the President of the United States."
But any “special” relationship between Trump and Johnson will go against the “Atlantic Charter” declared by FDR and WC. Historians see the friendship between these two statesmen as the foundation of the current global order. Today Trump and Johnson seek to disrupt it.
2
Let us hope that Boris Johnson takes the UK out of the Paris Climate Accord as well. He gave hints that he knew that the claim of human control of climate was a scam.
Our friends the Brits deserve some prosperity, like us...
1
So much seems to be forgotten in some of the comments. Churchill played FDR into some very stupid moves. One being to bring bring British into the Manhattan Project and two turned out to be Soviet spies. After the war Britain returned to its colonies like nothing had changed except it had. Thrown out of India, Aden, Kenya, Malaya and the list is endless. The nonsense of how great they were seems to miss a giant point if not for American - Canadian convoys they would have starved. Rationing went on until 1955. Churchill as mentioned was a disaster in WW I and used gas in Iraq in the 1920's. He was always broke and depended on the kindness of strangers. As for other comments once they leave the EU what exactly do they have to offer as a nation. Another Scotland will leave and there has to be a vote in Northern Ireland which will finally join the progressive Irish Republic. So, let see why only England. Johnson and the other elites have moved their money off shore or into the EU. Farage will help sell off National Health since he and Boris get money from Aaron Banks the insurance man. I will love watching all those that love Boris the con man just like Trump eventually get theirs. Why the fishermen and sheep owners are upset who will they sell to, gee you voted for it look in the mirror. Britain is a myth. The Empire existed by butchery, payoffs and stealing the resources from the colonies. Like Churchill get on with it with someone elses money. Jim Trautman
2
Johnson seems to have missed that in addition to the superficials, Churchill had character, ethics and gravitas.
1
Boris Johnson is a great opportunity for European Union. He will make a no-deal Brexit happen, wich will make EU get rid of UK, a poisonous member that joined only to divide and slow down this great European State inspired by the US federation. General DeGaulle was so right to block their entry, London could only join after he died.
So Go Boris Go! Wreck UK once and for all! So many countries will feast on the final fall of the British Empiiiiiire...
2
@Tristan Roy
Just one problem there Tristan, for the last 45 yrs there has only been 2 net contributors to EU funds, Germany by far the largest and the UK; sometimes other countries have contributed more than the UK but not consistently yr in yr out as the UK has done. Now where will they get that money from and yes you can say that Boris was over the top but he wasn't too far out.
Why do you think they are making it difficult for us to leave - because they like us; or perhaps it's the food; or maybe the British weather. No, it's the money!!
We shouldn't elevate a white supremacist that defended race-based colonialism. I've never understood the infatuation with Churchill in America as your FDR was everything the "Keep England White" aristocrat was not.
In Canada he's known as the man that single-handedly destroyed the British Empire, gave Stalin half of Europe and planned two of the most disastrous military campaigns in European history. We're taught that the soldiers hated Churchill and that's why he lost the 1945 election (his first) by more than 3,000,000 votes.
2
I don’t appreciate being lectured on why I voted to leave the EU. I’m a proud European, and have lived and worked in mainland Europe for the past 15 years or so. My problem is not with 'garlic munching foreigners', my problem is with the EU itself which i find self-serving and undemocratic. The constant shift towards a federalised continent and legal, economic, and political structures that over-reach and constrain those of individual EU nations became unacceptable to me, and a majority of UK voters.
What began as a thoroughly laudable free trade association has become an ideological project that many outside Brussels regard as absurd and alarming — and I include in that cohort plenty of my French, Spanish, and Italian friends and workmates. Most of my friends here are German, and it’s fair to say that they are mostly pro-EU. But there is widespread cynicism about the EU across Europe.
Imagine if the US trading relationship with Canada and Mexico grew to include most South American nations, and created for itself a federation with a parliament, flag, anthem, common currency, and a legal system that over-reached your own? And that free movement of people was a guaranteed right across the entire continents of North and South America?
You might want to consider such a scenario before deriding the urge to escape from the EU. Meanwhile, I’ll continue to cherish being European, regardless of attempts to portray me as some sort of racist xenophobe.
61
@WinstonSmith Oh come on. Britain has lots of power in the EU to change things if it wants to. It doesn't, just wants to complain, and leave. Oh yeah, and wants all the benefits of being in the EU, without any of the responsibilities. Sounds pretty much like the way Trump operates..
45
@WinstonSmith The exodus of commerce and business from England has already begone. It will be interesting to see how "United" the UK is in regards to Ireland if there is a hard Brexit.
16
@WinstonSmith: A lesson from WW2 is that big wins. I would support a North American Union. Such an entity would dominate the 21st century.
The free movement of people is an attempt to solve the age old problem that money has free movement, people usually do not. This creates inequities that leads to conflict. It also allows money to blackmail regions to offer advantageous tax/regulation terms.
Time to level the playing field.
18
To start, I find both Johnson and Trump appalling. Yet the UK is the world's fifth largest economy.That is not middling by any definition. Such ignoring of easily quantifiable fact brings everything else in the essay into question.
1
How much of British economy depends on the financial sector that (was) based in London, auto manufacture that is leaving for the Continent? Or is that going to stabilize, remain in post-Brexit Britain?
2
With Brexit, I fear for the British economy and my British family, most of whom are Remainers, and voted as such. As British-born, with dual US/UK nationality, I'm horrified that the UK has as prime minister a leader who is as self-absorbed, narcissistic and bigoted as the so-called US leader.
5
Mr. Buruma overlooked (or omitted) to mention that Boris Johnson's great grandfather was Ali Kemal Bey, a Turk. Ali Kemal's son, Osman Wilfred Kemal, changed his name to Wilfred Johnson taking his maternal grandmother's maiden name-thence he begat Boris Johnson. Churchill must be rolling over in his grave now!
1
" Britain and France should merge as one nation to fight Hitler."
Historically, might be wishful thinking. Churchill was, if nothing else, an ardent Imperialist. One might recall from history that a good deal of what is now France (I almost called it "modern France, as if. Silly me) did, in fact, once belonged (if not mostly claimed, yet not always held) to and by Britain. So was this something of a ploy to get that lump of sod back? It makes sense as one of Churchill's goals during WW11 was not only defeating Germany and its allies (Italy, Japan, Romania, Ukraine,Bulgaria, Finland and eventually most of France (recall that Britain did a good job of sinking the French fleet and even Ike called the French "total collaborators"), Churchill also wanted to protect, maintain ,if not expand and reclaim , much the British empire (some lost to Japan, but some lost much, much earlier and longer to France). Many, if not most, historians, understood that was one of the key reasons Churchill lobbied so hard for a southern front against "The soft underbelly of Europe" (which turned out to be not so soft, indeed) was to protect British "interests" in northern Africa (including Egypt) as well the mideastern oil fields, the canal and the route to the Jewel in the Crown, India. The war was one, but the empire, of course, was lost anyway. Someone might ring up Boris to let him know. But break it to him gently. We hear he's a sensitive bloke.
1
As Mother Teresa said:
"The problem with the world is that we draw the circle of our family too small" ...
2
Mr. Buruma is dead wrong if he thinks Churchill would have supported surrendering the amount of sovereignty to the EU that was required of the Brits in the last quarter of the 20th century. The idea that the English people would be dictated to by socialist foreigners would have sickened him, perhaps not as much as domination by Nazi Germany, but still to a high degree. Churchill's view of the EU would have likely been more like Thatcher's who said in 1988: "We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level, with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels." Churchill was more liberal than Thatcher, but he was a vigorous defender of British sovereignty.
A league or loose confederation of English speaking peoples from Australia, the UK, New Zealand, Canada, the US is the best option for the UK now. The European continent was the most violent one in the world in the last millennium and Britain often suffered from it needlessly.
The English-speaking peoples and the British Empire have made the world far more civilized and free than it ever would have been if they had not existed and they did this despite the constantly warring nations and ethnicities on the mainland.
4
"President Trump, who placed a Churchill bust in the Oval Office with great fanfare, has no upper-class mannerisms or, indeed, manners at all." Observations such as these is why I'm a great fan of Buruma.
2
The British public doesn’t seem to be aware or care that Boris Johnson is like the comic book character the “Joker”, delusional evil. Who, along with Trump, are dead set in using “a great big wrecking ball” to destroy the “peace of our time,” the Atlantic Charter, the EU, NATO and anything else that stands in their way or their patron of all destruction, Putin.
Brexit means the end of the UK as the economic and strategic power, both real and symbolic, it is as the buffer between the EU and the US. Even if the US trades absolutely everything with the UK, it’s economy will lose luster. It’s defense sector automatically weakens and becomes pray, by necessity, to the likes of China. Can you say 5G?
Johnson’s so-called “upper classism” affectations come out more like an opera buffa, than eccentric tic. Ditto Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage. What type of monsters is the “public” school system creating anyway?
2
Oh gosh. No he wouldn't. Sir Wiston was an effective leader for war times, but promptly voted out of office once the War was over.
Rightfully so. The Labour class never forgave him for ordering the Army to shoot at striking workers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonypandy_riots
Same will happen to Johnson (twice elected by the cosmopolitan elite of London) once Brexit is dealt with.
2
Boris and Donald are indeed “brothers from other mothers,” more in love with themselves than anyone else. Both have conned their countries down the path to oblivion.
Celts, Vikings ,Angles, Jutes, William the Conqueror. Boris is just throwing the gates wide open again.
Be careful, Mr. Buruma, Churchill may have admired Britain’s new Prime Minister, Boris Johnson.
Churchill was not, as Burma implies, always a good and decent man. Churchill had an unconscious ugly authoritarian streak. History is beginning to show Churchill’s rough side.
Look how Churchill treated Gandhi. He despised Gandhi. He’d do anything to see Gandhi fail. He gossiped, suggested the Mahatma secretly used glucose injections to withstand his fasts. He had British soldiers fire on protesting Indians.
Arthur Herman, in “Gandhi and Churchill,” wrote of Gandhi’s death:
“There was one public man, however, who did not publish a tribute. Neither then or later did Winston Churchill ever express any regret at the passing of his longtime rival for India and Empire. For Churchill, Gandhi’s death was just one more killing in the slaughter that had been going on since 1946.”
Churchill is a stereotype. He has become the pin-cushion to hold all the “good qualities” we’d like our politicians to have.
Look! Need I say more—Churchill is one of Rudi Giuliani’s political idols.
4
More to the point, Kipling would despise Boris.
2
Notice he walks, turns, bends, stoops like Churchill. Mannerism like Churchill. Did he practice?
1
i have a basic question. How do you know what Winston Churchill will despise? Did his ghost come over and talk with you?
2
I don't get the love for the EU superstate. What am I missing?
1
Or course Churchill wouldn't like Boris Johnson. Churchill saw the threat of fascism. I'm sure he would also see the threat in Boris Johnson and Trump.
No mention of the ways Churchill tried to sabotage operation overlord and cancel D-day so he could better protect the British empire. Read Nigel Hamilton's new FDR biography that portrays Churchill as a tactical fool. Losses in the Boer war and Gallipoli were disasters of his making. And yes, he was a racist who hated Indians especially Gandhi.
Not a good role model for a British prime minister.
1
In his heart of hearts, Churchill would approve of Johnson. As for FDR, he was a snobby patrician who harbored many prejudices, one of which was his antipathy to Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany. FDR was an Anglophile confronted by isolationists who opposed his attempts to more actively go to the aid of Britain. It took Pearl Harbor and Hitler's declaration of war to change that. Certainly, Churchill and FDR would be aghast at the wave of immigrants that are changing the culture of their nations. For England, that is certainly the case and Johnson certainly recognizes that.
3
Happily neither Trump or Boris Johnson have any plans to start blowing up bridges and buildings, or pouring poison into fields. They will do damage, but even the stupid people will see how bad their ideas were, in the long run. It will be an education.
It’s regrettable. At a time when we could be moving forward, towards affluence, we will instead be moving backwards. But the poverty of 2030 will not be too severe. People will still have food to eat, and they will be clothed and have access to medical services. They just won’t be affluent. No money for toys and trips.
1
What a well written piece summing up Johnston, another fact was that Churchill had no regard for Ireland at all, just like Johnston, he would have happily given up Northern Ireland in return for the use of Irish ports during the war
1
Who will confront Boris at Runnymede after his fantasies about reviving Britain's place in the world after Brexit lead to ruin?
2
Britain is in structural decline. Brexit and the associated loss of market access will only worsen the situation.
Boris and his Brexiteer cohort are delusional if they think Brexit will lead to prosperity.
Pathetic that the Conservatives could not find a better PM.
1
Well if anybody studied Winston Churchill and the people that he liked, Trump wouldn't be on that list either.
1
The best Brexit was the one 60 or 70 years ago, when Britain left its colonies!
The incredible racist discrimination of people for centuries in their own lands, exploitation of their wealth, suppression of their rights and dignity, with the occasional massacre or genocide in Amritsar, South Africa, Tasmania, Afghanistan or Southern China thrown in, is indeed exemplified by Churchill and his like, and been exposed by Shashi Tharoor, Buruma himself, K.N. Chaudhuri and other academics (e.g. Aimé Césaire’s morally powerful "Discours sur le Colonialisme", or see http://theconversation.com/ethics-and-empire-an-open-letter-from-oxford-scholars-89333).
While most former colonies realise that Britain's glory days are long past - except for its universities, museums, literature, music, television and science, to be fair - lots of British people are blissfully unaware of the widespread amusement, resentment, derision and at best, nostalgic affection that Britain is held in on the Continent, and in its former colonies.
Boris-types really believe the "colonial subjects" should be eternally and uncritically grateful to imperial Britain for "civilising" and "saving" them. The stupendous ignorance, delusions and out-of-step attitudes of so many older and/or non-graduate Britons towards the rest of the world is exceeded only by those of their similar US counterparts.
5
Probably has a "borderline personality disorder," just like his buddy, donnie dRumpf. A sociopath, narcissist, liar, and generally nasty piece of work, who taints everything and everyone he touches. Looks like it will be a lot easier for Jeremy Corbyn to challenge. Corbin is NOT an anti-Semite, he strongly disapproves of the right-wing government of Israel, NOT the people of Israel, nor their religion. This is a political, and humanitarian concern, not a religiously bigoted one, stigmatized by the opposition through disinformation, and lies. This is exactly the manner in which Brexit was presented to UK citizens, and now that they recognize it as a pile of lies, they are opposed. Boris Johnson was historically unpopular on his first day as PM. What a load.
2
@ChesBay--I hate the very thought of the name of Winston Churchill being spoken in the same sentence as the name of you-know-who.
1
My Scottish father had an explanation that fits: "You can always tell an Englishman. You just can't tell him much." We have to remember Little England is the home of other fantasy places alongside Brexitland -Narnia, Hogwarts and Middle Earth, two of which Johnson is trying to develop trade deals with. Brexit has been nothing but a train of delusional thinking, from the "easiest free trade deal ever" to "40 even better trade deals" (4 very minor ones rolled over in 3 years) to Borderless WTO trade (can't happen) to GATT24 (not available). Now it's a great deal with tRump (never mind his demands to eliminate Little England's 50 billion trade surplus and its regulations, never mind Pelosi saying no deal if the Good Friday Agreement is touched.Of course, getting humiliated by Iran and dumped by Pompeo has forced it to go crawling to the evil EU for naval assistance. Something that Johnson shrugs off while waving the Union Jack. It's popcorn time.
1
Britain asked for it ane got it. No pity from me. US has enough to worry over.
3
Boris Yeltsin willfully pulled Russia out of the USSR and now that country has terrible relationship with the formerly united and friendly republics.
Boris Johnson wants to pull Great Britain out of the EU.
Any hint about what the future might look like for London?
Boris and Boris, a pair of the best jokers!
“When President Barack Obama returned the bust after the old one was fixed — as had been agreed before Mr. Obama came to the White House — he was accused by a British politician of doing so out of spite, because of his ‘ancestral dislike of the British Empire, of which Churchill had been such a fervent defender.’”
Just because Boris Johnson was born in the United States is no guarantee that he is conversant in American slang.
But if he is, then he knows that “Johnson” is one of many slang terms for a part of the male anatomy that most, if not all, societies demand not be exhibited in polite company.
Those Americans repelled by Mr Johnson, his rhetoric and policies would, however, likely apply to him another, one-syllable, slang Americanism for that same body part.
If you don’t know that that word is, Boris, just reference Richard Nixon.
2
For modern Britain, "...the gateway to national greatness..." [op cit], is its ability to act as a social, economic and political bridge between the United States and Europe.
--
No speakers of English understand Europeans--and for that matter the whole world--as well as the British. They also understand us—much better than we think!
***
It's true. Britain needs America's military and economic power to buttress its unrivaled wisdom and knowledge. I'd even go as far to say that from the time the United States entered WWII, we have effectively become, "the Other Members” of the emerging British Commonwealth. [my caption]
--
But there are also benefits available to America, that only Britain can supply. One is culture.
Up until as late as 1920 [the beginning of the Jazz Age], our East Coast Establishment continued to slavishly imitate, "all things British." Even today, many including myself settle for nothing less than the likes of "Downton Abby,” on what amounts to our own version of British Television [PBS].
--
Oh, and not to forget: our own Founding Fathers were transplanted, albeit enlightened, English Aristocrats. In fact, without England, the reputed "Mother of Nations,” we in America would be just another isolated, backward, self-centered aggregation, plodding through time—subject to the despotic whims of a succession of autocrats, not unlike the likes of Donald J. Trump.
1
Brexit, Boris... Donald. It’s like watching a train wreck. The ‘make us great again’ program is a prescription for second rate status and mediocrity.
3
Boris Yeltsin willfully pulled Russia out of the USSR and now his country has terrible relationship with the formerly united and friendly republics.
Boris Johnson wants to pull Great Britain out of the EU.
Any hint about what the future might look like for London?
Boris and Boris, a pair of the best jokers!
A middling provincial country, indeed. Good luck with Boris.
1
Churchill's 'Special Relationship' was and is promoted as a union of white Anglo Saxons (and wannabes). it's racist and exclusionary, and also now ironic, as in approximately 25 years non-Hispanic white people will be the minority in the U.S. Boris and Trump are delusional enough to think they can refuel this shrinking alliance with appeals to the worst in their respective electorates, but let's hope a large majority in both countries will wake up and realize these two con men will only lead us off a cliff.
2
It's a good thing he's a proven liar, because if he actually does a no deal exit, the British economy will tank, London will no longer be a financial center, Scotland will likely leave, and the Irish border will be a disaster.
He's a fraudulent man in a very bad situation. It truly is a shame. The world needs a prosperous UK.
4
Winston Churchill would also despise those that would appease China and Iran and other global bullies.
We need deterrence. Even Trump understands this.
1
Queen Elizabeth must despise Boris too.
The difference is she is still alive and she actually has the authority to stop his reckless actions before he completely obliterates the little left of her empire.
I bet Churchill would also despise Elizabeth's lack of backbone.
3
Is Mr. Buruma now claiming he is channeling Sir Winston? Maybe he can explain, therefore, why he oversaw the policy that led to mass starvation in Bengal, on the level of Stalin in Ukraine and Mao in China? Churchill was a great war leader for the UK, and inflicted imperialist misery on the rest of the "Empire."
As for "exaggerated importance," who said he wouldn't preside over the dissolution of the British Empire? His only "internationalism" was aimed at preserving this atavism.
1
It appears that almost everyone in England despises Boris Johnson..and yet, he is now Prime Minister.
