| Boris, an historical perspective. 13:19 - Jan 14 with 2011 views | MattinLondon |
For the historians amongst us - has there ever been a PM or ruler of England/Britain who displayed Boris like levels of arrogance, incompetence, buffoonery etc? If so, what happened to them? Ta. |  | | |  |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:25 - Jan 14 with 1203 views | Cotty |
Charles I maybe? But I'm no historian. Head lopped off. |  | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:39 - Jan 14 with 1173 views | GlasgowBlue |
I think history will judge that Boris Johnson and his government were underestimated.
People unfairly said that they couldn't organise a piss up. |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:43 - Jan 14 with 1147 views | footers |
Think the worst modern PM outside of BJ would've been Eden for Suez. So it's quite some feat. |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:45 - Jan 14 with 1141 views | Darth_Koont |
No. But this was obvious to anyone at any point over the last couple of decades before Boris was ushered into Number 10.
I think the arrogance, incompetence and buffoonery needs to be shared out quite a bit wider. |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:48 - Jan 14 with 1119 views | fab_lover |
The "long view" is always an interesting one.
So, the punitive reparations applied to German as part of the Treaty of Versailles are generally seen as being responsible for the rise of fascism in that country. Hitler was therefore the symptom, and not the disease, and Germany could have just as likely gone communist in the 30s instead of fascist.
In the same way, I think it would be argued in 100 years time that Brexit was responsible for the appointment of Johnson as PM. The "blame" for Johnson would therefore go on Cameron's shoulders, for implementing an ill-thought out referendum with no planning beforehand of how a Brexit would be implemented if that's what was voted for.
It's also worth bearing in mind that historically, a certain respect for the position meant that the press did not make certain things public. Most Americans for example were unaware of FDR's disability. The French press never leaked the second family of Mitterand. Gladstone had some very ill-advised encounters with sex workers etc etc |  | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:08 - Jan 14 with 1074 views | Guthrum |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:25 - Jan 14 by Cotty |
Charles I maybe? But I'm no historian. Head lopped off. |
That was the first one which sprang to mind. Not a buffoon, certainly, but duplicitous and lacked good judgment. Stubborn in all the wrong places. The fact he simply couldn't be trusted to stick to any agreement and not try to start another war was why Cromwell - reluctantly - had him executed.
Mary Queen of Scots just made disastrous choices. She was dealing with a tangled and hostile situation, but pretty much every step landed her on the wrong side.
In several cases arrogance married to a weak position and lack of deftness led to their downfall. Richard II and Edward II being notable examples. In the latter case, the regent Mortimer who took over also overstepped and fell.
We've been relatively free of hapless Prime Ministers, probably because they have had to fight their way to the top, then get taken down if they mess up. The introduction of fixed-term parliaments has done a lot to preserve Johnson's position (tho he's actually only managed two-and-a-half years so far). |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:09 - Jan 14 with 1064 views | Illinoisblue |
Has there ever been any serious in-depth interviews with Johnson over the years? Surely some broadsheet hack must have tried to chip away to see if there’s anything of note behind the bluster and buffoonery. Prominent journalist, mayor of London, now PM… must be some profile pieces out there, right? |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:13 - Jan 14 with 1043 views | MattinLondon |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:09 - Jan 14 by Illinoisblue |
Has there ever been any serious in-depth interviews with Johnson over the years? Surely some broadsheet hack must have tried to chip away to see if there’s anything of note behind the bluster and buffoonery. Prominent journalist, mayor of London, now PM… must be some profile pieces out there, right? |
Years ago he presented a documentary about the Roman Empire and in one episode he was comparing it to the EU. For what I remember he was quite pro-EU and did any of that flag-waving rubbish he does now. I think he came across as well, maybe because he wasn’t trying to impress anyone. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:13 - Jan 14 with 1036 views | Guthrum |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:43 - Jan 14 by footers |
Think the worst modern PM outside of BJ would've been Eden for Suez. So it's quite some feat. |
For that matter, Eden was more unfortunate than stupid. Simply underestimated to what extent the Americans would pull the rug from under him. | |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:13 - Jan 14 with 1033 views | wkj |
All I know is that Johnson makes George Bush Jr look like a savant. |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:16 - Jan 14 with 1020 views | BlueNomad |
I think that in the decades where deference to our "betters" has reduced, leading to more public scrutiny and media coverage, then I would say that without doubt he (and the miserable crew he has around him) is the most arrogant and incompetent. In so far as buffoonery is concerned he is a clear leader, unless of course deference protected his predecessors from that charge. We have had "characters" but I don't remember reading of anyone worse.
