Porter’s Pensées

Even serious works – like this blog – need a scherzo. Here’s mine for now; some superficial holiday observations.

After a pleasant month in Less-than-Great Britain, Kajsa and I are now on our way back to Sweden: her lifelong home and my alternative one. She is privileged, I feel, to have experienced some interesting moments in British history, including a history-changing (we hope) national election, and a typically honourable defeat in the football. Our Swedish friends will be hanging on her every report.

For me the journey back has been equally enlightening, although in ways that have only confirmed most of my prejudices. We’re taking the long route back – we didn’t want to expose our beloved dog to a flight in a cage in the hold – by overnight ferry between Hull and Rotterdam; and then Kajsa driving all the way up to (and down from) Stockholm. (I’m no longer allowed to drive. Poor eyesight.) It took us four days each way, and four overnight stays (if you include the ferries), but took us to some marvellous places: Rotterdam, Utrecht, Bremen, Lübeck, Rostock, and a town in southern Sweden I’ve forgotten the name of. (It’s famous for its peppermint rock.) I know Germany pretty well – Köln was my first trip abroad, in a school party – but mostly the south. Northern Germany therefore, and the Netherlands, were new to me

What impressed me were the cleanliness and tidiness of all the places we passed through; the wonderful brick cathedrals with slender copper double spires; the way the motorways were sheltered from the communities behind them with beautiful tall fences covered with greenery; the multiplicity of ‘health and fitness’ shops in the towns; and – despite this – the number of ‘beer bellies’ walking about. On the boats I was also impressed by the efficiency and helpfulness of the Asian staff, even though they were all ‘blacklegs ’ taken on after P&O’s mass sacking of the British crews a year or two ago. Should I not have travelled with them?

It has been a welcome break from the intensity, excitement and depression of British, American and French politics over the last few years; and a sign – even the beer bellies – of what might have been, but for that disastrous referendum vote in 2016. But of course it’s not all – or even mainly – due to Brexit.

And of course I only experienced a beautifully manicured Germany. AfD reminds us that the old devils stalking her have not all been exorcised.

Apparently the suspect in the latest assassination attempt against Trump – young Thomas Crooks, killed on the spot, of course, as American suspects tend to be – was a registered Republican, and a poor shot. (That’s what we’re told so far.) So surely one of the tinfoil hat brigade will be coming along soon with a ‘grassy knoll’ theory to ‘prove’ that he was a ‘patsy’, and that the whole event was a put-up job by Trump supporters to engender enough sympathy for him to return him to the White House?

And if ‘images’ are important in American politics, this one, mirroring an iconic one from the Korean war, should be pretty effective:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/07/14/bloodied-face-fist-raised-image-win-trump-presidency/

So: has Trump got it won already? And, to take a broader historical perspective: isn’t this, political violence, a more convincing political narrative, more dominant in US history, than the ‘democratic’ one that most Americans prefer?

I watched the 1966 World Cup Final on TV yesterday afternoon – the first time I’d seen it in colour. (Colourised?) I was impressed by (a) the lack of play-acting after fouls – victims got up quickly and even shook hands with their assailants; (b) no black players; (c) the divine Bobby Moore, Mr West Ham; and (d) the Duke of Kent (I think it was) smoking a cigarette in the stands. The Sixties really were a better time. (Not of course if you were a woman. Or gay. Or black. Or allergic to cigarette smoke.) – But now I’m sounding like a boring old fart.

I actually went to one of the group matches then, courtesy of a Canadian friend who got tickets from his High Commission. I think it was the infamous Argentine game. That was a nastier affair.

I’ll be watching this evening, fuelled by an afternoon carvery dinner at my favourite Hull pub (named after Philip Larkin). It will be nice if the game is as gentlemanly as that Final in 1966. If it is, I won’t be too worried about the result. But then I’m a boring old moralist, too.

Sorry yet again for the long silence. A (minor) eye operation and various social commitments have intervened. Plus loss of energy. Isn’t old age a bugger? ‘Never get old’, as I tell my younger friends; until I realise what the alternative is.