Professor Buruma appears to think that the motivation for Brexit is racism. “Garlic” and “foreign tongues” etc. I find that insinuation offensive. It is also a clear signal of a lack of objectivity which begs the question why this opinion was published. That impression is reinforced by his characterisation of Britain as a middling provincial country, which is an odd thing for an educated man to say about the world’s fifth largest economy by GDP.
Stripped of anti-British hyperbole, there is a more fundamental issue which I would expect any thinking person commenting on this topic to confront. How does one reconcile the fundamental democracy deficit at the heart of European Union governance? And if the answer is “can’t” or “don’t know”, why would an academic resort to vitriol of this kind? I cannot answer that question, but perhaps if he is as I hope a man of conscience Professor Buruma will do so. Publicly.
As for breakaways, really? Why stop at Wales? How about Notting Hill? Or Chelsea? They voted Remain. Or how about the Blue states in the USA? Seriously.
2
All BoJo brings to the table is “Bluster, silliness and talk”. Good luck with that.
2
The Atlantic Charter was signed some 4 months before Pearl Harbor in 1941. The article (probably unintentionally) gave the wrong impression.
Thank you for acknowledging that Churchill was a racist.
“This is a man the British would have us hail as an apostle of freedom and democracy, when he has as much blood on his hands as some of the worst genocidal dictators of the 20th century,”
More on the impact of the racism here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-history/winston-churchill-genocide-dictator-shashi-tharoor-melbourne-writers-festival-a7936141.html
1
Boris Johson's book The Churchill Factor is entertaining and informative, But Johnson as a politician is neither. He's like a Trump TV Reality Show.
Now during Trump's reign, we could paraphase one of Churchill's great lines --- about the RAF pilots who saved Britain in WW2--- ' Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.'
To fit our warped politics -- Never in the history of democracy have so many been so fooled, exploited and manipulated by so few.
President Kennedy said " Churchill mobilized the English language and sent it into battle.” Trump demeans and disgraces the English language, tweeting it into daily insults to any challenger.
Churchill was a huge upholder of the British Empire. After all, he was born in the 1870s, in the huge Blenheim Palace built by Britain for his illustrious ancestor general--The Duke of Marlborough. India was considered the 'Jewel in the Crown' for the British Empire that Churchill revered.
Did Churchill's notion of England/France merging into 1 nation to defeat the Nazi takeover mean he was an internationalist? Whatever that means. Britain was alone. He wanted it to survive.
Winston Churchill would have despised Boris Johnson? Perhaps, but Churchill was himself a nasty piece of work: savagely chauvinistic and white supremacist, and perfectly prepared to see his hateful ideas inflicted on the innocent, as he did many times over.
People on the right still like to point out the left's indulgence of Stalin, even though that's almost 70 years out of date. But few mainstream writers ever bother to remark on the vicious ideologies of some of our most beloved, iconic figures: Reagan, Thatcher (hated in the UK but bizarrely feted in the US), Churchill... They were all dead wrong on race and did terrible things to minorities.
1
Ah, well, they can always turn the nation into a Harry Potter theme park.
1
For all his racist faults Churchill was a man of stature and principle who spoke his mind. Boris is the polar opposite, a serial misogynist and back-stabber whose sole aim is 'winning', without thought to the consequences for his country (sound familiar?).
Britain was already 'middling' before Boris's ascent to the throne. It will soon become 'piddling'.
2
Boris Johnson and Donald Trump have more in common with the 1930s strongmen of Europe that much of the world lampooned but whom Winston Churchill fervently warned his country against. But for the increasingly frail democratic institutions and a free press, Johnson and Trump would take us down the same ugly path trod by twentieth century fascism.
Hopefully Winston Churchill will reach up from the grave and extinguish these two imposters so that we in the US and the UK can Keep Calm and Carry On.
1
This man is selling a bill of goods he cant deliver. The strange thing is that when I was in London last November and since then when I've talked to English men, they believe, without reference to anything like the facts, that England is going to thrive under Brexit. If after October 31, the economy is damaged, and as the UN has reported, England is already a country where many of the natives are impoverished and depend on others for necessities like food, who are they going to blame? How will they swallow the results of their fealty to people like this? I don't think they'll be ready to blame this guy, because that would require them to realize how stupid they were all along. Same thing if Trump wins here in 2020. I heard he's already asking for cuts of up to $150 billion in the federal budget. Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security == bye bye. All those people who voted for him, and wind up loosing, and cant admit this is mostly due to his tax bill, giving their money to the rich, what lie will he tell them, who will they blame. Don't count on the truth winning out.
This is ridiculous, the way the Times and its writers root for people to fail.
Neither Mr. Johnson nor the independent U.K. have even had a chance to prove themselves, but the wise and all knowing Times have already condemned them both to failure.
Here's another prediction: The Times and its opinion writers will fail to prevent another four year term for President Trump, no matter what nonsense they print.
3
You know this is an op-ed, you are free to cheer on Bret Stephens and Trump all you like.
Winston Churchill is dead, so what does it matter. So many of us despise Trump and that is what matters.
Churchill was a racist. here is what he said about Muslims in 1899.
“Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”
Part of Boris' ancestry is Muslim. I recall one of his grandfathers was a Turk. Boris would have been happy to be despised by Churchill.
1
@Indian Diner
Are all Italians Catholic? Does any one of us praise all that lies in his lineage?
Good piece, except when it just can’t resist “othering” Johnson,s supporters as white bores who despise those who eat foreign garlicky food and speak strange tongues. So much like some of us “never t-ers” who sadly contribute to our global addiction to intolerance.
1
How long before Boris is out ?
At least Boris Johnson is not a mass murderer of 4 million people like Churchill during WW2 - the great bengal famine.
The English (yes, the English, because both the Scots and the Northern Irish have nothing to do with the mess just them wanted and created - the Welsh are drunk with them, but they are recovering from the booze*), the English - I was saying - know how to relate with Europe only in terms of giving and having and above all they have no desire to put back in the drawer of history the idea of "Rule, Britannia!" ... Well then there is no hope for them to understand that Europe is something much deeper, that goes beyond the issues of economy and power. It's a choice of civilisation. Have they not noticed that the world has changed? For God's sake, Brexit it is. In the end, everything will be adjusted in one way or another and their economy will recover. Business is business, right? But they have to know that they will lose the consideration, respect and esteem with which we European citizens have always looked to them. Best regards from Padua (EU)
*) I know some of British doubt that this is happening.
1
Everybody has his or her own Churchill, including Prof. Buruma.
So did the British people who threw him and his party out of office after he and they saved Britain from Nazi conquest and won the war.
Churchill might have been horrified by Johnson. He was horrified by any politician or policy that was not Winston Churchill.
1
Does this mean the British Trump will be going to jail too?
Once the all the financial services leave, what does England have?
Tourism, tea, trinkets and toffs.
Anglo peoples seem to love to cut off their nose to spite their face.
Churchill was a terrible leader in domestic dealings and politics. He was though the right man as an elderly warrior/leader. Once WWII came to a close he was useless. The Brit tossed him out of office in the end. Thats the real history. But even on his worst day Boris is nowhere near the cloth and ilk of Churchill.
And Trump is utterly incomparable to FDR.
I pity Great Britain. Boris is a buffoon, a braggart, a bigot, a racist, a chauvinist, a self-described elitist, a social-luddite, and a creep. He fits the same mold as Trump. And where Trump has Fox News in his pocket as his propaganda Nationalist machine, Boris has the BBC: a talking conservative /Tory machine. And both Boris and Trump stole the election from the vast majority and usurped the masses and gained power with less than 0.2 percent of the vote! And like Trump Boris will “mess” it up! Real elections can’t come soon enough for everyone.
2
From the giant EU economic zone to Little Britain. Brexit's sheer idiocy is astonishing. It defies logic to i think that becoming small and with very little leverage, Little Britain will be able to negotiate favorable terms with anyone. And doesn't Boris realize that Trump will take full advantage of Little Britain's weakened position in negotiating a bilateral deal? It saddens me to see this happen. What a pity.
1
Nationalism is a curse, that is the single, greatest threat to world peace.
1
Are we all entertained enough yet? In America and the UK, the political, social, and economic consequences of a frighteningly ill informed citizenry, with their phony populist, half-baked nationalist con-men "leaders", will be revealed at the first real crisis. Churchill and Roosevelt belong to history. For now, stupid is winning.
2
I would trade Boris Johnson for Donnie Trump in a nano second.
Seems the evening crew missed this. Once again:
“Hence the fetish of the Dunkirk spirit, used to great effect in the Brexit campaign. Hence, too, Mr. Johnson’s rhetoric revolving around the fantasy of wartime derring-do.”
Is that anything like Buruma’s “fetish” to trash Boris and Brexiters?
But to the point: “Dunkirk spirit” was hardly “derring-do”--it was the magnificent transcendence of the resolve of the citizens of Britain--as was enduring the daily V-1 and V-2 rocket attacks on London--and that is what Boris is speaking to.
Perhaps, Churchill was right, too many of those who dislike Boris have all the qualities that Churchill had no truck for when he was in India, the self-serving "snobs and bores".
1
I guess you could say that Great Britain's decline started with the madness of King George and the loss of the American colonies. And its decline continued and was exacerbated by WWI. Why? That war bankrupted the country. And they have never really recovered from it.
Great Britain lost their great revenue-producing Empire: India, Egypt, China, Siam, the African colonies. Well, colonialism couldn't go on forever, anymore than Victoria could go on forever.
But Churchill? Other writers here have referred to the WWI fiascoes: Gallipoli. And his background as an MP is a bit uneven, to be charitable.
He did rise to the occasion in WWII, but he didn't have much competition - Neville Chamberlain - Mr. "Peace for Our Time." I think the Brits- and maybe everybody - might have lost the war if it wasn't for Churchill. And Churchill did see the menace of post-war Russia when others did not. But as soon as the war was over, England was glad to be rid of him.
Our contemporary crew - Bush, Trump, Johnson - of Churchill idolaters are a pack of idiots, prevaricators. The look tough and go it alone crowd. The isolationists. The nationalists. The narcissists.
Trump and Johnson are the dead-cat-bounce before the collapse of the United States and England as world powers due to their recklessness, fecklessness, and overriding short term self-interest over the economic interests of their respective countries. (With a little help from our friends: Russia and China)
BoJo a second Churchill? ... The second time as farce.
And Lincoln would despise Trump
Well it was Farange who was shaking hands with 45 this week, so you know how long BoJo and even bro JoJo will be in power is a matter for debate - possibly over a pint.
Brexit is a terrible idea and will likely lead to the diminution of British power and affluence and possibly to the dissolution of the UK.
London is the financial capital of Europe and its future and its prosperity are tied to that fact.
After Brexit, London’s citizens will experience a dramatic decline in its standard of living as it loses its status and importance in the world economy.
The UK must remain part of Europe and one of its leaders. Brexit is right wing folly and self destructive nostalgia and must be immediately reversed.
Boris Johnson is a shallow fool and a self indulgent
buffoon! If he does what he intends to do he will regarded by history as possibly the worst leader in British history. He is the antithesis of Churchill!
2
I did not know the provenance of the Churchill bust. I do remember the incident with Obama and wondering why. Just shook my head (as I mostly do) and went about my business. I never heard about Boris Johnson slimey part in it. My comment will be, and pls respect that it is not meant to be funny, This could be something the Russians might do to distract and disrupt as Robert Mueller, the media including the NYT are alerting about. It feels awful to be as cynical as I am all of a sudden and for keeps
Churchill would have hated Boris Johnson just like Eisenhower would have hated Trump.
@USMC1954
Churchill would have trashed Brussels long before Boris showed up. More important--Eisenhower did hate the CIA for what they did him with Powers.
Can we please have diversity of opinion on Brexit in the NY Times? Wanting to be independent and believing that you ought to be in control of your laws as a sovereign nation is not imperialism or chauvinistic nationalism.
That is like asking for diversity of opinion on earthquakes or toothaches. But in honor of the special relationship, I am sure that Brexit can not possibly be as bad as everybody but half the British population think that it will be.
1
Aside from Britain having contributed to EU rulings, you are free to delight in Bret Stephens’ pro-BoJo musings in this publication.
How delusional can these people be? They think electing Boris Johnson will allow them to renegotiate with the EU from a position of power? He's confidently "waiting for their response"?
You already have it, you've had it for months and it will not change. Electing a clueless man with an extensive vocabulary, and nothing else, isn't going to change a thing. Doesn't matter how much pluck you have, nobody cares, the rest of the EU is waiting to pick your bones and many of them have been waiting for the opportunity for a long time.
As you're all about to find out. It will be like Dunkirk, minus the civilian flotilla.
1
How nice to read about the new prime minister being referred to as 'Mr Johnson'. I refuse to be taken in by the false familiarity of a funny first name. This man is a fake.
Assumptions embedded in predictions of the future on the basis of history are a very tricky business.
History is far more than the acts of leaders.
Drawing analogies between leaders facing radically different situations, in very different times, is, or has been, a sad temptation to historians from time immemorial.
A look at the economic, political and demographic forces pulling the EU apart should condition the expectations that the EU has a bright future, one offering safety and reliability to ANY of its members.
Draw your own conclusions.
1
Winston Churchill' s white supremacist nostalgia for the British Empire was met by Hideki Tojo and Emperor Hirohito's disdain for and determination to replace it in Asia.
See ' War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War' John Dower
Winston Churchill's ' winning' battles at Dunkirk and Britain pale in strageic significance in Europe to Joseph's Stalin's victories at Stalingrad and Kursk.
There was the Big Two aka America and the Soviet Union. And the Tiny Third aka the British and the Little Quarter aka France.
This article failed to deliver what its click bait headline promised. Given that Johnson is essentially a Churchill tribute act, my sense is Churchill would be cautious of Johnson but would hardly despise him.
2
Trust BoJo to focus (wrongly) on the so-called Dunkirk Spirit, about which Churchill more wisely said: "We must be careful not to assign to this deliverance the attributes of a victory. Wars are not won by evacuations." (4 June 1940)
The spirit I grew up knowing ~ as a post-war London baby ~ was that of the Blitz. Said Churchill: "These cruel, wanton, indiscriminate bombings of London are, of course, a part of Hitler's invasion plans. He hopes, by killing large numbers of civilians, & women & children, that he will terrorize and cow the people of this mighty imperial city . . . Little does he know the spirit of the British nation, or the tough fibre of the Londoners." (11 Sept 1940)
Johnson as to Churchill is as Trump as to Lincoln. 'Nuff said.
1
All this admiration for Churchill & Roosevelt is TRUEly admirable. But in today's world would leaders even "get there" with their cigars & copious amounts & varieties of alcohol or mistresses "appearing" at the White House. Just goes to prove, what kind of leaders we are "passing up" on, just because of personal "foibles" & over exaggerated public & pilloried moral judgements.
One might have guessed that if the author of this article is a professor he is likely a professor at a place like Bard where hatred for the Trumps and the Johnsons is pretty much a requirement for tenure. Having said this, it should be noted that Churchills vision of a united states of Europe was hardly what the EU is. Indeed the EU is little more than the Fourth Reich, a benignly camouflaged attempt by Germany to once again rule Europe with a perennially self-prostituting France as its willing flunky. That the British were the first to sense this and hasten to the Brexit hatch is not surprising considering their history with Germany. And ever since the Brexit referendum other EU members are waking up and making it clear they are no enamored of having their nationalities, traditions, folklores, economies and defenses cooked into a German controlled, Brussels based, faceless bureaucracy. Indeed Merkel's EU makes the entire continent at once subject to German will and, ironically, vulnerable to an irreversible barbarian invasion that will have the Fourth Reich destroying itself just as its hubris destroyed the first three. An Anglo-American alliance is the greatest hope of thwarting the Fourth Reich, along with the help of the Schengen countries, Italy and any others that choose to follow in whole or in part. One can only wish Boris Johnson well. His noisy detractors sound just like Churchill's in his time and may, like them, come to eat their words in due course.
2
I think it is inevitable that the right-wing whites who cling to power around the world will eventually be defeated, but not, perhaps, until they have made the Earth uninhabitable!
This is the best synopsis of the current sorry state of Great Britain I have read.
Returning to past glories, be it for an individual or a nation, simply does not work. How many histories must we read in order to be reminded of this.
The terrible reality of the horrible state of affairs in both the US and Britain must be seen in the light of the entire world’s playing around with ultra right wing governing tactics. ...and we thought that died with Hitler. Think again!
1
Churchill was a Victorian whose ideas of the world were formed in campaigns on the N.W. Frontier of India, in Sudan, and in the Boer War. As Nigel Hamilton and other careful historians have shown, he was impulsive, given to tantrums, and cursed by poor military judgment which led to choosing incompetent commanders and shameful and bloody failures - such as Gallipoli in WWI or Crete and Anzio in WW2. The world must always be grateful that he was no appeaser and stood for freedom against Hitler. But he was also largely responsible for postponing Indian's freedom by decades and for not easing the worst famine in recent history. Boris Johnson is a fraud and liar, like Trump. His Brexit will be disastrous and he will be forced from office in disgrace.
3
Churchill was a war criminal who started WWII to glorify himself ( he hid Hess away in the UK to avoid a peace settlement); now we have this grand self-glorifying buffoon.
Aping - badly - Churchill's metaphor-laden speech habits, stout courage, patrician manners and loyalty to the British nation doesn't make this boob Boris Johnson Churchillian.
His self-appointed status as saviour of the British nation, which needs him like a hole in the head, has all the shallowness of a badly-done reality show, and about as little resemblance to actual reality.
Of course, unlike the bewildering 30-something-percent of Americans who support Trump, only a tiny minority of Britons approve of this slovenly egomaniac. Let's pray that the actions underway to end his first weeks in office with a no-confidence vote boot him quickly to the back pages of the tabloids, where he belongs.
Churchill wouldn't give Boris Johnson the time of day.
3
Circumstances and challenges are somewhat different, but I believe each had/has, respectively, the guts to think independently and to not submit to appeasement- Churchill to Nazi Germany, Johnson to EU/UN bullying and to the mullahs in Iran..
Only England should leave the EU. Only the English wanted to leave. Not the Scottish, not the Welsh and not the Northern Irish. Break up this phony country that never was.
1
@R Kling
Both the Welsh and Northern Irish had a majority leave vote
Boris Johnson couldn't care less of what Winston thought.
There's a difference between Churchill's and Johnson's "do or die", in their adversaries. Churchill's were the Nazis. Johnson's are his own country's national interests, even as he pretends the opposite.
23:20 EDT, 7/27
1
Winston Churchill knew that without India there is no empire and without an empire, Britain would not be a world power. But behind the Bull Dog's growl, there was reason and realism. He bitterly opposed Britain's Govt of India Act of 1935 which offered India 'Home Rule'. During the war, he refused India independence after the war. But after Dunkirk, he agreed with the "War Cabinet" to handover India to Nehru and Ulster to the Irish Free State. He helped Republican India to remain the British C'mon Wealth --- more beneficial to India then. He even overcame his dislike of the Bolsheviks during the war. He invited the Labor to join the War Cabinet. Churchill's sad fate was his passion for the empire but he was too late by a hundred years! Indeed, his hard-line rhetoric only hastened the demise of the Empire!
But, Boris Johnson is no Churchill. Just as Trump is no FDR and Brexit is no anti-Fascist crusade!