It was always going to happen. His history is well known but the Tories elected him leader because he was their "useful idiot" who could secure Brexit on the basis that people liked him because "he's a laugh."
Sad times. |  | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:17 - Jan 14 with 1015 views | Sarge |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:48 - Jan 14 by fab_lover |
The "long view" is always an interesting one.
So, the punitive reparations applied to German as part of the Treaty of Versailles are generally seen as being responsible for the rise of fascism in that country. Hitler was therefore the symptom, and not the disease, and Germany could have just as likely gone communist in the 30s instead of fascist.
In the same way, I think it would be argued in 100 years time that Brexit was responsible for the appointment of Johnson as PM. The "blame" for Johnson would therefore go on Cameron's shoulders, for implementing an ill-thought out referendum with no planning beforehand of how a Brexit would be implemented if that's what was voted for.
It's also worth bearing in mind that historically, a certain respect for the position meant that the press did not make certain things public. Most Americans for example were unaware of FDR's disability. The French press never leaked the second family of Mitterand. Gladstone had some very ill-advised encounters with sex workers etc etc |
Johnson is also responsible for Brexit though. He may not have kicked it off but he was the idiot poster boy that convinced the masses (well, half of them) to ignore the clear and obvious consequences of Brexit in favour of half-arsed, half-baked fantasy. |  | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:18 - Jan 14 with 1010 views | bluelagos |
The last year of Thatcher her levels of arrogance did for her. The poll tax was universally hated. So much so that things culminated in the poll tax riots.
She started off by introducing it in Scotland a year earlier to "test it" and it was hated up there. Her response was to introduce it in England in pretty much exactly the same format.
It was clear to all and sundry it was unpopular but she thought she was immune to worrying about public opinion.
She wasn't one for u-turns (famously) and stood her ground it resulting her being dumped by her own party despite having delivered a huge majority for the third time.
Arrogance and an inability to listen to those around her did for her. |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:18 - Jan 14 with 1011 views | NBVJohn |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 13:48 - Jan 14 by fab_lover |
The "long view" is always an interesting one.
So, the punitive reparations applied to German as part of the Treaty of Versailles are generally seen as being responsible for the rise of fascism in that country. Hitler was therefore the symptom, and not the disease, and Germany could have just as likely gone communist in the 30s instead of fascist.
In the same way, I think it would be argued in 100 years time that Brexit was responsible for the appointment of Johnson as PM. The "blame" for Johnson would therefore go on Cameron's shoulders, for implementing an ill-thought out referendum with no planning beforehand of how a Brexit would be implemented if that's what was voted for.
It's also worth bearing in mind that historically, a certain respect for the position meant that the press did not make certain things public. Most Americans for example were unaware of FDR's disability. The French press never leaked the second family of Mitterand. Gladstone had some very ill-advised encounters with sex workers etc etc |
Yes!
Cameron’s absolute sh!t show shouldn’t be forgotten.
His utter incompetence ushered in this whole fiasco and then he retreated to his £20k garden shed.
Like Johnson he was obsessed with being seen as a Statesman when in reality nothing could be further from the truth. Vacuous and deluded. | | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:24 - Jan 14 with 993 views | BlueNomad |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:18 - Jan 14 by NBVJohn |
Yes!
Cameron’s absolute sh!t show shouldn’t be forgotten.
His utter incompetence ushered in this whole fiasco and then he retreated to his £20k garden shed.