Obviously lots has happened since I last posted, most of it good: the Labour electoral ‘landslide’ (eh? with 30-odd per cent of the vote?); England reaching the men’s Euro soccer final; and our boys trouncing the West Indies in cricket – albeit embarrassingly easily. I miss the days when the Windies were really a team to be reckoned with. And when the Tory party was a decent and honourable opposition.

This is clearly a transformative time in British history, equivalent to Thatcher’s win in 1979; and, more alarmingly, in the world’s, albeit in a different direction there, with something akin to neo-Fascism on the political rise all over. You can see why: economic uncertainty, charismatic populists, and – possibly – a basic and rather unpleasant instinct in most of us. Keir Starmer has a tough task ahead of him. First he has to renew people’s trust in politicians and politics, after the last fourteen years of  corruption and farce on the Tory side, and the ‘they’re all the same’ cynicism they seem to have engendered. He seems to be doing well on that – but it has only been a week. Then we’ll see where he goes on the other crucial issues: cost of living, the NHS, social care, inequality, our awful press, prisons, defence, Europe, Trump, immigration, Ukraine, Gaza, the climate…  None of this is likely to affect the current Rightward turn in global politics; but it may soften the latter’s blows for us unreconstructed social democrats, and act as a flickering beacon of hope for others.

In the meantime there’s Sunday’s European final for us to look forward to, albeit nervously. I see that the latest slogan on the yobbos’ t-shirts is ‘Two World Wars and one Referendum’. Basic instinct?

Global wars in the past – i.e. those that have spilled over the confines of single continents – have generally been fought about territory, trade, religion, sovereignty, security, ideology, race, and/or the personal ambitions of those most responsible for provoking them.

The next World War may be different. It will embrace several of these motives and traits, but with another great ‘divide’ dominating them. That’s the one between ‘the West’, and the ‘Other’; Europe and the USA on the one side, representing so-called ‘democracy’, liberalism in its many guises, and ‘enlightenment’; and on the other side countries – or governments – rejecting these ideals, maybe regarding them as false or hypocritical, and falling back on ‘tradition’ – and traditional kinds of dictatorship – to set against the seductive blandishments of the West.

All the countries presently opposed to the West share these latter characteristics. Some are religious autocracies (Iran); others deeply reactionary and secular (Russia); and yet others simply anti-Western, because of the harm they feel the West has done to them, especially during the era of European and American imperialism; and still is doing in the eyes of some. Many of these claims are justified: exploitation, annexation, other forms of theft, racial and cultural arrogance, and the consequent diminishing of those ‘inferior’ societies and their values in the eyes of the ‘superior’ West. Many in the ‘Other’ parts of the world are still smarting from this.

This is what brings together all those presently pitted against the West: Iran, Russia, China, North Korea, militant Islam, and others; in mutual sympathy, if not  (yet) in the form of military alliances. It also works to undermine the resilience of the West as a counter to it, attracting as it does extreme Rightists in Britain, for example, who have always questioned elements in their own liberal societies (the ‘woke’ ones), and hankered after more ‘disciplined’ régimes. That’s what brings Putin, Kim Jong Un and Farage together; and also probably the reactionary and autocratic Trump, if he gets in again.

I’m tempted to call this ‘nostalgicism’, because of its ‘reactionary’ character. For people and nations unnerved and confused by ‘modernity’ (as it shouldn’t be called), with their traditional cultures and even identities under threat from so-called American ‘imperialism’, and wanting to feel ‘Great’ again, but on their own terms; for all these the faux-familiar past provides a comfort zone, a sort of stability, and an alternative basis for national regeneration. It may be a more powerful influence than we think. If there is a Third World War, on any level, nostalgia could well provide the common bond between some mighty – and otherwise highly disparate – enemies.

Whatever became of noblesse oblige? In feudal times it was supposed both to justify the upper classes, and to soften their impact on society more generally. The idea was that if you were very rich and privileged, you had a duty to serve (oblige) those less fortunate than yourselves. Then the latter wouldn’t be minded to riot or rebel. It was an ethic encouraged in the old ‘public’ schools, and was a factor behind the creation of the welfare state, and the Haileybury-educated Clement Attlee’s conversion to socialism. It was also a reason why even a dyed-in-the wool socialist like me could get on pretty well with many of the aristos I met at university, whilst recognising that their friendly attitudes to my more plebeian sort could be patronising, and even condescending. They were often amusingly self-deprecating. ‘I’m not allowed to vote. That puts me in the company of criminals, lunatics and lords. I’m not sure which category I’m in: ha ha!’ It was disarming.