1
American presidents - and others - purport to admire Churchill for his refusal to surrender to the Nazis and a for few speeches. They are ignorant of the military disasters he was responsible for, his poor judgment of character and ability in choosing and promoting subordinates, his racism, his alcoholism, his failures as a parent, his money-grubbing, and his stubborn refusal to retire even when he was clearly incapable of holding office. We are left with a Yousuf Karsh photograph, busts, movies, and cheap exploitation by politicians of an image in order to appear "Churchillian".
3
Winston Churchill despised Indians in general, and Gandhi in particular. When told that many Indians because of Britain's policies, he asked why Gandhi was still alive in that case. He was a racist imperialist, and it's time the world got over its love affair with him
3
Maybe we should despise Winston Churchill more. The false hagiography comes simply from the fact that he had a comic book arch-nemesis who was obviously that much worse in Hitler. And so Churchill comes out smelling like roses. We are also inclined to like him because he is more like us than the rest. Mere geo-tribalism. Is that sophiaticated elitism what we look for in our leaders or is it the basis for "Yankee Doodle Dandy"...a disdain for one being "naturally" superior to another.
1
A pathetic little island that almost always used its power for personal gain and plunder. Times up. Now the clown car has arrived at 10 Downing. Let the downfall unfold. I can't wait for the meltdown and associated memes.
1
Well he would certainly despise Mayor Khan of London.
2
I was in Rome when the news came about the Brexit vote. Everyone was stunned. Five months later when the moron Donald benefited from VV Putin’s interference, we were heartbroken again.
I look around. I see protesters in the streets of Hong Kong and Puerto Rico, fighting against corrupt regimes. Let’s do it, America and England. Where is the rage?
2
Briton like the US has been turned into a mailbox for crooked world bankers not much more.
If Trump and Johnson hook up, maybe we can get Doc Martin as our Surgeon General.
1
Churchill had his own ghosts and skeletons. He would base approval or disapproval on what Mr Johnson does, not what he may have said or done in the past.
3
Great, another delusional narcissist at the helm. The problem with these kinds of guys is that they are like undiapered babies that are easily insulted and throw tantrums.
Yeah, Churchill would really despise them.
1
Let’s see now:
Benjamin Disraeli, Winston Churchill, William Gladstone, Margaret Thatcher, William Pitt, Harold Macmillan, Harold Wilson. Stanley Baldwin, Edward Heath, Clement Atlee, Arthur Balfour,
Tony Blair ... and Boris Johnson.
1
Yup, Tony Blair, the worst of the lot. Illegal war, Bush’s poodle, devolution, the list goes on. Boris will do much better than Tony and Cherie.
The author writes:
"myth of wartime Britain standing alone against the Nazi menace."
But that was no "myth". What does he mean "myth."
There really was a time after the defeat of France and before Pearl Harbor that Britain really did stand alone against the Nazis menace.
Mr. Buruma, please check your history books!!
2
Johnson is to Churchill what Trump is to FDR, in other words a big fat narcissistic nothing.
Thank you, America and England, for devolving your once-great leaders into a plutocratic cabal of boorish buffoons and bullies. If this is democracy, bring back the royals. The so-called "people" have all the sense of a turnip.
2
Amazing bit of anti Boris propaganda. Churchill was a racist, upper class warrior, imperialist and generally out of touch with the people for most of his career. His forever glory will be confronting Hitler and manoeuvring the USA, with Roosevelt into WW2. He was pretty clear that while he did support the idea of a US of E, he was dead set against the UK being in it. But then he was an unrepentant imperialist. Boris, except on the polarizing EU matter is not cut from the Churchill mould at all, except from a flamboyant public style which serves a lot of politicians well on both sides of the pond. Boris just seems good at it. At heart, policy and record he is a "One Nation Tory" who could almost be at home in the LibDems. That explains why he was generally acknowledged as a successful two term mayor of a Labour city London. He was tough when he had to be, but was inclusive, supported migrants and an amnesty , supported environmental causes, built homes, cut crime, promoted London in an energetic , fun and indeed sometimes buffoonish way. His agenda as PM is generally liberal, activist and bordering on fiscally irresponsible progressive. His cabinet is historically Disagee with Boris on the EU exit if you so choose, but be focused and not blindly biased because of one hot button issue for you! You run the risk of rewriting history to suit you, something Churchill excelled at! As written the "opinion" is an biased unsubstantiated hatchet job and unworthy of an academician.
2
A sad ending! Now we have two bleached blond bozos on the world stage. And running the two countries that effectively created the world order that they are trying to destroy. In spite of its feckless legislative and judicial branches I think that the US under Trump may fare better than the UKwill
1
This op-ed is a rather freewheeling, not to mention Leftist, reinterpretation of actual history and the players in it, sprinkled with enough ad hominem (Boris Johnson's pretentious "mannerisms"/Donald Trump's absence of manners) to render the entire piece unsound.
To invoke Winston Churchill as the antithesis of Mr. Johnson evinces an ignorance or understanding of Mr. Churchill. In historical context, if Churchill were to come back today he would, more likely than not, take as dim a view of the European Union as he once did Adolf Hitler. Two separate fascisms; two different eras.
But always---always---Britain first.
True, Boris Johnson may have "over-exaggerated" visions of a Britain post-Brexit, but at least it will be a British vision----a vision that does not preclude a relationship with the Continent, only a healthier one. When Churchill spoke of a United States of Europe, he was merely suggesting an alliance of convenience, one that would ward off future 'Hitlers.'
Not for one second did he ever intimate sacrificing British ideals for the sake of such an alliance. No, Churchill would not "despise" Johnson; he would be standing firmly at his side.
1
Apparently, the Brits were so envious of us for having a words-are-inadequate-to-describe-his-character-and-personality-disorders ... well, shucks they got one of their own. Soul-mates and comrades-in-destruction, Putin, Inc. must be drowning in celebratory vodka.
2
Winston Churchill is no saint. He is a racist who killed 6 million Indians during the Bengal famine. Boris Johnson and Trump have NOT stooped that low, yet!
3
The dismissive one-liner, “Churchill was indeed a defender of empire and held some racial prejudices, especially against Indians, whom he detested” is hardly adequate to represent the systematic and callous obliteration of human life Churchill single-handedly caused in the Indian Subcontinent during his regime.
The West has not cared to learn much about the 1943 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people, a catastrophe orchestrated by Sir Winston Churchill. Grains and other food were diverted from India for war efforts in Europe. The port of Calcutta in the state of Bengal was key to this export and it sucked out the life blood of the region to feed the Allies leaving the local population to slow death through hunger.
Churchill justified the intentional killing of Indians by starvation by blaming the famine on the fact Indians were “breeding like rabbits,” and asking how, if the shortages as reported by the press were so bad, “Mahatma Gandhi was still alive” in 1943.
For Indians, Churchill was and continues to be the personification of evil worse than Adolf Hitler. Those who glorify Churchill today is similar those who memorialize Hitler by saying that he was a great architect and a national leader.
Boris Johnson is no Hitlerish Churchill.
5
Boris is a poseur and a dilletante. It’s too bad Christopher Hitchens inset aroubd to pillory him.
Churchill was an overrated racist drunk. He's of zero consequence now.
1
Churchill only despised people that weren't white.
Churchill was a racist. Boris Johnson should be proud that Churchill would have despised him.
3
Had Boris been PM in 1940, Hitler’s thousand year Reich would be celebrating its 79th anniversary of British occupation, the Russians would have collapsed in 1941, and the United States would have its ambassador living across from the restored Reich chancellery where its puppet assembly met at the fuhrer’s pleasure.
Thank God Boris wasn’t born until the sixties.
1
Churchill famously ‘crossed the aisle’ to sit with the minority party (in the early 1900’s) over his own Tory party’s intention to bring a bill of protective tariffs aimed against all non-Commonwealth countries. Brexit is exactly what Churchill would roar against. Alas, the ‘lion’ now has a silly pussy-cat for a voice.
1
The moment I saw that Brit's evil person's name, I got very upset. What the western people do not realize is that British stole 47 trillion dollars from the sub-continent, they stole our heritage, they had done unspeakable crimes against the sub-continent people. Winston Churchill created famine in Calcutta, he diverted resources meant for the sub-continent to the world war. He is by far worse than Hitler, yet no westerner realizes nor cares about the crimes committed by the British. I am currently in India and I see the poverty created by the British, still in existence. They have made Kings poor, that itself speaks volumes about the dastardliness of the British. Read what Sashi Tharoor has to say about the British, their atrocities, and about Winston Churchill!!!
One of the more credible articles on the Brits, Brexit and Brussels I've seen for awhile. Churchill may have been a great one for The Empah' but he was a practical sod when you got down to it. And a decent sort - in the end.
Winston Churchill would also despise Donald Trump. Churchill fought the nazis - not embraced them.
1
If carried through, Brexit will displace the Act of Union and become the Act of Disunion. Scotland will not remain part of Great Britain very long and even Wales will have thoughts of disunion and departure while Northern Ireland may have to overcome its internal hatreds to survive economically in a new union with Ireland. England, but a part of the whole of Great Britain, will indeed become little in the event.
2
This is a welcome statement of the obvious. Churchill supported the European Project but did not want Britain to be part of it. Nor did Attlee at the time the Labor PM of Britain who was commencing the dismantling of The Empire which prompted an American Secretary of State to opine that..."Britain has lost an Empire but has yet to find a role". Their successor, McMillan who had a commercial background in international book publishing decided that Britain had to join the EU primarily for trade reasons and neither he nor his Labor successor supported the European Project of political integration. As the latter put it...."the Durham miners would not wear it".
Here lies a truth that IB ignores. Deep in the British psyche is the August 1914 decision to enter WW1 and then the Million dead of The Somme and Flanders. That million dead would be the equivalent of 6 Million dead in modern America! This is why not so splendid isolationism is a preference for many.
There is a further consequence. After Iraq and Afghanistan Britain wants no part of American militarized Foreign Policy the support of which was the major component of The Special Relationship from the US perspective.
If Tory England decides to execute leaving, Scotland and possibly N Ireland will decide to stay so breaking up the Union and returning to The Three Kingdoms of the 17th Century. France for one will be cheering!
1
In today's Sunday Times, historian Niall Ferguson also comments on Johnson writing about Churchill and refers to Karl Marx's famous "first tragedy, then farce" riff on Hegel's observation about history repeating itself. As pointed by Ferguson, Johnson "pre-emptively published his biography of Churchill, insisting on a parallel that could only be unflattering to himself". Ferguson's piece is worth looking up, though there might be a paywall.
Churchill was a racist all right, but his relationship with India and Indians was nuanced at least in the sense that he initially supported Gandhi's efforts on behalf of the Indian minority in South Africa. It was talk of independence that got up the old imperialist's nose. On the other hand, he got along very well with Nehru, with no falling out, though this has been attributed to their both being old Harrovians. Class outranks race. If evidence of Winston's capacity for bungling is needed, look up Gallipoli. All in all, Johnson is not in the same league, but that should be obvious to anyone.
1
Boris Johnson admires Churchill (almost as much as he admires himself.) But he should also read Karl Marx, who compared Napoleon III to his uncle: "History repeats itself. The first as tragedy, then as farce."
4
@Julian "But Britain would be terrible: it is too big for one things but, more importantly, its GDP er capita would put it 48th or 49th among the states, down with Mississippi and so on." - this would also have a devastating effect on BBC-type exposes´ of upper-crust mores
This may not end all that well. However, even if the Scots were to leave, the English should not be underestimated, Northern Ireland, however, is likely to see bloodshed. In fact, it already is.
Everyone plays the memory, ghost, and ideal of past leaders, relatives, and heroes. Perhaps the greatest of these shadows is the invocation of Christ’s approval on acts self-evident for what they are without such an imprimatur.
Such is not the case with Churchill and Brexit.
The British had an unease about the EU from the beginning, maintaining the Pound and thriving as a global financial center long after globalists speculated its demise. Now, after decades of the EU overreaching its original charter, that of providing a Common Market, a wide swath of Brits are saying “enough”.
Nations around the world are watching as their citizens push back against the brainchild of the wealthy: globalism. As the powerful scoff at their lower classes, calling them ignorant, at best, and racist/nativist, at worst, my sense is that knowing Churchill’s mind is a fool’s errand.
The world IS changing, due to social media and instant comminication. The bigger examples are not Brexit but places like India and Pakistan or the conflicts between Sunni and Shiite.
World leaders need to listen to their least, and not just when holding photo shoots on island atolls due to be swallowed by melting ice caps. Globalism takes no prisoners, and after we marvel at its good, we need to contemplate on the havoc it wreaks on the poor and working class.
As we plow ahead, minimizing every objection voiced by those whom some consider “deplorable”, we need to ask why they are frightened.
And actually listen.
8
When Tony Blair aligned himself with George Bush’s position, to justify the invasion of Iraq, we said he was George Bush's poodle. Today with Boris Johnson is Donald Trump's little brother, almost his clone.
Frankly, for being the neighbor of Great Britain, She annoys me sometimes, mainly she scares me but it still remains me gratitude and consideration toward her.
I think United Kingdom by voting to get out of European Union, did a enormous error. I hope sincerely they won't bit the thumbs in a close future. I am afraid she will come out weak with a country particularly divided.
Maybe I will offend more than a American, but Great Britain with Germany is our greatest ally, and I hope she still will be in despite of Brexit.
2
Actually, by the more sober half of the ruling class, Churchill was regarded as a reckless, blustering, self-promoter. Comparisons are better made at the end of a politician's tenure rather than at the beginning.
3
I wonder if 52% of Brits really did vote for Brexit or whether their vote counting apparatus was hacked.
2
BoJo is craftily dreaming of an alternative grand alliance among similarly situated powers. Andorra, Lichtenstein and San Marino are reported to have already secretly signed on, with mighty Monaco cautiously testing the waters. Lithuania also has distant memories of an era of imperial greatness but has too recently endured the pain of Soviet occupation to risk jumping so soon into the bracing cold waters of tribal nationalism.
Brexit seems to be almost entirely an English fantasy -- a final desperate attempt to escape an eternal fate of dull frumpery. The Scots and Welsh don't seem to be lining up to drink the kool-aid. And nobody even asked the Cornish.
Too many hours of bleary-eyed Masterpiece Theater celebrity elegance bingeing. Who knew that Henry VIII looked exactly like Jonathan Rhys-Meyers? Or that Queen Victoria was such a cutie? Powdered wigs should do wonders for Rees-Mogg and Michael Gove.
So where are Gilbert and Sullivan now that we really need them?
3
@woofer When I read comments about Britain in the NYT talking about Masterpiece theatre,Queen Victoria,of a longing for ^the Empire^ etc etc its clear the writer knows nothing about the Empire and absolutely nothing about modern Britain
In fact in Britain life for the majority was largely grim with alcohol providing the main escape just as opioids provide the main escape for stressed out Americans today while many in Britian wondered if the millions spent on keeping the Empire going would be better spent on destroying slums and providing healthcare just as Americans now look at the cost of its endless wars.
As for today,Britain has (despite its problems produced by its present horrible government) one of the best welfare health and social security systems in the world with London surely the most modern city
Much of the talk about Brexit is a kind of bluster as is any talk of Britain ^breaking up^ forget it ...people know what side their bread is buttered... at the moment Britain is among the top of the world in engineering medical research IT design and all state of the art businesses.It has the fifth biggest economy in the world and all economic analysis says that in thirty years (2050) it will still be at about ninth in a world of 8 - billion(?)
Lets hope America has a decent health service by then
1
An editor in chief of a Netherland based institute wrote about Mr. Buruma in awarding him a writing prize: "This refusal to be challenged – irritated by the other, the alien perspective – and the withdrawal into safe spaces (literally and figuratively) cause [Buruma] concern, mainly because in his view institutions are by definition cowardly. A term like melting pot has actually become problematic, he says, because it denies the existence of separate cultures and hence damages the rights of minorities once more."
So, isn't this Britain that is courageously turning from the cowardly institution of the EU which denies its separate culture? Or does Britain not count because it still wants to be Anglo-Saxon and its prior success means it can't count as a minority, in the EU narrative?
This reflexive anger at Britain, the need to criticize or punish it for demanding it's separate culture and not wanting to end its separate existence in the synthetic Euro-culture on the way to internationalism or utopism, is quite predictable. Stray from the narrative and be condemned. Ironically, Britain has always been international - just a British brand, but has long shed the empire and its colonies. It just wants to be free.
I don't know how Britain will do economically, in the short run, but, if it sticks to its guns, and fights through the desires of the new stronger empires to see it fail, I hope it will thrive, perhaps demonstrating the courage Mr. Buruma has previously lauded.
5
Or perhaps Ian, Churchill would see the EU as a failed German-dominated experiment with a stagnant and sinking economy run by bureaucrats determined to tamp down the slightest possibility of growth. Since there is no fixing this mess, the Brits are removing themselves from the economic quagmire. I think Sir Winston may have been pleased that British innovation and guts led them to do more than simply sit still and accept their fate.
3
"(...) kinship with the largest nation of English-speaking peoples, which many older, mostly white, Britons find more congenial than shared arrangements with foreigners on the Continent who eat garlic and speak in strange tongues."
Maybe something much more insidious is going on here: contrary to what is the case in other European countries, Britons have direct access to Fox News, so to the exact same, utterly fake propaganda that US conservatives have invented in order to continue to exploit ordinary citizens bill after bill, all while winning elections, only because of their massive cultivation of racism.
In many European countries today, conservative parties are trying to imitate the GOP and find their own "Trump". But most of the time they fail. Why? Because you can't create an entire "alternative facts" universe on your own, as a politician, you vitally need a gigantic media machine that brews all the fake stories for you, and which you then merely have to copy-paste into tweets (Trump's main activity, day in day out) in order to make your voters feel that "you get it", "dare" to say what no other politician says, and as a consequence, must be somehow fighting for them.
In France today, recently a new politician is trying out the same thing, telling its citizens that French and Norwegian "cultures" actually have nothing in common, so the EU doesn't make any sense, we should cultivate what differentiates us from others instead etc.
The waking up will be rude...
3
Boris Johnson seems unaware that Churchill messed up pretty much everything he did in public life until his 60s. Bet on Boris to extend that record.
1
I’d still trade Trump for Him. At least he is literate and intelligent. That DOES count for something, at least among the educated.
2
Mr. Johnson is very well educated and a very smart person. He chose his Exit writing over his own Stay writing when he realized his chance of enhancing his power benefits from writings and speeches appeasing believers of Britain being isolated gloriously.
He is one of untrustworthy politicians as he chases voters’ feel, which is not formed on principles. Just like Mr. TrumpRepublican.
Looking on the bright side, this may encourage Scotland and Ireland to finally break with their old, backwards-looking nemesis, England, and allow them to take their place as the preeminent English-speaking countries in a united Europe. It would be fascinating to see where the headquarters of international finance, previously in London, makes its new home.
2
Churchill was a racist, just like Trump and Boris and would probably approve of them. He was hardly in favor of "political freedom for all" and only signed the Atlantic Charter because he wanted America's aid in the war (see https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/atlantic-conf )
"Finally, both Churchill and many members of his Cabinet were alarmed by the third point of the Charter, which mentions the rights of all peoples to choose their own government. Churchill was concerned that this clause acknowledged the right of colonial subjects to agitate for decolonization, including those in Great Britain’s empire."
Nor were the other European colonizers so keen for freedom of other people, even after WW2. Many fought wars to keep and oppress their colonies (eg. France: Algeria, Vietnam; Holland: Indonesia; Portugal: Angola, Goa).