Like Johnson he was obsessed with being seen as a Statesman when in reality nothing could be further from the truth. Vacuous and deluded. |
The common denominator being that elite, prohibitively expensive, education at Eton followed by three years of obnoxiousness at Oxford. | | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:25 - Jan 14 with 993 views | Guthrum |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:13 - Jan 14 by MattinLondon |
Years ago he presented a documentary about the Roman Empire and in one episode he was comparing it to the EU. For what I remember he was quite pro-EU and did any of that flag-waving rubbish he does now. I think he came across as well, maybe because he wasn’t trying to impress anyone. |
He did Who Do You Think You Are, several years ago. Think I recall him coming across reasonably well. | |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:31 - Jan 14 with 961 views | Guthrum |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:17 - Jan 14 by Sarge |
Johnson is also responsible for Brexit though. He may not have kicked it off but he was the idiot poster boy that convinced the masses (well, half of them) to ignore the clear and obvious consequences of Brexit in favour of half-arsed, half-baked fantasy. |
In addition, he took Theresa May's already half-baked plan and turned it into a complete dog's dinner, only just avoiding an outright disaster of his own making (No Deal). | |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 15:23 - Jan 14 with 892 views | factual_blue |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:13 - Jan 14 by Guthrum |
For that matter, Eden was more unfortunate than stupid. Simply underestimated to what extent the Americans would pull the rug from under him. |
He was drugged up to the eyeballs because of his post-operative problems.
There's also an argument that the US President at the time of Suez (Eisenhower) was determined to get back at the British for what he saw as Montgomery's ineptitude and self-serving behaviour during the D-Day campaign. |  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 15:39 - Jan 14 with 846 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Churchill?
150,000 dead covid sufferers pales into insignificance compared to the dardenelles, his tinkering in the middle east - and the Bengal famine.... not to mention the prolongation of WW2 in the name of empire - and speaking up consistently against the vexed question of allowing women to vote.
BJ has to go some to match his hero's arrogance and incompetence | |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 15:42 - Jan 14 with 839 views | Churchman |
King John was toilet, Edward 6th, hopeless, James 2nd rubbish, Charles 1st deluded, clueless and headless, Mary 1 - too much liking for bonfires with people on them.
The prize goes to Edward 2nd. He followed Edward 1st (the Hammer of the Scots) who had ended the near union of England and Scotland, which was highly likely before he came to the throne. But at least Eddy 1 had some success including smashing in particular Wales.
Now Edward 2nd was weak and clueless in every way. Trampled all over by the Scots (Bannockburn), created a civil war in England he finished up deposed, imprisoned and dying at Berkeley Castle. Nobody cared.
Prime Ministers? Ramsey MacDonald was terrible. Cameron the father of our current woes, but for me Johnson is the worst going all the way back to Walpole and co.
Best leaders? Alfred the Great, Athelstan, Eddy 3 and Eddy 4, Elizabeth 1. I can’t include Henry 8th - just too much of a tyrant and squandered all the country’s money |  | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 15:55 - Jan 14 with 798 views | XYZ |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:31 - Jan 14 by Guthrum |
In addition, he took Theresa May's already half-baked plan and turned it into a complete dog's dinner, only just avoiding an outright disaster of his own making (No Deal). |
He did the deal that May said no british PM could do - put a border in the Irish Sea | | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 16:04 - Jan 14 with 777 views | BlueBadger |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:24 - Jan 14 by BlueNomad |
The common denominator being that elite, prohibitively expensive, education at Eton followed by three years of obnoxiousness at Oxford. |
|  |
| |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 16:09 - Jan 14 with 770 views | RadioOrwell |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 14:25 - Jan 14 by Guthrum |
He did Who Do You Think You Are, several years ago. Think I recall him coming across reasonably well. |
Psychopaths are usually capable of being quite charming when they choose.
There's a great Netflix on Ted Bundy.
Of course he didn't kill as many people as Johnson. |  | | |
| Boris, an historical perspective. on 16:37 - Jan 14 with 742 views | noggin |
Yeah but... |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
