Boris Johnson's success

In the last few weeks, Boris Johnson has passed from the man of Teflon to a figure of popular derision. It is possible that his tenure as leader of the Conservative Party and hence Prime Minister will not last long into the New Year. However, this decline in his fortunes should not detract from his real political achievements and his skills as a politician. Theresa May, Gordon Brown and potentially Keir Starmer may be more honest, more hard-working and more capable of managing the complexities of administration, but Johnson has superior skills in understanding the public mood, developing a narrative that voters understand, and summarising it in short pithy phrases. Slogans like ‘Get Brexit done’ or ‘Levelling up’ communicate intentions that, however vague, mean something positive to those who hear them. The Labour Party has no equivalents.

Johnson’s political achievement is to develop a new style of politics in England. This is inadequately described as ‘populism’, but comprises three elements: social liberalism; an expansion of public expenditure (particularly for areas which vote Conservative); and strident nationalism, mobilised against an outward enemy (in this case the European Union). This combination transformed the fortunes of the Conservative Party, from a failure under Theresa May to gain a Parliamentary majority (even against such a weak opponent as Jeremy Corbyn), to an 80-seat majority under Johnson two years later.

This new style of politics most resembles that of the Scottish National Party, which continues to dominate Scottish politics despite a dismal record of over-centralisation, declining educational standards, a catastrophic drugs problem, and persisting and severe inequality in Scottish society. Social liberalism reassures middle-class voters that they have a progressive government in power, public expenditure generates a sense of progress and improvement, while nationalism excuses all failures, which are then blamed on the great external enemy. For the SNP, there is the usual tripartite drama of nationalism, with Scotland as the victim, England (politely termed the ‘Westminster Government’) as the foe, and the European Union as the saviour. England under Johnson has a victim and a foe, but does not identify any potential saviour because English history draws on an historical narrative of England standing alone.

Will this form of politics persist in England after Johnson departs? One problem is discomfort among many Conservatives about the expansion of public expenditure. The austerity of the Cameron years was more amenable to those with comfortable incomes who believe they pay too much in taxes. Another problem is discontent in the traditional Conservative areas that their interests are now neglected. The trade agreements negotiated after departure from the EU will devastate farming incomes, while rampant housebuilding has generated opposition in rural areas, particularly those within commuting range of London and other major cities. The other factor that may doom the Johnson style of politics is the absence of Johnson. No other politician in the Conservative Party has his innovative political skill combined with the necessary flexibility that comes from his shameless lack of beliefs and principles.