Britain systematically robbed India for more than 2 centuries, reducing it from a relatively prosperous land and leaving it an impoverished, starving, largely illiterate and shattered state, with no industry to speak of and in the middle of a civil war. Only racists would consider the empire a good thing, Boris Johnson and Churchill are in that category.
2
Is becoming a European Singapore feasible?
During his political lifetime Winston Churchill was as reviled as Trump is today. And like Trump, he also had many fervent supporters.
That is where the comparison ends:
1. Churchill had a fantastic knowledge of history, while Trump has none.
2. Churchill was a war hero, who managed to escape from a Boer prisoner of war camp. Churchill took part in actual Calvary Charges, and like any good British officer of his era, purposely exposed himself to enemy fire to set an example for the men under him. After being booted as First Sea Lord during WWI, Churchill insisted on going into the Trenches in France as a Major, in a sector where 25% of the front line officers were killed within 6 weeks of their start of service. Trump avoided service.
3. Churchill was a heavy drinker, while Trump does not drink at all.
4. Churchill was very interested in science, and strongly boosted scientific projects. Trump thinks our flat earth will be really cool forever.
5. Churchill believed that the British race was a superior race. Trump believes that Trump (himself) is a one man superior race.
6. Churchill was deeply concerned about people. Trump is deeply concerned about Trump.
7. Churchill won the Nobel Prize in Literature 1953 "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values." Trump is a hate-speech expert who uses 4th grade vocabulary.
Boris? I don't want to comment on a foreign politician.
3
For those who have not caught on by now, Putin is pulling the NATO alliance apart.
Great Britain as a single isolated nation is not great, nor even Britain post-Brexit.
The British were duped liked the Americans were duped. The Kremlin is expert at duping citizens into believing red is green and 1 is 7.
The former late great Senator John McCain said "Russia is a gas staton masquerading as a country, run by the mafia."
They have seen their neighbor China's economy flourish by cracking down on corruption and diversifying into tomorrow's technology.
Russia, meanwhile, is an economic basket case, where Putin and his band of oligarch thieves steal half the GDP that belongs to the people.
Visit Russia after other former Eastern bloc countries. As soon as you cross the border, the people are dead-eyed and soulless, mistreated by centuries of thieving leaders.
There is no creativity, no ingenuity, no smiles, nothing. It is a land of the walking dead.
Vladimir Putin, Boris Johnson and Donald Trump would be happy to be amongst the handful of people enjoying the fruits of the land while their citizens suffer.
They are plagues upon the world, and must be tried for their crimes against humanity to punish the most guilty of all to free the human spirit.
But their true punishment will come in a form beyond the ability of humanity to deliver.
2
Now the British people have their own nightmare it seems like, just like us. From what I've read Boris is as unfit as Trump. They are one of our nation's best allies so I hope they can survive through their own "dark time".
2
Good drama is no longer a British specialty, even though, heaven knows, they try. So Trump's mini me, Boring, is the brexit past present and future. Fail Britannia!
Johnson's no-deal Brexit will indeed be Churchillian.
It will emulate one of Churchill's worst decisions (next to Gallipoli): the 1926 return to the Gold Standard at prewar parity.
And if he supports a US lead-war with Iran, he will also be emulating Churchill's other monumental blunder: Gallipoli!
1
For most Indians who have some Indian History background, Churchill was a war criminal for what he did to Bengalis (Indians for those of you Americans who don't know) by starving them during WW II even though we fought on the same side. Eventually at least 3 Million people died.
He emptied the granaries in India for the war effort and refused to allow the Aussies and the Canadians to send surplus wheat to Bengal. So maybe if Churchill would have hated Boris the Horrible, he has a good side? We have to investigate.
The problem is Trump the dictator wannabe thinks Boris is his subservient counterpart in England which give me pause. There is no good side to Trump. Smarter people than I have gone in search and came up empty. This leaves me with a conundrum...
1
How quickly people forget that Britain was a sad and colorless country before the EU. The strikes, the isolation, loss of manufacturing, the dole. The famous Chunnel, property ownership in Europe, improved food choices and London as a financial center. Perhaps it’s those from Eton and the upper classes that long for a return to their “glory days”. And Ireland - best of luck!
1
Unfortunately, Maxwell Anderson is not around to write "Boris of the Hundred Days".
At the time of the referendum, few voters realized what the consequences of leaving would be. Nobody even mentioned Northern Ireland. Many people voted "to teach the elites a lesson", and were taking in by the tabloids.
There is still a significant fraction, possibly even a majority, in the UK that wants to remain. So why does the EU not openly start to prepare for a "Return", making a roll-back legally and administratively as easy as possible? When the extreme dire consequences for manufacturing, trade, and agriculture of Leaving become clear, the calls for a Return can only increase.
Political parties, the CBI and trade unions, now in favor of remaining would with such legal preparation by the EU be in a much better position to argue for returning.
3
Populist movements are ascendant across much of Europe. They all call for more sovereignty and greater democracy. They don't want to be ruled by distant unaccountable elites in Brussels. They don't want Germany forcing them to take in quotas of immigrants or imposing austerity on them. They do want mutually beneficial trade, while keeping control of their own countries. Many of the commenters wax nostalgic for a EU that becomes a United States of Europe and they share globalist pipedreams for the role of the UN. Those ideas had their day and are now in a fight to avoid being drowned by the populist tide.
2
Impressive essay. I disagree with much of it but who knows what will happen.
Although these days if you want to be a great nation it helps if you have an advanced economy and a huge population.
The UK in or out of the EU won't be a great nation, which is true for the likes of Germany and France anyway.
So far as Churchill and Boris go, Churchill as it turned out was the right man for 1940, we'll have to wait and see about Boris.
Yet what if Churchill had signed a peace deal.
17
@Paul. Britain, France and Germany are all great nations, in fact some of the greatest, and so they will remain, regardless of their dwindling share of the world population and economic output.
13
@Paul - That is a bizarre statement, just because you have a platform to comment in the Times, does not imply you should be so confident about claiming what is or is not a great nation... Seriously, just think about that.
2
@Overpop Britain is no longer a great nation and hasn’t been since America had to insure their survival in WWII.
6
I lived in England for quite some time, yes, paid taxes there, and loved it. Those were unique and wonderful years of my life. During that time, I learned that England as a political entity has a view of itself that may not always match that of the world, or be backed up by events (as is also true of many nations). But in the past, despite holding some very unsuccessful notions of itself, England has always had an admirable way of falling on its feet. Let's hope this ability lasts the decade, and let's hope that not too many people will lose their retirement money, health care, livelihoods, real estate and hope in the process of Brexit. Sadly, No Deal, where it stands now, offers no real security in either of those departments. I currently see no plans that are even remotely watertight beyond Brexit day.
83
@Christine
I'm glad you enjoyed your time in England. I'm a Brit who has lived in a few different places including France, where you are now. I've been in Germany and Switzerland for more than 10 years. There is good and bad everywhere.
Perhaps I'm being complacent but I must admit don't feel any great threat to my "retirement money, health care, livelihood, real estate [or] hope."
The weakness of the pound has worked wonders for our investments / pension funds, and for our exports, which are now cheaper. I'm genuinely mystified why my American friends in particular see to think that leaving the EU is going to destroy our economy. Imports will cost more in the short term, it's true, but most import tariffs are not significantly higher, and if it encourages us to shop round, or revive some of our own industries, so much the better.
I will still be a proud European and inveterate Euro-traveller. As I keep having to tell people, it's the EU we are not so keen on, and the EU is not the same as Europe.
18
@WinstonSmith
What we have at present is not Brexit. It´s "Full EU while investors devalued Pound becuase of the letter triggering Art.50"
This is all what happened.
The consequences of Brexit will be visible when Brexit is going to happen. Meanwhile companies and companies are only preparing their plans to execute when Brexit is taking place. We will see.
You are right: All the biased Pundit drivel about results of the referendum has turned out to be nonsense until now as it had to be expected because nothing had happened in effect. The critical moment is yet to come. But it´s absolutely certain that there will be an impact then.
10
@WinstonSmith: Unfortunately GB got the largest trade balance deficit of all EU members by far which is usually compensated by financial transactions. In respect of the Brexit GB will loose it's financial EU passport while the trade deficit will minimum remain maybe increase.
8
A friend of mine in the UK suggested (more than half in jest, I'm sure) that Britain could become the 51st state post-Brexit, with Ireland becoming the 52nd. I did some calculations: Ireland would fit right in, as its population is average size for a US state, as is its GDP per capita. But Britain would be terrible: it is too big for one things but, more importantly, its GDP er capita would put it 48th or 49th among the states, down with Mississippi and so on. The US would take a big hit to let the UK onto the Union.
All this Johnson-esque talk of reclaiming some special relationship completely misses that hard economic fact: Britain might make sense as a US colony but hardly as a state. In addition, I have seen little sense of the so-called "special relationship" meaning anything among Americans, although it is much discussed among Brits who imagine it is reciprocal.
'Fraid not.
118
@Julian
Ireland is one of those few countries in the world where GDP per capita is an especially problematic tool for understanding actual national wealth, as it significantly exaggerates it.
See the following for more details: https://www.ft.com/content/6c7a0c9a-1913-30a2-a317-24d2623e1865
10
@Julian The U.S. and Britain lead other Anglophone countries in strategic military intelligence sharing. Cultural, historical, linguistic, political and economic affinities comprise an important bridge between our two countries. A portion of people in Britain do not see their relationship with the U.S. as special, but many of them do. Likewise the duality in attitude of the American people toward Britain.
Bottom line: In no way possible do you speak for British or American people. Only for yourself, and not in a very impressive way.
24
@Julian Why would Ireland want to become a 52nd state of the US? I just don't understand why anyone could think that. The Republic of Ireland is doing just fine in the EU. Why would the Irish want to leave the EU? They may do even better in the EU as the sole member country with English as their primary language.
55
Well, Mr Buruma, I suppose we can only expect crass identity politics from our universities and those who prefer to invite the abandonment of personal responsibility in forming opinions. The message here is that Britain is a second class nation with a leader whose politics don't align with yours. The latter is clearly true; the former is something we shall see in due course. Whatever the fate of the UK we will muddle along without you....
4
The mess in England is both the self-inflicted revenge of the upper class and just desserts for commoners who subject themselves to Tory fops who have no interest in doing right by the British people.
A Chinese friend teaches in London and has lived there for 20 years thinks Brexit and Boris are a pincer move to dismantle UK's welfare state, specifically the National Health Service, and substitute a commercial for-profit system.
Tory PM David Cameron kicked off "Austerity" by slashing government funding of public services like the National Health Service, police, road repair, schools, jobless benefits and other social programs.
The cutbacks are so devastating for ordinary people a UN expert quoted in The NYTimes said the Conservative government's Austerity was “entrenching high levels of poverty and inflicting unnecessary misery in one of the richest countries in the world.”
All general welfare indices are bad: child poverty rates, widespread hunger that regularly depletes food banks and a jump in crime rates. In 2017 over 70 died when a 27 story public housing tower burned down because of cheap and unsafe cladding (made by a US firm) and fire and building inspection cuts.
Without EU docs and RNs, a short-staffed NHS will be crippled. And free of the EU, the English ruling class can abuse their subjects free of EU human rights sanctions.
Far-fetched? Compared to PM Boris Johnson?
It's a preview my friend said.
7
I wonder when the Brexiters will come to recognize that Trump likes them because he can take advantage of them. He doesn't value the British anymore than he values his ex wives. As with them, Trump will get what he wants from the British and then discard what remains along the side of the road. He looks at trade agreements as pre-nups. He will make absolutely certain he gets everything he wants and the British people will get the scraps that are left. Then, when the British have outlived their usefullness, he will move on to someone else. By the time the British figure it out, it will be to late.
3
@Walking Man well said and totally agree with you we, the people, will try and block any "no-deal" motion but it may not be possible. Greatly annoys me that the ardent Brexiters say that want a return to "our sovereign parliament " but Parliament has rejected no deal they want to go outside parliament!! also most such as Rees-Mogg have already moved their companies into the EU
Perhaps Churchill’s greatest accomplishment was his steadfast refusal to entertain the recommendations of the appeasement faction of Britain ‘s government. Churchill rallied Brits around the their love of their country and their refusal to cede control of their future to those that did not have the best interests of their country in mind. Churchill understood that once Britain’s autonomy was gone it would be gone forever and the fought mightily to ensure that did not happen.
Boris Johnson may not have been the kind of person Churchill would have chosen to vacation with (although he might. Churchill has a great sense of humor), but I think Churchill would have enthusiastically supported Boris Johnson for the same reason he stood on the roof of a London building during the German air attacks, i.e. to ensure that the British people controlled their fate, not someone else.
10
Churchill, for all his faults, was a capable war-time leader. In contrast, neither the Tories nor Corbyn's Labour party seem capable dealing with Brexit - the most important political issue that has confronted their nation this century.
On our side of the pond, the Republicans show a similar incapacity for good governance. The Democrats may be better, but need to get over their identity crisis or consign the US to a second Trump term.
Thus, the UK may be headed towards dissolution and the US may be headed for another financial collapse as the kleptocracy maintains its choke hold. Yet the discussions about Brexit and Trump's leadership revolve mainly on illusory economic advantages rather than political hazards of living in nations where the people have no unity of purpose and their respective governments demonstrate increasing dysfunction.
10
While the article puts Johnson where he deserves, it didn't incorporate firmly the recent twist in the historical thread after WW II, I mean Populism, which switch off the historical comparison, where Churchill's despise is more logical. Populism, with its current figures like Trump and Johnson, marks a new era in human politics and thinking, no historical comparison is feasible.
But another comparison is worthwhile. Proroguing Parliament to enforce a no-deal Brexit is a Johnson's Populist attack on Liberal Democracy. A copy scenario of Trump's border wall to be built on emergency military funds, by passing Congress, at the time experts say it will not benefit the border security much, but increases debt.
The free world that emerged after WWII, should recognize the SECOND WORLD COLD WAR between Populism and Liberal Democracy, which put its existence and freedom in jeopardy.
6
Comparisons between the first half of the 20th Century and the present are tenuous. It is a far different world technologically, economically, and politically. Yet aspects of Churchill's character are certainly worth pointing out. First, there was a morality of service at work in him, for all of his flaws. He worked sincerely and did not shrink from complex realities and difficult choices in seeking to make life better for others. He sought a serious solution to the Irish question, was sympathetic toward the Jewish desire for a homeland, although he opposed Indian sovereignty, he rightly predicted the violence and chaos that came about with as a result of that move. When he was ousted from the Cabinet during WW I, he sought and received a commission to lead a brigade on the front lines in France. Where he did not command from the back, but often ventured into the fray. There he won the admiration and respect of those whom he commanded. It strains credulity to see Trump or Johnson acting in any way similar to him.
11
Johnson and Trump are much alike. They both have an extreme elevation of self-exaltation and self-worth. Both their countries have been great in the past, and both Trump and Johnson think their countries are still leading the world, as if the time was in the late 19th - 20th centuries.
This is the 21st century however, and the once great countries and their leaders appear to not care about the rest of the world, especially other leading countries such as China, or the most-dangerous dictators and despots such as Kim Jung-On.
We need leaders and countries who can work with other countries in harmony and unity, and find solutions for the world, not countries and leaders who want to dismantle what is, and work by themselves and have their countries less involved.
14
I normally don't find value in vague, emotional comments, but by the time I finished this article, I felt sad for the British. I'm not exaggerating or being hyperbolic; I'm truly saddened. In 1700, the British Empire was dwarfed by the Qing and Mughal empires, and was smaller than eight other empires, countries or dynasties. Even the Joseon Dynasty in Korea ruled over more people! Yet, 1700 was also the heyday of Isaac Newton and Christopher Wren. I hope the British can get past the loss of the British Empire as it existed 100 years ago (the largest empire in history!) and recapture the greatness of the British Empire 300 years ago (minus the American colonies).
5
With Brexit, Britain has cut the chain which tied to debt-laden EU - countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. Britain's future may be unclear, but at least it will not drown.
8
@Mark: UK is not member of the Euro Zone. The impact of Italian or Greek possible troubles depending on their debth remains in or out the EU. It's just dependend on the engagement of UK's financial industry.
4
@Mark Yesterday's newspaper and ill informed. Spain is doing just fine, thank you! So's Greece and Portugal - all thanks to the help provided by the EU. Britain, not so much.
You might want to consult the Financial Times or The Economist or Business Insider. Inward investment in the UK has tanked, replaced by the EU.
7
Maxi, the UK is required to pay a $49 billion dollar divorce bill. It is correct to say that the size of this bill is decided by how certain Countries impact the EU financially.
Churchill would indeed despise Boris,the Pretender!Boris is no Winston Churchill and there is no resemblance except some pudginess.Churchill fought for his country in World War I , not gloriously and fought in the Anglo-Boer War.He was a great defender of Britain but always saw the need for alliances.He saw Britain as a leader ,an architect of a united post war Europe.He, more than Roosevelt,was suspicious of Stalin’s designs on Eastern Europe after the war.Churchill was an incredibly inspiring and articulate statesman as was Roosevelt-their famous lines,”We have nothing to fear ,but fear itself”and “ never in the field of human conflict has so much been owed by so many to so few”.Boris andTrump are latter day loudmouths interested only in self promotion.These are sad days in Britain and the United States-our history is being trampled and torn .
26
Transatlantic ties have a rather different meaning to Winston and to Boris.
Speaking to the joint Houses of Congress in 1942, Winston mused that he "might have got here on (his) own" had his father rather than his mother been American. He did so with affection. And he was later given honorary US citizenship by President Kennedy.
Boris has a different relationship. He was born in New York with US citizenship, and renounced it, invoking "absolutely outrageous" US tax on the sale of his North London home.
Then again, Churchill's friendship was with Roosevelt, a somewhat different class of American to Boris's new pal Donald. Their standards aren't quite the same...
16
@Waltz You stated that Roosevelt was "a somewhat different class of American to Boris's new pal Donald."
I quite agree in that President Trump has never advocated the wholesale execution by firing squads of 49,000 POW's as Roosevelt did at the Tehran Conference in 1943. Nor has he forcibly interned thousands of American citizens as Roosevelt did with US citizens of Japanese descent.
So I completely agree with your assessment that there has been a huge improvement in the character of American Presidents.
1
@Hayekian von Mises Yes, well observed! "huge" is just the word I was looking for.
Johnson was elected and chosen by a ridiculously small number of votes compared to the size of the country. A little bit like Trump in the US with the electoral college . A farce of democratic process from these nation who claim that the EU Arely on non elected officials. Yes the director of the EU commission is a functionary position like a judge or a director of police ( sherif ) in Europe are not elected but state employees responsible in front of a civil administration. That is the democratic process.
9
@JPH Johnson was elected as leader of the Conservative Party and de facto PM ONLY by members of the party. This was NOT an election. No comparison with Electoral College or any national election. As far as the EU is concerned, Ministers are elected to the Parliament by popular vote in each sovereign nation (28).
2
@A. Brown Thank you I know how the UK political system works . Binary like the USA .your 1st sentence is contradictory and you don't even have conscience . Elected but no election. And thank you also I know how elections work in Europe, but the criticism of brexiters is about the EU , that the officials are not elected and that in the UK they are .
1
@A. Brown No comparison ? How or why would you impose ? Both Trump and Johnson were designed as chief of state without a democratic vote.
A retired English engineer told me a while back that "we've finally got our country back and we'll have plenty of trade agreements with the colonies so things will be fine."