Conservative cabinets generally had a sprinkling of these types in them, exemplified in Thatcher’s time by her faithful country-squire retainer William Whitelaw (‘every prime minister needs a Willy’, as she is reported to have said once, quite innocently); until they were thinned out, firstly under her, in the course of her weeding the ‘wets’ out of her party; and then under the more summary purge of ‘Remainers’ undertaken by Johnson in 2019. That left only the pur free marketists, many of them educated in ‘public’ schools which by now had lost most of their old social-paternalist ethic, and had become mere staging posts for rich boys (and a few girls), on their way to ‘raising’ themselves materially in their personal lives. Sunak is one of those; rich beyond almost anyone’s dreams, educated at Winchester (even older than Eton), who last year demonstrated the ethic he must have imbibed there by his desire to close down university courses which did not enhance their students’ earning power. That was his only criterion.

So it is hardly surprising that so many modern-day Conservatives seem to regard the profession of politics not primarily as a means of ‘service’ (oblige) to their country, but as a ‘career’ opportunity merely; a means of ‘bettering’ – by which they usually mean ‘enriching’ – themselves. Which must help explain the arrant corruption that has been eating away at the party’s vitals over the past several years; including of course the ‘betting scandal’ which is the most recent manifestation of this. If that’s the reason they went into Conservative politics, what can be wrong with using their ‘insider’ knowledge to have a flutter on the side?

OK, I’m back in Blighty, after six months. And what a contrast to the European countries we’ve driven through! Dirty streets, shuttered up shops, few public amenities working, a corrupt government, and a vile public political discourse; quite a shock, after what we’ve seen and experienced in Sweden, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. Or is that just Hull, our final destination; and – with regard to the discourse – the British gutter press?

It’s depressing to be here; but also fascinating, on the eve of a General Election that has the potential – I’ll put it no higher than that – to change most of this. I’m disenfranchised here, by the way, by virtue of my having secured a postal vote, sent to our Swedish address, when I, and most of my compatriots I gather, assumed that the election wouldn’t come before the autumn. If Labour loses North Hull by one vote I’ll be mortified. But even as a non-participant it will be exciting to witness it, in a sporting kind of way: which is how all our British elections are treated by the press (‘Who loses and who wins; who’s in, who’s out’: King Lear); and to witness what is predicted to be the total annihilation of this criminal Tory government. Or does that sound too much like Schadenfreude?

This morning the media debate is centred on Nigel Farage’s claim in a TV interview that Russia’s Ukraine invasion was ‘provoked’ by the expansionary policies of the EU and NATO; which was the sort of excuse (or one of them) trotted out by Hitler before World War Two. It has been roundly condemned in the media. But as it happens, and however much I revile the awful Farage generally, I think there’s some truth in it. I’ve not checked back, but I believe I’ve raised in previous blogs and books over the past ten years my fears that EU and NATO enlargement (‘imperialism’?) could be seen by Russia as threats, with possible dire consequences. Of course that’s no excuse for Putin, as it wasn’t for Hitler; but in the case of nations playing these old-fashioned ‘superpower’ games, it’s a factor to be taken into account.

And it can be seen as another way – Farage’s line of reasoning, that is – in which Moscow could influence British politics; in addition to all the Russian money that has poured into the Tory Party’s coffers, and the cyber attacks that have their origin there, or there-abouts. (Has that inquiry into ‘Russian influence’ on Brexit ever been published, or even completed?) Brexit was obviously to Russia’s advantage; which takes care of the ‘cui bono’ argument there.

Incidentally, and as I’ve mentioned before: in the recent EU elections (where I did vote) Sweden and the other Nordic countries went against the general Rightist trend in the rest of Europe, with the Reds and Greens gaining votes, and the populist and proto-Fascist Sverigedemokraterna falling back. I’ve never been more certain than I am now that I was right to acquire my (dual) Swedish citizenship. I can hardly wait to get back to normality and decency; hopefully in about a month.

