Just about every Tory activist begged Dave not to push through his flagship law on homomarriage. This abomination, they pleaded, would hurt the party.
Now they’ve been proved right, Dave says he’s sorry. Oh well, that’s all right then.
What exactly is he apologising for? According to the Tory activists at the receiving end of the apology, Dave “still believes that gay marriage is right.”
A man with the power of his convictions then? If so, why apologise? You see, Dave isn’t sorry about his commitment to this subversive law. He’s only sorry about the effect it has had on the party.
The effect is well-nigh seismic. Under Dave’s sage guidance the party has lost more than half of its membership, with thousands of lifetime Tories citing this law as the reason for leaving.
Many of them have defected to UKIP, enabling it to act as a wrecking ball in the next elections. Unless a highly unlikely agreement is struck, this practically guarantees that the Tories won’t win the election outright. Another coalition beckons, emasculating the party and hurting us all.
There’s no doubt that the new law has done much damage not only to Dave’s party but also to the country at large. But having a PM like Dave is even more damaging – while the realisation that the other lot are even worse makes one weep.
Dave’s apology confirms that things like intellect, integrity, conscience and morality play no part in his decision making. Political expediency reigns supreme, and he only regrets he didn’t realise that his fanatical support of homomarriage went against the grain of that sole desideratum.
How was I to know? Dave asks. That makes him sound both disingenuous and daft. It’s the former because every association chairman told him so, imploring him to desist. It’s the latter because a modicum of common sense would have sufficed to anticipate the highly predictable result of his faddish stupidity.
Dave, Dave, Dave, what are we to do with you? Well, here’s what I’ll do: I’m going to give you a sure-fire procedure for avoiding such mishaps in the future. Next time you decide to tout an asinine idea, say post-natal abortion, compulsory euthanasia of wrinklies or humans marrying other species, guide what passes for your thought through these steps.
Step 1. Remind yourself that many grass-root Conservatives are different from you and your cabinet. They don’t regard the name of their party as strictly a figure of speech.
Step 2. That being the case, ask yourself what it is that they are trying to conserve.
Step 3. You’ll find that, generally speaking, they wish to protect what’s left of Christendom – its moral, religious, social and political tradition. Irrespective of their personal faith, they are desperate to conserve what they regard as immutable values at the foundations of their party.
Step 4. Accepting this as an overriding principle, you may be able to figure out how it applies to each particular idea that may cross your mind.
For example, homomarriage defies not only the 2,000 years of Christianity but also the 5,000 years of known human history. That’s 250 generations in about as many countries – you must tell yourself that not all of them were inferior to the one you so ably represent. Maybe they were on to something.
If you can’t go through the requisite mental process yourself, ask someone who can. Specifically, when an issue of public morality is at stake, you may wish to ask the Church. Flawed as it has become, the Anglican Church is an essential part of the realm, and it’s constitutionally empowered to offer such advice.
Just to be on the safe side, also ask some Tory thinkers, preferably those who aren’t seeking a political office. The late Prof. Ken Minogue would have been a good choice, but even after his death there are quite a few others.
Had you sought the advice of such people before shoving this abomination through Parliament, they would have told you that you’d run the risk of leading a party that no longer exists.
Step 5. Listen to what they have to say. They are cleverer than you are and just as committed to the party’s political success. What would make their advice particularly valuable is that they are committed to a few other things as well.
Alas, something tells me Dave is incapable of going through such elementary steps. That’s why one has to compliment him and his staff on the fallback election strategy they seem to have adopted.
Rather than re-emphasising their conservative credentials, they expect to win the next election by simply not being Labour. All that’s missing is a snappy slogan encapsulating the party’s promise to the electorate.
May I suggest “The Tories. We are the lesser evil”? Such truth in advertising just may carry the day.