14
In my opinion, Brexit is the wrong word for Englexit, because both the Scots and the Northern Irish have nothing to do with the mess just the English have wanted and created - yes, the Welsh have drunk with them, but but they are recovering from the booze.
In my opinion, English know how to relate with Europe only in terms of giving and having and above all they have no desire to put back in the drawer of history the idea of "Rule, Britannia!".
In my opinion, there is no hope for them to understand that Europe is something much deeper, that goes beyond the issues of economy and power: it’s a choice of civilisation.
Sometimes I ask myself if they have noticed that the world has changed.
So happens what has to happen. Brexit it is.
In the end, everything will be adjusted in one way or another and their economy will recover.
Business is business, right?
But English have to know that they will lose the consideration, respect and esteem with which we European citizens have always looked to them.
Best regards from Padua (EU)
25
Singapore is not easily replicated because crime and corruption is discouraged. However, Imperial England, is in the underground vaults buried underneath the City of London that Prime Minister Johnson gets. Every stolen fortune is there and now under the protection of the aristocrat mindset.
3
@terry brady Yes . And the US biggest corporations also rely on the London exchange to launder their cash benefice from the gigantic fiscal fraud they operate in the EU .
That is Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Yahoo, Google, Starbucks, Netflix, and others, all in Ireland and invading the European markets, but repatriating the money back to the US via London and its crooked ties with the US offshore banks in the Caribbean .
13
@terry brady And don't forget that Singapore provides housing for its citizens and doesn't allow poverty to fester. The UK has a housing crisis and shocking poverty for a wealthy, western nation.
4
@HaRE, thanks indeed. Singapore gets almost everything right. This includes tolerance, government/citizenry alignment and wellbeing for all within a tiny landscape.
1
One of Winston Churchill’s more notable quotes:
‘The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter’
If Mr Churchill met Boris Johnson, I’m guessing it might take him less than five minutes to arrive at the same conclusion.
Perhaps they could meet over a cup of tea to talk about things. Probably not in public though. These days most places prohibit smoking. You know how much Churchill loved his cigars.
18
@Very Confused
That's a very interesting quote, thanks for mentioning it.
It goes to the very heart of what is going on in the West today. Most Western democracies were created somewhere in the 18-19th century, and universal voting rights most of the time are less than a century old, right now.
The first democracies were merely small expansions of oligarchies, where men with the right education, families, color of skin and religion now had the right to be elected in Congress and to vote for lawmakers too, whereas in the aristocratic systems that had dominated the continent until then, only men born in the right, aristocratic families had the right to vote and become lawmakers.
Then, gradually, all citizens acquired the right to vote and become politicians themselves. In the meanwhile, education systems become more "democratized" too, but until this day, most Western schools do NOT yet offer the same, high-quality education that "aristocrats" received at times when their countries thrived.
THAT's when Churchill's quote becomes fully understandable.
It's also what defines today's English-speaking conservatives: a deep fear of ordinary citizens, a deep mistrust of their OWN voters, and the strong belief that they HAVE to invent "alternative facts" universes in order to make such ignorant, dumb people nevertheless vote for policies that they are the only ones to "know" should benefit the entire country, or ... at least conservative politicians themselves.
2
Too few seem to realize that a departing UK represents a serious loss to the EU. Yes - it is an unwieldy bureaucracy, but it had benefited from the British pragmatic spirit. Who will now fulfill that role?
11
@Paul The British pragmatic ? Only to steal. Stealing for the USA, stealing from the Greeks with all the Greek shipping companies hiding in London under fake pavilions and the greeks never seeing the money from their work.
Stealing with the Swiss banks , SBC ?
Etc, etc,,,
@Paul. Proof of this? The Brits thought the EU needed them. They found out otherwise
@Paul
The Germans.
Johnson was chosen as PM by about 90,000 Conservative party members, almost exclusively white middle aged and raging males in South East England. Many of us find him toxic and unable to speak the truth, only being interested in his own career advancement. According to the polls a new referendum would result in an entirely different result, in spite of the pressure of the press to maintain the status quo. The thought of Brexit is appalling and will do unending damage to the prosperity of Britain and will result in a (official) Disunited Kingdom. Scotland will become independent and Ireland will be united.
31
@BrianS
Brian, there is no firm indication at all that "a new referendum would result in an entirely different result". Different polls in today's UK newspapers show that the Brexit parties ahead of the Remain parties (even if you class the dithering Labour as Remain).
The fact is that there has been very little movement in opinion. It's absolutely possible that Remain would win another referendum but it would be just as close as last time -- we are still a deeply divided nation. And remember that nearly all polls prior to the referendum showed a healthy lead for Remain, which was not borne out on the day.
Personally, I think the best option is not another referendum but a general election. Had the Tories had a bigger majority (or had May done better in 2017), the referendum result would have been honoured and this would all be water under the bridge by now. We need a parliamentary majority of some kind, otherwise we'll get a repeat of the chaos of trying to pass May's initial deal.
6
When will some people realise we voted to leave the EU and May totally failed in that so now Boris Johnson is actually carrying out what the people voted for.
13
@Jason "We?". The referendum did not allow those British citizen to participate that are most affected by it. The ones living in the EU. And what version of Brexit did the people voted for? A no-deal version? Really? The version hardliners now prefer? And what about the 48.2 % who voted remain. Somehow their concerns do no longer factor into the version that is put in place. How does Johnson's cabinet reflect the 48% and give them a voice? The referendum is a sham. And if the UK does not recognise that and act accordingly it will bear the consequences for many decades to come.
53
@Jason A referendum such a far reaching and potentially destructive issue as the Brexit vote should have had a higher threshold, such as 60%.
The rethoric about "carrying out the people's will" is actually very divisive when it's about such a close call.
21
@Jason The Brexit referendum is a perfect illustration of how bad are referendums on policy issues. A republic, which the UK mostly is with Parliament, puts the power to make public policy in the hands of representatives not the people. Of course, the people choose the representatives and thus, indirectly, the policy. Voting for candidate A or candidate B is straightforward. 50% plus one. That is not OK for policy, which is most often extremely complex and with details that matter. 52% voted for Brexit. What does that mean? We really don't know. A hard Brexit? A border in Ireland? Theresa May thought the vote should be respected; Boris Johnson seems to have the same view. They are wrong, and no follow up referendum can correct what should not have occurred in the first place.
17
Churchill was from Brooklyn, and Mr Trump is from Queens.
I find them more compatible than most do. Both are truculent and belligerent and self-important and nationalist, which hereabouts is a good thing. It is too early re Mr Johnson, for an opinion, altho he is from Manhattan, three prefectures of boroughs of NYC, unified in 1898 or so, to dilute the voting power of Manhattan's Irish political machine. Ah yes the Irish still a sticking point and a real one re BrExit.
In my alternate universe, the British people voted by referendum to Leave, and the democratically elected government refused to abide by the wishes of the electorate. Hereabouts this is a crisis of democracy.
The voices here are of the un-wisdom of leaving, I am agnostic on wise or not, but in MY alternate universe the people I vote for are my agents not my masters, and if I and my like-minded other voters are unwise, so be it.
Exit has many foreseen problems and surely many unforeseen ones. Life is risk and the alternative, of paralysis, is less appealing.
As for the un-wisdom, so be it.
11
@Fortress America
"In my alternate universe, the British people voted by referendum to Leave, and the democratically elected government refused to abide by the wishes of the electorate. Hereabouts this is a crisis of democracy."
That’s the crux of the matter, whether or not you approve of Brexit. We were asked to decide if we wanted to leave or remain in the EU. We chose to leave but our elected representatives have collectively refused to accept that verdict. The same bunch of people voted by a margin of 5 to 1 in favour of holding an in-out referendum. It seems that a referendum is a valuable democratic device — as long as you vote the correct way. If you don’t, you obviously failed to understand what you we’re voting for, and need rescuing.
"The idea that Britain, acting alone, can exact favourable terms from much larger powers such as China, Europe or, indeed, the United States, is a delusion. If it leaves the European Union, Britain will become a middling provincial country, whose fortunes will be subject to the whims of others."
Funny thing about "conservatives." It's all about yearning for a fanciful past.
In the same why Trump wants to eschew economic titans like CA and NY as models and, instead, turn the US in crumbling, dilapidated place like Alabama and West Virginia.
42
@Raymond L Yacht
I assure you I don’t have any "yearning for a fanciful past". I voted to leave the EU because I prefer the model of the independent nation state — the same preference shared by almost every nation on Earth, including the US. Would the American people vote to join a federation of North and South American countries whose parliament and legal system could override US law, and offer guaranteed freedom of movement to live and work in each other’s countries?
No you would not.
12
@WinstonSmith - a country is only independence to the degree that it's not dependent on others. The UK will still find itself passing laws reflecting that dependence which cannot be wished away in a globalised technology driven world
22
@Raymond L Yacht
Funny thing about "conservatives." It's all about yearning for a fanciful past.
Yes. Imperial nostalgia is alive and kicking in Britain as well as the US. Yearning for the days when they could still win wars and bully weaker nations into unfavourable trade deals.
1
We can thank our lucky fifty stars that we have not: an egocentric leader of strange hair; a bigoted leader with a sense of entitlement and arrogance; a man who wasn't elected by popular consensus-- all wrapped in nationalistic fervor and resentment; along with an uneasy alliance of states with disparate economies and influence. Isn't that right?
53
A professor friend from Japan spent a year studying in London a few years ago and his impression of the country was not flattering. He said it was basically a museum living off the revenues from glories past thanks to all the tourists. It is not the country of Winston Churchill, those days are long gone; the best days were in the past.
37
@Mahalo. Your professor friend was just jealous that Japan was not able to attract as many fans. By the way, international tourism accounts for a larger share of exports in the U.S. (10.7%) than Britain (6.5%). So much for glories past.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.RCPT.XP.ZS?most_recent_value_desc=true
11
@Mahalo would a year studying in Tokyo represent what the whole of Japan is like? I doubt it.
London doesn't represent what the UK is like as a whole, and you can't judge a country by how it markets to its tourist trade.
We do need to be more forward looking, and my vote to Leave the EU was very much my way of looking beyond the next 10-15 years and getting excited about the opportunities it will bring.
9
@Doyle
agree, that one year living in a country is not sufficient to judge on it as a whole.
But if the way the UK government handles "Brexit" is an indication of how you intend to benefit from the opportunities you believe you see outside of the EU, then I doubt you will be able to realize on them.
8
I'm continually surprised & shocked that at the current stage of the Brexit saga:
(a) how dysfunctional both leading UK Parties each are,
(b) how so many English politicians (seen apart from those of other parts of the UK) & people are fixated on & guided by nostalgia & romanticism rather than a rational appreciation of the grave circumstances with which the UK must shortly deal, &
(c) the breadth, scope & depth of the social, economic, domestic political & geopolitical crises that the UK unavoidably must confront in a matter of weeks & how little recognition let alone proper preparation is evident to meet these crises & the existential threat to the UK these crises in concert entail.
Bluff, bravado & a willingness to double down on an increasingly weakening hand will not do & simply courts disaster for the UK.
Canada & the other Commonwealth countries will sympathies with the plight of many innocent victims in the UK when the day of reckoning comes but we will not rush to the UK's aid. The US & many other countries will drive hard bargains on a desperate UK Government.
28
It is time to move on past heroic images of Churchill and England going it alone against impossible odds. We are in a new era. Now the great power blocks, China, the USA, the European Union, Russia, India rule the world. As a part of the EU the United Kingdom would retain great power as a very important part of that block of very wealthy group. Already the process has started of making England small with various power groups relocating into the EU, banking, pharmaceutical, research groups. Boris Johnson and Farage have squandered Britain's remaining power in little dreams of their own importance, not the importance of the UK. Sad.
42
@Harold Johnson I love your list of great power blocs...
Ha ha... the EU and Russia, both of which have recently had globalist pretensions, have gone from being genuinely powerful nation states to strangulated globalist paupers.
When Britain was attempting to join the EEC in the early 1970's, that bloc represented 40% of the world marketplace. As it stands now it is at less than 15% and falling.
Russia has gone from being the "breadbasket of Europe" through to having an economy the size of California, to where they are now with an economy approaching the size of New York.
And if you think that real business people will be merrily moving their businesses to a failing marketplace, you are fooling yourself.
10
@Harold Johnson
Your power blocks are not equal. EU has a GDP of USD 14 Trillion, USA is USD 20 Trillion (but much higher public and private debt to GDP than the EU). Russia is only 1.7 Trillion (smaller than Italy at 2T)
5
@Natalie.....you are delivering yourself the best argument against a successful post BREXIT Britain! It’s importance is based on the EU market access - which is in your view failing - and nothing else. If you take that away with BREXIT then nothing will be left. There are no new trade deals negotiated with countries like the USA or China or India that might replace the EU market for the Brits. It is as with all populists: great promises and no delivery. Worked here for a bit more than 2 years now but did not deliver anywhere near to the promises made by then candidate Trump. There is now “5-6% GDP growth” or anything close to it. The isolationist approach does no longer work....and that’s a fact.
13
There will always be an England because: as long as the younger royals pop out new princess and princesses on a regular schedule, the Treasury coffers will be refilled with revenue from increased tourism especially when the US$ is on a par with the UK pound.
Instead of relying on tax payers' financial support, the royals could sign up their multiple royal residences with Airbnb for a princely fee, or sell them to foreign investors...
4
Before Britain joined the 'Common Market' in the early 1970s there was talk of revitalising the British Commonwealth as a serious economic alternative to joining Europe. Even then it was a pipe dream. The Indian subcontinent & Anglophone Africa were going their own way without British overlordship. Australia had already begun transitioning its economy to Asia.
Nor were the British public keen to see more 'çoloured' immigration to metropolitan Britain, which a beefed-up Commonwealth would inevitably entail. Should Johnson attempt to revive such plans he will run into the same problems.
15
I met Churchill three times.
I don't think he would have been in favour
of Germany winning World War II,
via economic means, some 70 years later.
England will survive and England will prosper
because she won't have the economic in-balance
and bureaucratic inertia of the E.U.
Monies go where they will and London will
not lose all is economic dynamism while
the E.E. become more and more ungovernable.
14
@John Brown
Interesting. So the American and Soviet troops who met in Torgau in 1945 were there just for fun and didn't win the Second War - because Germany simply kept it going for 70 years?
In the world view you are drawing here, the British correspond to those Japanese soldiers who are said to have entrenched themselves since 1945 in the primeval forests of Asia up to the 1970s.
The European Union is, by the way, based on institutions which give the smaller European nations a clear predominance over Germany and the other large nations, for example in the number of Members of the European Parliament (850,000 inhabitants per Member of Parliament in Germany, 83,000 inhabitants per Member of Parliament in Luxembourg). In the Commission, a kind of government, they are even more overweight.
The European Court of Justice trains common law and the protection of human rights beyond national legal systems.
No major decision in the European Union has been taken in the past 40 years without British approval.
I think that if your argumentation and that of the Brexitans were to be transferred to the USA, your great Federation would have dissolved a long time ago.
As a person with German, Polish and Kashubian roots, Turkish, Austrian and Pakistani family members, I do not feel personally attacked by your comment. But this talk of war to be won here by the British seems to be of never-ending silliness.
29
How old are you Johnny? England will survive because they never surrendered/ integrated their currency Pound/ Sterling with European Union currency Euro.
@John Brown *England*. Says it all. Not a hint of union in this shiz sandwich.
2
When Boris Johnson visited Myanmar in 2017, he must have felt that the former Burma, and the countries that form the British Commonwealth today, would instead be colonies of a British Empire still alive. There is nothing Mr. Johnson can be proud of. Because, the legacy left behind in all of the former colonies, is nothing but, chaos.
If Mr. Johnson was sincere and serious about a Brexit, he should have had a plan a long time ago. If Mr. Johnson is dreaming of a Britain First, that may not be the best for the British people and the country. Politicians dream very strange things. It is always their personal ambitions and Power First.
18
@citizen
'...the legacy left behind in all of the former colonies, is nothing but chaos.'
Not all. Apart from a period of murderous chaos between Muslims and Hindus immediately after the granting of independence in 1947, Indian politics have not been chaotic. Elections are held regularly and the winners are acknowledged by the losers. The poor and downtrodden can and do vote. The political and judicial arms of government are separate. The army is powerful but they are not the boss. India has a high level of individual, media and religious freedom. The economy is lifting millions out of poverty annually. Not the same in other former Brit colonies like Pakistan for instance.
10
@citizen
Johnson is dreaming. Britain ranks 25th in the world in student performance. Singapore is 5th.
Lots of ground to make up for the UK; should only take a couple of generations...
7
But it won't be Great Britain after the Scots leave the union. Of course, there will always be an England.
43
@David B. Benson There's a very good chance that Northern Ireland will eventually leave too, uniting with Ireland proper.
49
@Jake
That would be a wonderful fallout from this whole thing.
“A nation once again.”
"If it leaves the European Union, Britain will become a middling provincial country, whose fortunes will be subject to the whims of others. Trump probably won’t care. Churchill would have been horrified."
No, actually Churchill would have been horrified at the prospect of allowing unelected European bureaucrats, in the service of Germans, dictate Britain's labor laws, criminal procedure, product regulation, trade policy, and social structure. Churchill would have been horrified that so many Britons would consider selling their sovereignty to keep trade trade trinkets flowing freely across the Irish border. He is, after all, the one who told his fellow Britons the United Kingdom, in its darkest hour, "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat." And gloriously, they took his offer, and it was "their finest hour."
No, Churchill would be appalled that his country, that spent a thousand years desperately trying to keep itself from the clutches of the European continent, had surrendered its sovereignty to that very continent.
15
@Chuck French
...you do realize that within the EU as it exists today, Britain has a heaping helping of extra rules carved out for itself, right? It's formally a member but stuck to its own currency, for instance - the Brits, as it were, always got their little extra. Perhaps if they had cared more, they would've been a much stronger partner, but as they didn't, that void happened to be filled by Germany and France, as the budding friendship post-war between those two nations was essential. In general European history, it's between those two nations that conflicts arose most often, so them dominating today is only logical. Whether it's always for the best of all EU members involved is a different story altogether, but at least we haven't had to deal with another devastating inner-European war for close to a century now.
That in and of itself is an achievement. As it stands, no modern European country on its own can stand entirely on its own in the modern day and age. None of them alone have enough pull, even if they wish it be so.
The UK, for all intents and purposes, is a sovereign nation, same as the other EU members. What EU rules do is, for the most part, reach a consensus between its members on, for example, trade to make life easier for, say, traders. There are good, pragmatic reasons for this union of nations, historic ones as well, conceived as a trade federation to prevent wars by tying everyone to the same economic anchor.
It's a shame people forget that fact.
110
@LG Great comment. I agree and am disheartetened by how people so easily forget and misinterpret the past, dangerously forgetting why certain institutions were created in the first place. Britain has always wanted to have its cake and eat it too and as you point out, the EU conceded to them on many points such as allowing them to keep their own currency. But the British illusion that it is still a great empire blinds it to the fact that we live in a highly interdependant world and to go it alone is suicide. They need to stop with the Downton Abbey nostalgia. Churchill was not nostalgic and knew the importance of interdependence without illusion.
8
@LG
Giving up your nation’s sovereignty for trade & profit, & as they like to emphasize, for help in curtailing any possible future aggressions - what a sad thing.
1
Yup. The grandness of Great Britain is a memory. They could be Robin and the US Batman perhaps.