I’ve had a host of messages – well, three – regretting my decision to give up blogging, and pleading with me to come back. So here I am again; presently preparing for our journey back to Blighty – by car to Rotterdam and then overnight ferry to Hull – where we should arrive next Monday morning, staying in the UK for about a month. That will take in the British general election, where I hope I shall be able to vote in person, despite having been granted a postal vote (I didn’t expect the election so soon); and having just voted in the EU election, using my dual Swedish citizenship. Scandinavia, incidentally, seems to have bucked the right-wing trend in Europe generally, with the Left and Greens doing better, and the Sverigedemokraterna (proto-Fascists) falling back. Why doesn’t the British media report that?

I’m presently engaged in writing a ‘My Life and Times’ sort of book, probably not for general readers, but privately published (if at all), and for my kids. There’ll be a chapter on my time at Cambridge, for the Corpus freshman who wrote to me recently asking about that. But nothing too personal.

Last night Kajsa attended a meeting she had spent weeks arranging in a nearby suburb, for the ‘Left’ and ‘Green’ parties in Stockholm, to discuss the threat of ‘Fascism’ in Sweden; only to have it brutally attacked by neo-Nazis, dressed in black, with their faces covered by masks, and carrying smoke canisters and red paint sprays. Kajsa – who suffers from asthma – hid in a cupboard with a couple of others, but the smoke still got through, and they had to rush out – holding their breath – for air. It was a terrifying experience. Outside there were dozens of police, police cars, ambulances and even fire engines; which eventually restored order, and somehow sucked the smoke out, so that the meeting could resume. It was the main news item on Swedish TV last night; there’s a long report in today’s Dagens Nyheter; and it even made it into the Independent in Britain: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-masked-attackers-fascism-event-b2534448.html. Kajsa eventually got home safe and sound; but she’s still – this morning – shaken. She’s contacted news agencies to ensure that her family name is not mentioned, as it’s an unusual one, and could make her a target; especially as the meeting was all her doing. (To me she’s a hero!) One of the Greens had already been personally threatened before the event, when she was putting up posters for the meeting. Kajsa had alerted the police to that.

I suppose that one good result of this incident is that it shows that the ‘threat of Fascism’ is real, and not just scare-mongering. On the other hand – and not intending to belittle it – there were only five (5) of the masked attackers; and one of them was revealed to be a young-ish boy (14?) when his mask slipped. This was not a mass riot, and nothing should be read into it about the strength of Fascism in Sweden. Fascism and Neo-Nazism have been always been present here, as in Britain, waxing and waning according to the political weather, but rarely significant on their own. We should avoid the tendency, which is more characteristic on the political Right, of exaggerating single incidents – the occasional (query) anti-semitic banner on a pro-Palestinian march, for example – into something more general and sinister. These were in all likelihood only half-a-dozen kids, probably idiots, out for a bit of excitement. I don’t know yet whether any of them were caught and arrested. When they are, we’ll doubtless know.

Neo-Fascism is a danger, which we all – Swedes and Brits – need to be wary of; but it’s far more likely to come in other, more ‘innocent’ guises than last night’s scary incident in Gubbängen.

Incidentally – and following on from my last post – I used to think that writing novels must be far easier than writing history; not insisting, as history does, that you are bound by facts, but allowing you instead to make them up as you go along. What freedom! However, having just ventured momentarily into fiction-writing (see my last post), I now realise that that assumption is totally wrong. Fiction is much harder; and mainly because it doesn’t provide you with the crutches that the facts afford you, helping you to navigate the chaos and confusion that is your imagination – if you have any of the latter at all. (Remember, my English teacher told me I didn’t.) I wonder whether other authors who have switched from history to fiction have felt the same? (I know one here in Sweden who is trying to make the transition, and finding it difficult. I must have a chat with her.)

I may take up my ‘alternative history’ novel again, later; but shorn of my previous happy illusion that it will be a doddle, probably to be completed in a couple of months. Come on, imagination; buck yourself up!

Serious blogging will, I hope, resume later.