19
I hope you are aware that Great Britain is a geographical designation rather than a narcissistic boast. Sigh.
1
@NOTATE REDMOND
More like Alfred.
"The special relationship appeals to another type of nostalgia: kinship with the largest nation of English-speaking peoples, which many older, mostly white, Britons find more congenial than shared arrangements with foreigners on the Continent who eat garlic and speak in strange tongues."
That is a cheap shot, Professor Buruma. Moreover, you are only minimally right.
I should think that many more people of England--omitting the Scots and the Welsh--than "older, mostly white Britons" do not "find congenial" membership as a satellite in an EU increasingly dominated by Germany, the most economically powerful country in the union, whom they will be obliged to obey, as Greece had to obey a few short years ago in order to emerge from the crisis that Germany was complicit in putting them in.
13
Dear sms, the Greeks are entirely to blame for their own mess. They cheated their way into the euro and freewheeled for many years on the low euro interest rate, while maintaining their lavish spending.
15
@SMS I agree. British prejudice against foreign food is on the wane because we realized we decimated our traditional cuisine and have been trying for 50 years to build a new one made of bits and pieces from all over the world.
However, food prejudice was only ever a proxy for the real hatred every true Englishman holds in his heart. It's the one that ersatz Englishman Joseph Conrad revealed so horribly well.
9
@SMS Weaselwords, Greece managed to totally corrupt it's economy and taxbase all by itself, thank you.
Brexiters claim that Britain is merely a vassal of the EU, an organization with, presently, 28 members, limited majority voting and, in critical circumstances, the right to veto.
Divorced from the EU and bereft of other allies, Britain will be dependent on the dubious goodwill of the USA, a relationship infinitely more one-sided and subservient than their previous partnership with the EU.
David Hall Hong Kong
110
@David Hall
And what will Hong Kong do
when China asserts absolute control ?
7
@John Brown. And what does it have to do with David’s point?
2
But sir, the Brits and Australians anyway do NOT have an independent foreign policy, they are subservient states to USA
1
During and after World WarⅡ, people have learned that it would be inevitable for us to cooperate with other western countries if we would want to avoid conflicts and keep peaceful life. The policies stirring nationalism tend to bring conflicts. We should value the United Nations, European Union and other international organizations much more. Those who have not learned from history try to spoil the international cooperation and bring instability to the world.
73
When did Britain ever have "splendid isolation"? Pre-modern British history is of one conquest after another. Once Great Britain became the conqueror rather than the conqueree was a model economic and military internationalism, if primary guided by one nation.
5
The British are much more resourceful and resilient than the author of this opinion admits. One can easily picture a U.K. reinvigorated once they have left the EU. The spirit of “get on with it” originated with them and has always ultimately brought them success.
12
@NorthernVirginia. By doing what exactly? What are the current constraints? Kippers?
1
@NorthernVirginia. “The spirit of ‘get on with it’ originated with them”. Like, stoicism originated in England?
2
Britain sure seems to be digging the same grave as the US. Isolation may sound good on the surface to a few ignorant old people but, in the end, it will get them nowhere.
2
Why shouldn’t we focus on what Churchill and Johnson have in common?
The former commandeered the British troops into the unnecessary carnage at Gallipoli during the WWI with about 250,00 casualties among his troops.
The latter is commandeering the troops into the Brexit.
The both events were supposed to bring the great victories , weren’t they?
41
To compare a historic event with an event which has not yet passed is folly. Unless you possess a crystal ball.
Here’s the diff: Churchill learned.
1
Boris Johnson was a superb Mayor of London and did a great job during his tenure culminating in the 2012 London Olympics. I feel this piece is biased and lacks objectivity. Yes he has flaws, many leaders do however I tend to think Churchill would have been pleased that a PM was prepared to step up and negotiate hard for the UK. Most of the reporting in this paper is balanced but this piece feels very biased.
23
@AP Boris’s record as London mayor is sketchy. Many large projects and purchases that were disasters: he spent a fortune on powerful water cannons that were never used, massive investment in a whole fleet of ‘bendy buses’ that were a disaster and ultimately mothballed. The success of the Olympics is largely down to the Labour Govt at the time and the late Dame Tessa Jowell. Remember the London riots in 2011 a year before the Games? He wasn’t a disaster as mayor but his record is checkered at best.
28
@AMD
Wrong. Ken Livingston introduced the disastrous articulated buses. They were responsible for many deaths of pedestrians and cyclists. Johnson, as mayor, ditched them. David Cameron had been PM since 2010.
5
@AP
Boris is an upper class twit with pretentious ideas of restoring past glory to a small island. I’m deliberately excluding Northern Ireland as Boris is doing the same in his talk about hard Brexit. Scotland wanted to stay in the EU and has not supported the ruling Tory party Boris leads. The chances of Scotland going through several more votes to dissolve its union in the UK are now very much higher.
The divisions in Ireland with a hard border being brought back between north and south again could reignite the troubles there.
Britain had carved itself a special place in the EU. They carried a lot of strength but due to some arrogant narcissists in the Tory party and a lot of aging voters in Britain blinded by dreams of a grand past revisited Britain’s future is now unstable. It will be certainly a poorer and possibly a more dangerous future.
And actually Boris was also a terrible mayor.
1
The Brexit "fatigue" has been going on for too long now. When Britain gets out of the EU with or without any deal the impact will be be minimal unlike the olden days of the empire. Britain is clearly overestimating itself in its importance economically in the modern world. The "empire" on which the sun never set was built on deceit, military might ,pure imperialistic designs and exploiting the generosity and goodness of people in Asia , Africa and elsewhere. The time has now come to Britain to get it back in the same coin. Even "poor" India will soon overtake Britain as the 6the biggest economy in the world and Brexit will further accelerate its downfall. So be it. The world will go on well enough. China will some near day overtake America looking at what is happening there too.If any serious course correction is not visible immediately the slide for both these countries will be swift and inevitable.Even with this the glory days look like a bygone era.It is
for their peoples to choose the road .
35
@Venugopal
I think your description of British imperialism is astute:
"The 'empire' on which the sun never set was built on deceit, military might ,pure imperialistic designs and exploiting the generosity and goodness of people in Asia , Africa and elsewhere."
In a play on a well-known phrase, some thought it was a matter of England's always "waving the rules."
35
@Venugopal Ok. Fine. All immigrants from Britain should also return to where they went from and raise their countries to levels above Britain. The British will drink to that.
It’s buffoons like Trump and Johnson, and others around the world like Bolsonaro, Duterte, Salvini, etc., who appeal to nationalistic prejudice in an effort to cast themselves as all-knowing paternalistic autocrats. They know best. People are children to be led, not citizens to be served. It’s us against the evil them. When this inevitably fails they always blame others. Fake news, deep state, cabals, you name it. Of course, it’s the guy in the street who’s left to sort through the wreckage.
Johnson has few cards to play. Many corporations have already left Britain or downsized. It has been reported that Johnson’s commitment to Brexit is so shallow that before the vote he had two speeches prepared, one for each outcome. Apocryphal or not, this sure sounds like Johnson. He has no natural resources, no critical industry, and no good will except from Trump, and we all know that Trump’s good will has a shelf life of nanoseconds. If Scotland decides it prefers to go it alone, then Brits won’t even be able to drown their sorrows in Scotch without paying huge tariffs.
143
@Avatar
The 2 speeches story is indeed apocryphal. After admitting he could see merit and downsides in both positions, he was advised to write two newspaper columns (not for publication) setting out the case for each. He found, when doing so, that the Leave case was one he could much more easily get behind.
It strikes me as being quite a good idea — as long as you can trust your opponents not to misrepresent it as duplicity and opportunism.
@AvatarAlso Northern Ireland since with the upcoming vote there are more Catholics than Protestant racists. If the Brits and the Unionists try and stop the vote the Troubles will return and then watch what will happen. The Irish Republic is progressive while Boris and his crowd in the Unionists are fascists. Jim Trautman
@Avatar this rings very true to me.
Boris didn't get into this whole Brexit debacle because of his belief; he just used it to get elected.
79
What is Boris Johnson's baseline for success? To make a deal better than Patricia May--anything better is a winner for him. He doesn't have to have total victory and he doesn't have to go for Brexit neat. He'll be able to say, with justice, that he got the best deal possible--everyone will applaud and return to work. everybody is tired of Brexit, they just want to get it over with.
5
Where does this boundless optimism come from? "just a better deal" that is impossible to make nor pass in parliament. If it were that easy it would already be done.
The words empty vessel come to mind.
9
@Ronald B. Duke
Patricia? There won`t be a better deal, only no deal. Johnson will sell that as better.
@Ronald B. Duke. Patricia May?
"But he [Churchill] was also an internationalist."
You misunderstand the man completely. He was an internationalist to the extent that he could enlist the aid of others to strengthen Britain's position. He had no love for others outside what we today would call the Anglosphere.
I really wish academics could drop the filter and at least be more cognisant of reality.
34
It is no longer Pax Britannica and Johnson will bring down Britain into relative obscurity as China and other countries progress. It is likely that the Europeans and the US are actively preventing other countries overtaking them economically - US by using sanctions and Europe by encouraging inter group fighting in countries.
7
@Hrao. Europe is encouraging inter group fighting in countries? Can you be more specific?
Well Winston and I can agree on one thing at least. Actually 2 things, bet Winston would despise Trump too.
53
@cherrylog754 Bet Trump would tell you Winston was very weak.. He would probably tweet it.
2
"The idea that Britain, acting alone, can exact favourable terms from much larger powers such as China, Europe or, indeed, the United States, is a delusion. If it leaves the European Union, Britain will become a middling provincial country, whose fortunes will be subject to the whims of others."
Those sentences say it all. Conservatives are driven significantly by nostalgia, and emotion and facts and evidence are secondary, if not ignored totally. It's easy to stir up emotion with lies and alternative facts. Over many years, Brits have been assaulted with many distorted facts about how the EU has degraded British sovereignty and imposed petty rules that deny Brits their Britishness.
66
@Barry Long If one accepts that it was largely the older 'nostalgic' generation that voted to leave the EU then one has to accept that it was the same people, then the 'younger' generation, that voted to join the common market as was.
So did these same people who dared turn away from commonwealth and seek a more internationalist future lose their vision over the years? Or, has something else changed as in a move to federalism, single currency, open borders, and a Brussels that has primacy over national, elected governments that was never mentioned and never voted for?
I put it to you that Britain was and is still forward looking but not in favour of being subsumed by an external, convenient 'federalism' in the name of so called European 'harmony' that is the EU.
Would the good people of the US accept laws, currency and immigration set in Ottawa, if american free trade became a North American Union without consent?
You don't need to answer that of course, the answer is obvious.
5
@Barry Long
"None so blind as those who won't see."
@Jonathan I actually would welcome Canadian leadership over the clown-car mess here now. At least they recognize healthcare for all is critical.
3
Yes, Churchill would have despised Boris Johnson, not least because he is a liar who knowingly misleads British citizens. But what Mr. Buruma omits to mention is that Johnson's accession likely presages the end of the United Kingdom. If Bexit takes place, particularly if a no-deal Brexit can somehow be forced through, Scotland will very likely demand a second referendum and then will vote for independence. That will be the end of the UK as a nation. Did you ever think that the Union Jack would become a historial artifact? Certainly, I did not, and the idea appalls.
69
@JJM, no problem. There is no added value in a UK, and Scotland is better off without it. The Irelands are getting closer, once the DUP is excised.
There is an old saying, "Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute". What it means is, sovereignty and identify of self is more important that being in a subservient position, even if life may be a little more comfortable in that subservient position.
The supporters of Brexit got tired of decisions affecting life in their island nation being determined for them in Brussels. To them, the ability to rule oneself completely as a sovereign nation is more important than the economic benefit of integration into a larger European quasi nation. That EU quasi nation itself is not doing that well economically. They have negative interest rates, which may be cut further (!)
I think Obama engaged in uncalled for meddling in the affairs of the UK when he warned, falsely, that if it left the EU, it could find itself last on the list to negotiate trade agreements with the USA. That is an outrageous thing to say in a foreign nation on the eve of a national referendum on whether it should regain its powers of self determination previously surrendered to Brussels. Obama probably angered a number of on the fence voters, and caused them to vote for Brexit. I cannot imagine a foreign leader coming to the USA and threatening them of dire consequences if they voted the wrong way.
18
@RM
A lot of error of fact here.
1. "Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute," is a quote from U.S. Ambassador Charles Pinckney during the XYZ affair of 1797 and actually expresses his refusal to engage in the standard bribery of public officials expected in diplomatic negotiations at the time.
2. Obama never threatened anyone. He was asked his opinion and, speaking for the United States, he gave it: That it was in the U.S. national interest to have the U.K. stay in Europe and in our estimation, it was in the U.K.'s interest as well and we advise that course as their friend and ally (but ultimately they need to decide for themselves.)
Then he was specifically asked if the U.S. would prioritize a free trade deal with the U.K. (a claim that the Leave campaign was loudly promoting) and he aid that the U.S. would reopen to such a deal, but that in terms of priority the U.S. was focused on deals with very big blocs like the TPP deal and the E.U. deal first and couldn't give the U.K. special treatment. By the way, that has also turned out to be entirely truthful and correct, even under Trump who refused to move the U.K. ahead of larger trade blocs and countries in the priorities of U.S. Trade Reps.
I fail to see how any of that was a threat. Also, answering specific questions (and doing so at the urging of the U.K. government at the time) is not something usually styled as "uncalled for," "meddling," or "threatening."
142
@Cormac
There are many times when one should withhold an opinion. If someone had a homely child, and a proud parent asked "Isn't he handsome", it is more prudent to evade the question. He should have said something like "Britain's economic future is best determined by Britons.
As for the Millions for Defense, you are being to literal. Since 1797, it has been used in a broader sense to mean principle outweighs economic convenience. It is the principle behind tracking down criminals of all kinds instead of paying them their tribute, even if paying the tribute might be the least cost way out.
5
@RM
Do you think Trump has been correct promoting his desire for Brexit?
3
The central thesis put forward isn't very clear but appears to be that brexit means an obsession with sovereignty and isolationism. The two are often associated but a professor ought to be capable of recognising the distinction.
Churchill's best moments was when he was furiously keen on protecting the sovereignty and independence of this country while romantically and emotionally adoring its part in the world. Re read his memoirs of both world wars, and look at how he describes the Belgians and Dutch in their hours of crisis. Look at his insistence on equal evacuation of French and British troops at Dunkirk.
Johnson may be a weak imitation of Churchill, but that does not mean the original was weak.
13
@Walsh
The problem with Churchill was that he may have been keen on protecting the sovereignty of England, but he was somewhat less concerned about the sovereignty and independence of eg. India...reflecting his racist views...
What Mr. Buruma says about Boris Johnson was true about George Washington. Most heroes in history faced a similar odds and a dangerous fate. And innumerable doubters. Mr. Johnson faces set of Herculean labors ─the stuff that nationalist heroes are made of ─ I wish Mr. Buruma recognized the historical parallel. Geroge Washington, was hastily appointed as commander of a non-existing army. And being ordered to fight the world’s mightiest English army without anything, by the Congress ─ weapons or ammunition, even shoes or food to eat. From the very beginning, from the days of Pilgrims and Quakers, from the days of original settlements, and to the founding of the American Republic, Americans owed its culture and civilization to it its mother nation, England and its institutions. There are no two other cultures in the world that are so profoundly interconnected. The two nations share so many deep physical and spiritual bonds like no other two nations in the world. What Mr. Trump and Mr. Johnson are suggesting not only common economic bonds but also a cultural and spiritual renaissance of this two English speaking civilizations. Both nations are commonly, deeply rooted in the same laws, political and social ideals, and economic, educational and religious institutions. The United States and United Kingdom are bound by philosophical ideals, religion, language and literature like no others. The world’s humanity will greatly benefit from such resurgence and reawakening.
12
@ChandraPrince As an American, I can assure you that the "special relationship" is special only the the British. The American have barely heard of it, and the economy doesn't recognize it at all.
35
@Margaret Boerner
I too am an American and agree about the special relationship not being recognised in the U.S., but some Americans think the Royal Family is cool.
7
@ChandraPrince
The war of independence was won due to the French intervention.
Brexit is a win for Russia. England will in due course ally itself with Russia against the EU...That is how power politics work
Perhaps, in the not too distant future, England, frustrated with its economic prospects and place in the world, will strike out on military adventures to inflate the national ego, or try artificially inserting itself as peace broker in conflicts it has little apparent immediate interest in.
Perhaps England will fund proxies throughout the developing world, and attempt to develop itself as a unique "powerholder" globally, like Russia, Iran, or North Korea.
If nothing else works, Boris can Make England Great Again through human trafficing and monopolizing the Asian opium trade, like "the good ole days"...
22
@Thomas Now, now.
Boris hasn't done anything bad (or good) yet so why the doom? Give him a chance to put his stamp on things. Which reminds me, anyone remember the "Yes Minister" series on BBC? What the new broom proposes, the civil service disposes
10
@stewart Well remember Trump was supposed to cause WW3 as well, so this is the usual scare tactics of the future for opinions the left does not agree with. I think they are still sad he did not Bomb Iran,
Besides being a “provincial middling country” if it disastrously, stupidly leaves the E.U., Britain could end up shriveling to encompass only England proper as Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland eventually bid adieu, responding to all the ensuing post-Brexit chaos and economic devastation. If Johnson sees some of Churchill in himself, he should be taking up residence not at #10, but at a Royal Mental Health Hospital.
29
@John Grillo -- When Britain entered the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, it was about 10 million people.
It overcome 30 million in the French Republic, and a great many more in Europe controlled by France. Italy was bigger than Britain, Germany was much bigger, and Russia was four times bigger (and on both sides at various times).
India and China were each over 200 million as Britain at the same time, as Britain established its dominance of them too during and shortly after disposing of Napoleon.
It isn't just numbers. Britain's 65 million people today are no worse off for numbers than Britain in the Napoleonic Era.
Of course, that Britain was deeply into its Industrial Revolution, while the rest of the world hadn't started.
So the question for Britain, and the US too, is not numbers. It is a new economy to show the way for the world to our future.
That's the Green New Deal idea -- seize the future, and make a profit off it too, for the benefit of all of us.
Boris Johnson and Trump haven't the imagination to see that. Their nations might be able to do it. Other potential leaders see the possibility. No other society is so able by its nature to seize the future, if only we can shrug off the dead hand of our self satisfied elite.
11
@Mark Thomason. Nonsense. Britain’s population at the time was in excess of 15 million. In any case, the Seventh Coalition, which eventually defeated Napoleon at Waterloo, comprised of forces from Britain, Russia, Prussia, Sweden, Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands and several German states.
2
Boris Johnson does not have a “vision”. What he does have is a puerile sense of power which he imagines that he can exercise as a Prime Minister but which his colleagues will do their best to diminish. He is a strange extension of Trump with whom he shares some similarities of which the most obvious is self-aggrandizement. They are both doing their personal best to transform two erstwhile stalwart democracies into centers of white privilege where indecency will reign supreme - for a while.
43
@Camestegal
When was two-class-forever Britain ever a "democracy"?
I am not sure whether the fact that his mother is English means that Mr Buruma is another example of the truth of Orwell's observation that "England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality" but I do note that he seems to be criticizing Johnson for talking up the importance of his country's role and its prospects - as if this was somehow something of which he should be indeed ashamed rather than merely engaging in the same kind of rhetoric as the leader of virtually every other country on the planet.
Like many critics of those who had the temerity to want to leave the EU, Mr Buruma is keen to allege that these poor deluded fools are panting for a return to an empire (which almost all of them have never known).
Perhaps he might like to consider that it is possible they thought that Britain should have the right to decide, for example, who has the right to live in their country: again, something that the huge majority of the world's sovereign states decide for themselves, no matter what their heft in global affairs, without being told they are getting above themselves.
Many Britons doubtless have an exaggerated view of their country's importance, but they are hardly alone in this, and to leap from this - understandable and well-nigh universal sentiment across the nations - to assume that the British see themselves as, for example, more important in the world than Italy or France, seems an unwarranted and over-critical leap.
12
Anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence, would despise Boris Johnson.
Boris is an opportunistic character with a very flexible set of principles.
The main issue facing the UK, is that any Brexit, will result in lower economic growth, than remaining in the EU.
Boris has pushed the fantasy that Brexit will revive the UK. Sadly when Brexit fails to lift the UK, Boris will blame the Parliament and remainers, for his Brexit continuing the shambles of British politics since June, 2016.
28
Not surprising at all, its the other half of the current world power. It is supposed to be this way as both the US and the UK are to be fully functioning at the time they are destroyed at the hands of Gods Kingdom at Armageddon which is now on our doorstep. This system is passing away and it will be replaced with a Kingdom to time indefinite.
1
@DG
Um...yeah...hey look, I'll just go and use the washroom and then I'll be right back...ahem, cough cough...
@DG
A finer example of self-fulfilling prophecy could not be stated. People, who are mesmerized by biblical mythology, are responsible for Trump’s political rise and capture of the presidency. One should expect their desire for end-times fulfillment — like sugar plums dancing in their heads.
1
I'm no fan of Boris Johnson. But, in all fairness, Winston Churchill despised almost all politicians other than himself.
16
@Larry Covey
Would you care to cite any examples?
From my reading, WSC carried on cordial relations with all MP's, even those who fought against his political stances.
8
@Larry Covey. Um, wasn't FDR a "politician" ? They got along famously, and in fact WC admired him tremendously. Their wartime friendship and alliance was one for the ages.
10
@Lewis Ford yes... and Santa was a friend of his too..
The only thing Boris and Donald have in common is a belief that if they say it’s so, it is. This delusional attitude will eventually serve neither country well. It’s time to look to the future, rather than try and dredge up the past in the hope of a model of governance that is merely attractive on the surface. You don’t become a leader by comparing yourself to someone else. Both Britain (and it might just be England after all of this nonsense) and America stand to lose all but the patina of importance.
21
Given the suffering of colonized people as the result of the British Empire's despoliation of their countries, I think millions of people would have been better off if Britain -- among others, including the U.S. -- had never been more than a middling country.
12
@V. Whippo
In most cases the conditions in British colonies was much better that it would have been without the British.
Ask the people on Hong Kong - would they rather be a colony of Britain or a part of China?
5
@Amy If you could raise from the dead those who starved to death during famines in India that were a direct result of British taxation and exportation of crops needed to feed the Indian population they might tell a different story. And that’s just one example. Suketu Mehta provides a brief, well documented overview overview of how wonderful the Empire was for the people the British exploited in This Land Is Our Land, published this year.
10
@V. Whippo
The Irish were also starving when produce, dairy products, and livestock were exported to Britain. The Irish lost land to thieving British Aristos; those who were smart enough to sell before the great famine and land theft were the best off. My paternal Irish antecedents got out early, sailed to Quebec, then to Missouri where they hired their own wagon train to Oregon, and sent the first Senator to D.C. The maternal side were blessed with physical beauty; they married well: George M. Cohan which took one to NYC; A Federal postal employee which took the other to S.F. The Irish did what they had to do, just as all immigrants do. Those crossing the Southern border will do what they need to do to succeed, and most will succeed on some level. We recognize it as the human spirit.
5
Boris Johnson seems to be putting all his foreign policy eggs in the same crate of a grand economic-political alliance with Trump's United States. His stint as Foreign Minister under Theresa May offers little hope for Britain's future internationally.
Two problems: The US will not be Trump's forever. Moreover, even if Trump remains in power beyond 2021, it is now painfully clear that anyone, anything that touches or is touched by Trump turn rotten in a hurry. Neither Britain nor the UK will escape the Trumpian stain.
49
So if the Europeans are 'away' for August that leaves only September and October for Boris to work his major of getting a better exit deal. The EU will be reluctant to encourage exit paths from it membership. Can anyone suggest the 'leverage' that Boris will utilize to get his favourable deal? No deal Brexit seems likely. Only eight weeks to make this magic work so Boris may be unfrocked by Halloween.
17
Never underestimate the power of a "no confidence!" vote by a disgusted House of Commons.
16
Andrew Roberts’ recent majestic biography of WSC argues pretty persuasively that the great man would have favored Brexit.
3
@Shanin Specter
I disagree. I read it and did not find it at all persuasive. And it is contrary to repeated public statements for greater European solidarity and integration throughout the post-war years.
6
Boris's job is to get Britain out of the EU in one piece, and hopefully keep it that way. Whatever spirits of Churchill or Gandhi or Genghis Khan that are necessary will do. They really don't have time (or the need) for a history lesson at this point.
But in fact he is actually a pretty good Oxford-trained historian. If you ever watch his BBC series "After Rome Holy War and Conquest" you will probably conclude that he is the most anti-imperialist of left-wing scholars. It looks like the subtleties of his beliefs have eluded a lot of his critics.
4
@Jim1648
Boris's job is to serve Boris, or rather, to have others serve him, as it's always been .
He is not in fact, "a pretty good Oxford-trained historian," but took a second in Classics (Greek and Latin and their literature), and excelled in English and Classics at Eton.
Ian Baruma however, is quite trained in history, educationally, and through his experience and study in several diverse cultures.
18
@jdc
Well he was elected president of the Oxford Union. I didn't say his degrees were in history. It seems some people are imposing their politics on his history.
1
I don't know how to break it to the elite-wanna-bes on both sides of the pond, but patriotic Britons and Americans gave up on finding leaders that the old elites would have liked YEARS ago.
Those on the Left in both countries have been quite busy destroying everything that was worthy and wonderful since the 1960's.
If it takes a brusque man who could NOT care less what people thought of him as he saves the economy of his country, THAT is the man that was needed.
If P.M. Johnson is as good for Britain as Pres. Trump has been for working Americans, both will enjoy fond memories throughout literate history.
But both men will be hated forever by those less discerning and more gullible people who always live by rawest emotion.
8
@The Observer
Wait until you and your children get the bill.
The 2017 Ryan / McConnell / Trump tax cut will increase the deficit from $600 Billion to $1 Trillion.
The expected ten year increase in the debt is $12 Trillion which is $80,000 per tax payer.
This is after eight years of Republicans relentlessly railing against the debt under Obama.
We got 2.60 Million jobs in 2018. We got 3.0 Million jobs in 2014 and that was without "tax cuts for the job creators" and with the "jobs killing" Obama-care. And 20 Million people got healthcare.
Every Republican senator voted for it. Not one Democratic senator voted for it.
Good luck to you and your children.
82
@Independent
20 million people didn't get healthcare. They got insurance with artificially low premiums that they're only now realizing are going to skyrocket once subsidies from the government dry up.
It was the same classic bait-and-switch they pulled with mortgages and their accompanying balloon payments.
And if you actually bother to read Obama's tax legislation, you'll see that he also cut taxes for the rich, while levying zero fines/penalties to Wall Street banks for their fraud.
It was under Obama's taxation policies that Amazon, Apple and Facebook grew into behemoths while paying zero in federal taxes.
It's touching that you're worried about the deficit. El Chapo will forfeit $12.6 billion to the US government through the seizure of his assets. Facebook's fine is $5 billion. See how easily you can find $17 billion to pay down the deficit?
4
@The Observer Not sure which working Americans DT has benefitted. Perhaps you'd like to share the details?
28
Excellent thoughts.
This will be especially true if Northern Ireland reunites with Dublin, especially since such thorny issues like abortion and gay marriage have already been settled. And then there's Scotland. The idea that Scotland will remain part of a provincial England seems highly unlikely, they were almost ready to bolt when they had the benefit of the UK and EU. Let England buy its own energy.
There's also another fallacy. England will never be another Singapore. Never. The Singaporeans willfully subject their personal needs for the cultural and political needs of the country, something unimaginable of the Brits. They're just too ornery. So there goes any hope of a "regulation free zone."
And with low taxes, how are they ever going to afford their DHS?
Like Boris' twin Trump, he's playing his country for a fool. The only thing that will save Britain is snap elections and a new ruling coalition. It might destroy the Tories, but it will save Britain.
28
@BillG I agree with you about what Ireland and Scotland might do and what the situation might do for the already troubled DHS. It is not just a problem of low taxes, but many doctors and nurses from continental Europe and elsewhere are leaving the UK in droves. Let's see how the xenophobes running around with pitchforks react to the deterioration of an already beleaguered health system.
Where I don't agree is with the idea that Boris is playing the country for a fool. The little (white) Englanders, with all their racial prejudices and woeful ignorance, outside of London mostly, freely embrace Boris, just as their equivalent counterparts in the U.S. embrace Trump. News today is that Boris' and the Tories' popularity have actually increased after he became prime minister, so snap elections would only strengthen him. What might help is if Labour got rid of Corbyn, whom I have always suspected of being a closet Brexiter. The Brits are on the road to ruin, but I have hope that things will be turned around in the U.S. If only we had a real democracy in which the candidate who wins actually has the majority of votes. But we don't.
18
A VERY GOOD ESSAY.
But if as prescient as I interpret it to tragically be, then melancholia not
1
Once Merkel opened up her country and seemingly the rest of the EU for mass migration requiring billions in support and services from so many countries, the landscape changed. Wonder how Churchill would have handled all the politics in today’s society of angry mean politicians and people?
8
@Bug Off Agreed. Churchill was no fan of non-Europeans. However, I believe things would have played out much differently if Churchill was around.
Instead of dithering and making excuses, Churchill would have seen the necessity of resettling refugees, or even have tried to stop the Syrian/Middle East wars in the first place. Or even better, have been a better strategist to have won them more decisively, hence no or few refugees in the first place.
Churchill was no Theresa May, and no David Cameron.
3
@Bug Off
Ironically, long before Churchill became PM, in 1910-1911 he called in the army to South Wales to clamp down on protesters/riots from miners who wanted such crazy things like livable wages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonypandy_riots.
So it's safe to say that he wasn't a fan of uppity immigrants demanding things.
Boris Johnson is to Donald Trump as a Brexit-happy UK will be to the US: a mini me. Boris Johnson now says he wants to make Great Britain great again; I wonder which countries he hopes to colonize (again) to return to the "good old days " of the Empire. Better be careful, though: countries like India have a pretty strong military these days, and the memory is still fresh.
54
Gandhi said that India had come a long way with Britain and he did not want part on bad terms. There is no desire in Indian political circles for enmity with Britain.
There is at least one former colony that would benefit from re-colonisation—Zimbabwe!
7
I was slightly perplexed about the Brexiteers assertion that once out of the European Union Britain will become a major trading nation again, and then I realised. The economy is 80% services and 20% goods, so goods export is insufficient to cover the cost of merchandise imports, so it must be services, pre-eminently financial services.
All the best plots come out of Britain. I would conjecture that once the tariff barriers are down City of London futures operators will work hand in glove with British trading conglomerates to tilt world trade in Britain’s favour.
The Royal Navy will need a revamp, of course. The frigate HMS Montrose, in the news recently, its keel was laid down forty years ago. Some new ships are in order.
If you can’t beat them join them. Brexit is going to happen no matter what, and it will likely be a hard Brexit. Everyone in Britain needs to put their shoulder to the wheel now to make sure it passes off as smoothly as possible.
5
@Pelasgus And how exactly will the trading conglomerates tilt trade in Britain's favour? When Brexit happens, it won't be tariffs that are removed but are added; Brexit will end the free movement of trade and currency, essential components of Britain's standing as a global financial center.. Britain's home as a financial hub will evaporate as new restrictions are placed on trade with the EU and the rest of the world. The Trade Conglomerates will be hard pressed to find any sort of favorable trade pact once Brexit has removed any advantage the these conglomerates currently enjoy.
33
@Bill
They've already done it, and that was long before the EU was even a thing.
The City of London has extremely curious financial laws that don't apply anywhere else in the country, or the world.
Do you think it's just a coincidence that London is a playground for rich Saudis, Russians, Chinese, etc. who can't trace their wealth to legitimate businesses?
8
The United States can not afford to indulge in bashing international norms. The price that the US (and other aligned nations) will pay to restore these norms once it is realised that they were established for a reason will be many times greater than the cost of holding to them now.
It's almost as if the US is being run by a cabal of Septuagenarians millionaires who don't care about the results of their actions because they will either be dead or can buy their way out of any difficulties
135
@Michael Worse than that, it is being run by old people who are borrowing/spending in to the year 2060. The antithesis of the greatest generation.
2
@Michael Yes.The "special relationship"
It’s interesting to see the parallels between the U.K. and the U.S. and it’s respective leaders. Both want to make their once glorious empires “great again”. However, thanks to such political calculations as austerity budgets, trading away manufacturing jobs to satisfy corporate donors, and costly, ill reasoned wars, both empires are seeing their sunset years in many ways. It’s the way of empires, and many citizens in both nations cling to a sense of nostalgia about the glory days....especially those working class citizens who once had a decent standard of living on one paycheck per household.
53
@Ellen,
If the United States and United Kingdom are in the sunset years, God help us all.
No other nations hold a candle to the ideals of both America and great Britain.
Britain and USA taught the world how to cooperate for the good of humanity.
The rest of the nations act like detached parents, selfish grandparents, incompetent babysitters, perverted uncles or just plain leaving the toddlers, and preteens on their own.
@JRS
Perhaps both nations once held to such ideals. But, since FDR and the New Deal, it’s been pretty downhill here, in my view. How can we hold our heads up- our foreign policy is a mess as we inflict misery on others and support right wing dictators. Our infrastructure is rickety and outdated, our public schools underfunded, healthcare a mess. We, the richest nation on Earth, throw our tax dollars to the military to the tune of a trillion dollars a year. It’s just not sustainable.
2
I don’t know why I read endless columns and stories about what Trump or Johnson believe or revere. They have no beliefs. They are hucksters and hucksters have always been among us. The problem is that the people who have suffered from insecurity took the only revenge left to them by the rich and the political parties they bought. They’ve voted the rascals out, through Trump and Brexit, no matter the consequences. You can decry the caliber of our hucksters compared to those supposedly great men of the past but what’s needed is to alleviate people’s pain and insecurity - no great men required.
69
@Jc
Perhaps; however, another great communicator would be welcome. FDR saw us through a Depression and almost through a world war. I was a little girl when my parents listened to FDR on the radio. I was in H.S. when my mother was outraged by the McCarthy Hearings. My friends were shipping out to Korea. Years later friends were shipping out to Vietnam. Now, a younger generation might see their friends in the ME conflict. This new generation is not smarter than we were; I hope they are more empowered to act on the information available. They have no reason to trust a T.V. huckster; hopefully, they won't trust him. Hot spots have a way of growing bigger; dishonest and corrupt pols have a way of distorting information and access to polling venues. We do not have a Warren Court; we don't even have a liberal Court; we have a conservative Court with Gorsuch, Thomas, Kavanaugh et al making Decisions.
4
Britain does not yet appear to realize that it no longer has an empire. It has a glorious past, but its future is going to be very different and much more difficult. Its ruling class cares for nothing except holding on to its titles, land, and money. As far as Britain's ruling class is concerned, the lower classes are entitled to nothing.
35
@Vesuviano "Britain does not yet appear to realize that it no longer has an empire. It has a glorious past, but its future is going to be very different and much more difficult. "
Keep in mind that America might be in store for the very same fate. If Trump is re-elected multiply the outrages he has done by 10 in his first term of office. That will surely destroy the United States.
But, there is a common theme here. Elect a terrible leader and it can have catastrophic consequences for that country.
Venezuela was once a rich and prosperous country. It still is if you consider that its sitting upon an ocean of oil, but because of its terrible leaders it economy is in tatters and its people literally starving.
163
@Richard Gordon
Believe me, I'm not crowing about my own country's prospects. After the Second World War, there was talk of an upcoming "American Century." By my reckoning, that century started to end when Democratic president Jimmy Carter turned his back on organized labor and proposed huge tax cuts for corporations.
The final nail in the coffin was the stolen election of 2000, with the finishing touch given by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore. Now we're watching a completely treasonous Republican Party turn the USA into a third-world country in the name of preserving white power.
No, Richard Gordon, I was not being smug at all.
26
So we reap the results of what the British Followed by the American empires have wrought. First they conquered and now the same vanquished countries have learned and risen. Rome ruled and declined. So will the Brit and US empires. So it is written and so it shall come to pass but not in my life time..... ANTI- FAKE- NEWS .
Also sprach M
I spent time in the UK in the 60’s before it joined the EU. DeGaulle, I believe had rejected them at first.
The UK was noticeably poorer than Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and West Germany
at the time. It will slowly but surely retreat into economic mediocrity, and its talented people will move abroad.
I understand how difficult it must be for such a small island to be unable to control its immigration, but there must be a way for the UK to have some say in the matter and still remain part of Europe.
37
An opinion from a minor academic from a very minor college. Well, we are talking about the 5th largest economy in the the world and one that is far more important than that in terms of cultural influence and as a financial center. If the UK can't make it outside the EU, then very few countries have a chance to be independent. And yes, Northern Ireland may leave the UK, but Scotland leaving would be suicide as they would then have a hard border with England. Scotland has 5.5 million inhabitants, less than Yorkshire, and most of what they produce goes south. Moreover, the would have to accept the Euro. If thats what they want to do, then bless them.
12
@Bryan
Actually, many people here in the UK will agree with the view expressed by the author of this op-ed. Similar op-eds have been written by British academics and economists.
28
@Bryan
California with 40 million people has a larger economy than the U.K. with 66 million people.
4
@W. Fulp
California doesnt have to make trade deals with the rest of the US. It has open access to people, resources, money etc. Its hardly surprising.
1
And if Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland break away to stay in the EU, England will be this quaint little kingdom that used to be a big deal. Hardly a powerhouse on the international stage. And they will have done it all to themselves.
188
@Michael Gallagher I doubt Wales will break away. Wales voted for Brexit.
Majorities in Northern Ireland and Scotland voted to remain in the EU so those are possible (probable?) breakaways from the UK.
36
"Britain will become a middling provincial country, whose fortunes will be subject to the whims of others."
This does beg the question: will the British populace care? Are you saying that the standard of living will go down? Has it plummeted in Norway or Switzerland? Neither country is a EU member and both have extravagantly high standards of living. All of this Doomsaying seems to leave out the fact that Britain is still a country with a highly skilled and educated populace and the chances that Europe, or anyone else will not want to sell their goods there are very low. The trade deals may not be as good as being in Europe, but while be go on and on with all of this fatalism we seem to forget that big businesses will not simply ignore Britain because of Brexit nor will they allow European politicians to employ harsh rules that would damage their bottom line. At the end of the day the capitalists run the EU, and they won't let the British market just disappear from revenue sheet. It will probably be ugly which the media will make out to be worse than it is, and then we will probably be wondering what all the fuss was about in 10 years.
12
@Tom Britain --comparing itself with Norway and Switzerland ? Norway has oil and very few people. Switzerland has cutting edge industries. De-industrialised and denuded Britain has nothing left that is world class , except Rolls Royce jet engines . The only last thing left was the city of London and it's financial centre driven service economy. With Brexit the "passporting" will be lost for financial services and there goes London - glug..glug.. down the tubes. As for remaining industries like Jaguar-Land Rover (JLR) , as I see the quarterly results of Tata Motors that came out last week, JLR numbers were pitiable and I am just counting how long before JLR winds up UK operations and the devastation to it that Brexit has caused and moves manufacturing to India! Oh, as for the pound, prepare for a steep devaluation post Brexit . That is the only thing that can make Britain competitive. Not very pleasant to wake up the next morning and be 20% poorer like what happened in 1998 in Asia after the financial crisis. Britain after de-industrialisation managed to hang on by selling itself to the Americans and growing Financial services. Now with the latter gone , the only hope left would be to go the whole hog and "merge" and become the 51st state of US. Churchill would surely have loved that, of course with the hope that the rump UK runs the show and not the US. The 51st state is probably the only way to keep Scotland and N.Ireland together with England.
18
@Tom
Has it plummeted in Norway or Switzerland? Neither country is a EU member and both have extravagantly high standards of living.
And neither is "great britain."
Norway is self-sufficient when it comes to energy, and Switzerland is surrounded by nations that are happy to deal with it. It's not an island that doesn't produce anything.
14
@Tom
As for big business response to Brexit: Honda just closed it's manufacturing plant in Swindon, UK. Nissan is waiting to see what happens with Brexit. If I happens, then they are hinting they will likely pull out of the UK also.
As for a highly educated workforce: the UK has under-invested in vocational and adult education and retraining for over a decade. The UK has relied heavily on skilled workers from Europe to in many sectors of the economy (e.g., medical and science and research). Some of them are returning to Europe since the 2015 Brexit referendum. Others will leave when Brexit becomes final.
Norway and Switzerland citizens pay higher rates of income taxes in return for more services provided by their governments. The standards of living are high in these countries because there is less income inequality between the rich and poor. The UK has had a decade of budgeted austerity with funding cuts to local governments that have eliminated basic services and devastated the poor--record numbers are turning to charity-run food banks to survive.
Market size matters: The UK (after Brexit) will not have the bargaining power that the EU has. After the UK leaves, the EU still provides access to markets in 27 countries with a combined population of nearly 450 million people. The UK has only 66 million people.
20
One can only imagine what Churchill would think of Mr. Trump and those that support him.
47
Johnson, will, like Churchill, look West for salvation, though this time from the self-inflicted wound of Brexit. The Cousins will be happy to oblige - for a price. Trump has mentioned that he expects the NHS to be "on the table," for one thing. Farewell, Europe. Hello, Airstrip One.
31
Another great Brit, Charles Robert Darwin, naturalist, geologist and biologist, once said:
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
This quote defines the confidence, and the underlying ignorance, of both US President Donald Trump and his British Mini-Me, Boris Johnson.
432
@Joe Miksis
Great minds -- Darwin is one of my favorite people in history.
The Donald personifies "Ignorance and arrogance" or is it " Pride and stupidity."
As an aside, San Francisco is a great city and must be a good place to live.
Best regards.
4
So Britain will follow the trajectory of Portugal. As will the U.S one day.
28
@Suzy One thing we can learn from Portugal is that they have decriminalized drug possession of any kind. They treat drug addiction as an illness, not a crime. And it works.
I say this because in my opinion, when we stop ranking nations by their might and GDP, we can genuinely learn from each other.
91
@Suzy
I wonder if you are saying that the UK will become dictated to by the Troika. If this is what you mean, how will the UK be able to get help from the European Central Bank once it leaves the EU? Brexiters want out because they don’t want to be governed by the European Commission. If the UK still belongs to the IMF it can apply for financial assistance once BJ messes up the country.
I believe WC played roles in the creation of the IMF, NATO and other agencies. WC even called for a United States of Europe. DT and BJ claim to admire WC but they want to destroy the alliances WC helped form to provide a more stable world.
Due to the limits of this forum, I can’t provide details on Portugal’s history. It is being subjected “to the whims of others” because the nation's leaders have failed to develop industries that provide decent jobs for the Portuguese. This is why my family had to immigrant here. The Troika is ruling Portugal and others because of the irresponsible actions of those who created the financial crisis. The Portuguese are paying the price while the bankers go unpunished.
BTW: Brexiters want to leave because they don’t like to be pushed around by others but the UK has had no problem doing that to other countries be it while they had the empire or while in the EU.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_troika
winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1946-1963-elder-statesman/united-states-of-europe/
@expatYou cannot learn from others when you always claim you are number one.
2
Their are strong historical and cultural ties between the U.S. and the U.K. that transcend any politician. The language, our laws, the fact that this nations founders all came from England.
10
@dave,
Agree, whatever the naysayers believe, USA and Britain are tied at the hip; similar culture, even if many would like to deny this; we make it together, or the whole world goes to pot, again.
3
@dave The founders of the U.S. came from America mostly, not from England, though their ancestor were largely British. At least, I think I'm remembering my history correctly.
4
@dave
This nation's "founders" did not come from England. They were all born here, or in the case of Hamilton, in the West Indies.
8
Churchill was far from perfect as a man, or as a political figure. What he did accomplish was keeping Britain at the first table throughout the war despite her decline internationally after WWI. Without his voice that may well have not happened.
While he was a man of the Victorian Age, and that was the vision he strove to preserve and protect, the final result of his efforts was the preservation of Britain through its most trying time.
The chances of Boris Johnson bringing the nation through this difficulty are dismal, to say the least.
132
@Dave Blazer Churchill was a mass murderer just like Hitler and Stalin (the Bengal famine killed nearly 6 million people in Bengal by starvation.. not too different from the 6 million killed by Hitler in the concentration camps). Just that he ended up in the winning side and didn't see the "victor's " justice. As for his "high mannerisms" , he was really a skinflint who would/could barely pay his bills. He was posted here in Bangalore and he finally decamped without clearing his dues he owed to the local clubs and cooks and laundries. Old Bangaloreaons remember all that very well and smirk at his pretence of "class". A vicious , murderous cheapskate if there ever was one. I could never understand why "official" America always sucked up to him (US has/had a ship USS Winston Churchill), maybe that is an American failing and can't to see beyond pretence, like the current incumbent boasting how "rich" he is while the truly rich snicker at such claims. The Brits had far better sense. Threw him out at the first opportunity right after WW-II.
Johnson's book, "The Churchill Factor", of which I have a signed copy, is a must read for anyone hoping to understand Boris Johnson. Of all the multitude of books devoted to the great man, Johnson's might be the most unambiguously uncritical. It is basically a 370 page love letter written by a wannabe. I do not expect to see it mentioned in the bibliographies of any future books on the subject. Johnson has an enormous sense of his own importance , in that view he is completely alone. I fully expect that the British parliamentary system of government will, in due course, deal with Boris in the same way it dealt with his predecessor. Maybe the Liberal Democrats will form the next government..one can only hope for Britain's sake.
251
@macbeth I bought and read The Churchill Factor when it came out, and enjoyed it. Johnson's an easy read, a kind of Jeffrey Archer (another upper-class Brit with an arms-length approach to truthfulness) of non-fiction.
At the time, Johnson was Mayor of London and wasn't covered widely in the States, so I knew little about his character, or extreme lack thereof. Family in London set me straight. I hate throwing out books, but once I got a feel for who he really was, I tossed the book into a trash bin in the street.
When someone lies loudly and repeatedly over a long period, he loses all his credibility. Whether it comes in written or oral form, I see no reason any more to take seriously a single word he utters.
30
Dear Macbeth
Rarer still are unsigned copies. It didn't sell well.
3
@Dan McSweeney An admirable attitude and action, mr. McSweeney.
Unfortunately, nowadays Lincoln's aphorism
"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time," seems to be no longer valid as proven by mr. Trump and mr. Johnson.
2
The Donald is concerned about two things: himself and the 2020 election. Everything he does is calculated to pander to and activate his base. Tariffs, race, immigration, taxes, Iran, Israel, foreign policy, etc., they are all just props to be used as needed to play to his base.
He doesn't know anything about policy and does not give a hoot about policy. I doubt that the man has any principles or ideas about how government should be conducted. He seems to have no personal beliefs other than to pursue his own personal advancement and pleasure. One of the slogans that he loves to use is "America first." Of course it should really be "The Donald first."
Now that Boris Johnson has become Her Majesty's first Minister, his job is to put the United Kingdom first. That will put him at odds with The Donald. Boris might have visions of taking advantage of the special relationship and he might get a few crumbs. But sooner or later he is going to have to make a choice. That is he will be required to either disagree with The Donald or sell The United Kingdom down the river. If he has a serious disagreement with The Donald, that will be the end of the special relationship.
I'll be watching to see what choice he makes.
165
@Aubrey - I think selling the UK down the river is the very thing he came to do.
4
@Aubrey As Pompeo just showed, that special relationship is more master and poodle than two equals. Then again, Bliar was a very good poodle for Dubya.
2
@Aubrey Whatever choice keeps him on the telly and in front of the cameras is the one most like BoJo to make.
3
If you do the studying, and I have, on Churchill, FDR, Stalin, & Chiang Kai-shek, you learn that each was the right man for the time in which fate put them in a position of power. Churchill is recalled the most inaccurately of the four, the hagiography is thick. Stalin conversely was the greatest of the four, accomplishing the most under the most duress and yet gets the worst rap. They'd be speaking German in Paris today if not for him, which ironically they do at the banks anyway. FDR was the Bernie Sanders of his time, putting the spotlight where it belongs in America - on the working people against the powers of the rich. Kai-shek flew under the radar, not even invited to the major strategy talks held by Britain, the US & USSR re the postwar future. Again more irony, China now has more to say than any of the latter. Bottom line history is surprising for the facts you learn that Americans generally miss, in their rush to embrace comfortably simple stories about heroes and enemies.
53
@CK, "bottom line history" wants to add that China was involved with a ten plus year civil war between the Nationalists [Chiang, Flying Tigers] and and the Communists [Mao, the "Long March"], as they both, fought off the Japanese during WWII. Eventually, Chiang got kicked off the mainland to Taiwan and it's been trouble ever since. (Taiwan has been off and on the map with the US Administration ...)
When World War I and II, came, Britain put Churchill in power and just as quickly dismiss him when they were over. His speeches? I believe he was inspired and encouraged by the vast legions of English writers before him, that for most Americans have not read, but his speeches are the best I ever read.
Remember "Winds of Change" moniker that seem to speak from weather reporters everywhere back in the nineties? I believe it came from a British politician's book title in the 1830's, that came from a mariner's working vocabulary. But then, I have 'no worries', that excerpts from trump's speeches will be chiseled in stone anytime soon.
6
@CK Re Stalin: Yes, murdering millions would tend to get one a bad rap, no doubt.
8
@CK It was the Maoists in China that kept the fight going in China.
2
After Brexit, Great Britain will become like Greece. A great place to go, to view historical things and sleep and eat cheaply. The UK, under Boris, is about to become like Hellas is, only colder and a lot wetter.
260
@Joe Miksis I love London and the British Isles and have enjoyed visiting England and Scotland several times. But you are correct. I like the history and art part of the British Isles and it is like visiting a museum -- like visiting a gigantic Disney land.
The Queen lives in Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle which must be like living in museums. The same is true of the aristocracy which live in the stately homes.
It is sad to see them turn to Brexit but sometimes I think countries have a overwhelming urge to commit suicide. Parts of the United States seem to have the same urge.
Best wishes.
240
@Aubrey What do you refer to when you refer to the British Isles? Certainly not the island of Ireland? The vast majority of the island of Ireland has not belonged to Britain for 100 years... and even then, it was unwillingly.
22
@expat Thanks for your comment.
Wikipedia says that the British Isles consists of Great Britain, Ireland, the Isle of Man, the Hebrides and six thousand smaller islands. Some people say that Jersey, Guernsey, and Sark are also part of the British Isles. All of this includes two sovereign states: the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom.
I actually had not thought about the topic but that is what Wikipedia says.
I like all of the British Isles and wish them all the very best.
Best wishes.
35
While few living Americans may recall the glory days of Winston Churchill, and must contend with history books and the memory of his ghost -- the presence of Boris Johnson looms large inasmuch as he not only bears an uncanny resemblance to the current president in both his physical demeanor and the way he demands center stage, but has an equally oversized ego of who he is and what he can do.
Needless to say he's in for a real trial by fire with his plans to force Brexit onward either with or without a deal --especially if he thinks the U.S. can be relied on to pick up the slack left after Britain exits the E.U.
And considering the fact that Pax Britannica and Pax Americana have seen better days, the only comfort this country might offer is that we'll both slip off the world stage of importance together.
63
@N. Smith
Misery loves company.
an Burma says that post-Brexit Britain will become a "middling country." Well, I think that happened during the first two decades of the post-WWII era. The mighty British Empire vanished, replaced by the British Commonwealth. During the Suez Crisis in 1956, Dwight Eisenhower was furious over the duplicity of the British and French. He was very afraid that their neo-imperial action to keep the Suez under their control would only through the Arab world into the hands of the Soviet Union, our mortal enemy (no kidding). So the British and French withdrew, and so ended Britain's standing as a world power. If it was chancy at the time of Dunkirk, with Churchill pleading for destroyers, planes and supplies from Roosevelt, it was sealed with the humiliation of Suez in 1956.
When I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s, Britain was indeed a middling power and so were all the countries of Europe who were mighty empires before the First World War. The only exception was Russia.
The second question is Boris Johnson's vision of a high tech Great Britain akin to the Chinese city-states. Singapore's GDP according to PPP standards is now about 100K per year, double that of Great Britain and 2.5 times that of the average EU member. Perhaps Britain can do it with their world class universities, on par with the best American universities. Of course, they have to wide open to immigration and emerging venture capitalists have to believe in post-Brexit Britain. We shall see.
28
@Yankelnevich
1/3 of students in the top U.K. universities are non-Brits and the London School of Economics has 2/3 non-Brits. The LSE application is in either English or Chinese. The world class universities are educating the world and not focusing on their own students.
5
Winston Churchill admittedly had faults and made errors during his long lifetime, as some of the commenters have noted. However, he was the penultimate leader for Britain's Darkest Hour, and neither Johnson or Trump, have the ability or the right to hold a light to his candle.
148
@RWP You may want to consult a dictionary regarding the definition of "penultimate."
1
@RWP Penultimate means "next to last." What did you wish to say?
1
@RWP. If Churchill was the penultimate leader of Britain in its Darkest Hour, who was the ultimate leader, King George VI? This is not meant as snark. I truly wondered as your comment got me thinking.
This how the United Kingdom ends: not in a bang, but a whimper. If Boris Johnson gets his way, in 15 years Britain ( for there will be no United Kingdom left ) may be splendid in her isolation, but it will be quite a negligible player internationally. Churchill, who basted himself in the internationalism of the Empire's glories, would be horrified.
76
@Gerard Can you name (without looking) all the other member states? What kind of power houses are they, since you think being in the EU grants that status to its absorbed members?
@Gerard A vassal state of a former colony.oh the irony.
Yes, and if the Scots vote themselves out of the UK, which they very well might, Britain becomes an even smaller country there on its island.
359
@Anne-Marie Hislop
When pared down to just England & Wales, the mini-UK will be much more agile. With the iron and coal Trump will be producing and the gas Johnson will be making, we will have the trappings of a successful 19th century ultranationalist alliance!
50
Scots will be more than welcome in the EU. They will feel appreciated again. And they will receive political stability and peace. That is priceless and for free.
22
@Anne-Marie Hislop
Yes, and why is that of such deep concern to the Left?
I can only speculate that globalists see these isolated events as dots that will connect or influence each other.
Perhaps the worlds’ citizens, and notably its least, are not comfortable with the speed at which change is being forced upon them.
Should that matter?
2
Excellent essay, but there was a math error. It is stated that 52% of Britons voted for Brexit. That was the percentage of those voting who did so. There was a 72% turnout, so slightly fewer than 38% of eligible voters did so. And several analysts have noted that Brexit opponents stayed home in greater numbers than supporters. Not voting can have consequences.
507
@Marvant Duhon
It's not a math error, it's a statistical and political error. Pointing it out is correct -- and politically correct (that is praise).
15
@Marvant Duhon
"..slightly fewer than 38% of eligible voters" voted to leave.
Is anyone supposed to feel enlightened by this?
Slightly fewer than 36% voted to remain.
14
@Marvant Duhon
Yes, I have several would-be remainer friends who unfortunately didn't vote. They thought there wasn't the slightest chance that leave would win.
2
Winston Churchill did what he thought best for his country.
Boris Johnson does what he thinks best for himself. He is still hellbent on withdrawing from the EU in three months, even without any tenable path forward for Brexit, because he would rather bring down Britain - for that matter, Europe too - than admit to his own mistakes.
324
@NM
Gosh . . . sounds like somebody else I know.
2
@NM
Churchill- same
1
@NM
Just like Trump.
3
It was interesting to read a piece about possible intentions of Boris Johnson right after reading one about the dangers mosquitoes pose to humans.
66
Certainly Johnson is no Churchill. But let us remember that before the 1930's Churchill was not very impressive or likely to make good in politics. He had already made many damaging mistakes, military and political. He came from a family which was not as successful as you might have thought, given its descent from John Churchill who betrayed James II in 1688 and went on to become the Duke of Marlborough.
16
Is your point that Boris shares traits with Churchill and will emerge as the saviour of the UK?
3
Churchill is no Churchill.
1
@n1789 or maybe your point is that Johnson, like DJT, will somehow rise to the occasion? Wouldn’t hold my breath.
The physicist Carlo Rovelli has written: 'I believe our species will not last long. . . The brutal climate and environmental changes that we have triggered are not likely to spare us. . . public and political opinion prefer to ignore the dangers we are running, hiding our heads in the sand'. This was written in 2014, before the era of Trump and Johnson who are doing their bit to accelerate the process.
619
@David
A physicist would say such a thing.
And I would respond, in a world that is without the providence of God, a world of physics, biology, and chemistry, why should any one care.
No, I believe that we arc toward life, intermediated by our consciousness and free will. We may despise the free will of others, and we are left in that struggle, many insisting that “their will” be done. Or the will of their particular tribe and with force if necessary.
What you may hold as dearest, deterministic materialism, is simple and unable to save us. We will make a mess of things before things turn aright. Because human free will absorbs its past, both its wisdom and its errors.
In a place where we are all worm food, by your attestation, I am okay with that and choose to ignore your frettings.
Try to have a higher opinion of others, even their flaws. Contempt of humankind is a worst thing.
3
@David In the end our so-called intelligence will prove to be our undoing. Turns out we are only smart enough to delude ourselves into thinking our problems don't really exist, to convince ourselves that impossible to ignore facts are really lies, and that the inevitable is nothing but a possibility, and a remote one at that.
9
Add the criminal government of Mr. Bolsonaro in Brazil and the wanton environmental destruction it has unleashed (see the NYT article published today), with deadly consequences for the entire planet in the name of the same shortsighted, selfish, tribal “nationalism” that Trump and Johnson love so much.
At a critical juncture for the planet and for human civilization, the ignorant morons of the world have taken over and have voted for the worst possible leaders they could find. Right now I really hope we go extinct, and quickly. We don’t deserve this planet.
15