Brown’s troubles don’t mean the Tories can start laughing – Bruce Anderson, Independent, 20 April 2009
Tarot Analysis
Bruce Anderson and I campaigned together in the Newbury seat at the general election, and prior to that I met him at the Reading Conservative Future conference, where we discussed among other things getting my cartoons published in the Spectator (some hope!). He has always been very loyal to the Conservative Party and we became fairly close during the campaign, though afterwards and throughout my troubled period of Cameroon-scepticism I have not really troubled him since.
In his latest article for the Independent, Brucie discusses the “decomposition” of the current government and gives David “Vulpes Vulpes” Cameron the benefit of some advice on how to revamp and renew political culture in the wake of Smeargate and Porno-films-on-expenses-gate. His erudite words, however, worry me that this is what should come naturally to Cameron, rather than having to be spelled out to him, and the title asks a question which is never fully answered in the article – namely, why can’t the Tories start laughing and what aren’t they actually doing (answers on the back of a postage stamp to CCHQ, please).
Delving into the realms of the tarot again, I detail more objective analysis of the article anon.
Situation.
II Wands. This suggests that things are now at a crossroads for both parties – and what they do henceforth will decide the results of the next election, due by June 3 next year. Things are no longer just idle speculation and “paper” results; decisions will be made now that will determine the next occupant of Downing Street, or confirm the current one with a mandate (not as far-fetched as it seems, given the outcome of this spread). Cameron’s actions – or lack thereof – will seal fates quite soon as the parliament moves into extra time. Hopefully – unlike Everton’s spectacular defeat of Manchester United on Sunday – it won’t have to be settled on penalties after a goal-less draw.
1. Conscious.
King of Cups. Cameron could have all he wants – this is the card which I have used as his significator since I began to read the tarot politically three years ago. There is a conscious and stated possibility he could well carry the day as Labour seemingly decomposes – Bruce’s article lists the things that he can do to overcome Brown decisively and, quite apart from whether he does them or not, it is clear to Anderson that a change is as possible as a rest. This is being strictly true to Bruce’s conception of Cameron as someone who reads what is written about him and acts upon it – it is certainly possible that at this late stage he can become the true heir to Blair and wipe Labour out completely.
2. Subconscious.
VII Wands. Why, then, the ambivalent title? Why can’t the Tories laugh all the way to the (admittedly bust) bank? Perhaps Brucie is trying to say that Cameron is not yet doing what he is telling him to do here, and therefore the struggle which underlies the Tory advance is much more intense and much less certain of a positive outcome than it appears here. The Seven is often a good card, of someone beginning to triumph over adversity. But next to the King of Cups, where the Tory leader has mastery over his own emotions and can use them to dazzle and bedazzle, the Seven demotes this auspicious appearance to a battle of wits which continues to haunt the Tories, particularly as recently they were pushed into fourth place in a Manchester City Council by-election, a seat which Labour held, when they badly need to make inroads into northern, Scottish and Welsh areas where they need to win seats to form the next government. They even lost a seat in Redditch, of all places. Support for the party in the most recent Sunday Telegraph poll actually fell by one point to 43%, though the gap widened because of a collapse in Labour fortunes after Smeargate. The Tory advance seems to me to be deepening their support, not widening it, and it is these obstacles which need to be overcome. Bruce is not saying this out loud, but the Independent’s sub-editor clearly needs to express it in these terms. And since Bruce is writing like this at this late hour, it still evidently needs saying to Vulpes Vulpes.
3. Roots of the article.
Strength. Here the message is, as usual, about holding on and not rocking the boat, rather than gambling on putting forward a progressive and coherent philosophy (if not actual policy substance). Bruce sees the Tories in the position where they are afraid to challenge the political culture which has nurtured Cameron because they are relying on it to get them in through the front entrance of Downing Street next June. Discipline and the need for stability prevail where the really radical debate has yet to take place, even now as the parliament moves into extra time. The Conservatives have appointed Greg Dyke to chair a review of culture policies. Fantastic. That should have been done years ago. And round about Christmas they expected an election to take place in January...forgetting they would have been trounced without a manifesto to speak of and the debates still taking place over whether or not to bring Fat Ken back gripping the readers of Conservative Home. The element of control and manipulation has replaced real radical thought and action, because the Tories are too scared that even a decaying government will steal their ideas and make them their own.
4. Seeds sown by the article.
The Fool. This card always suggests a new beginning and a fresh approach, but one that is inherently unstable. The magnitude of the card as compared to Strength couldn’t be clearer – the opposite of control is release. However, this is not a manageable card: the Fool affects everyone, it shakes politics up so much that normal tactics cannot be relied upon and events mean much more than what politicians can bring to pass themselves. This does not suggest a return to the uneasy equilibrium that has prevailed since the Labour conference brought Brown back from the electoral dead last September. The potential for political fireworks escalates, but not because of any one person or leadership; it is no longer possible to manipulate and stage manage one’s way (back) into Downing Street. This election will not be micromanaged in the favour of one or other contender; we are heading into the great unknown. This is not liked by British politicians, but with the failure of spin to do Labour any favours, it is unlikely to do the Conservatives much good either.
5. Advice.
Queen of Swords. Anderson is advising Cameron to be as cautiously rational as possible in response to the chaos into which the government is rapidly descending. The advice is of an intellectual and thoughtful nature, and is built upon the assumption that Cameron is reading the article, possesses the capability to articulate the exact angle that Bruce is pushing, and that voters will listen to the vague case for Conservatism rather than any concrete policies the party may or may not have by June 3 next year. Anderson is asking a product of the current system to change it, which is presupposing that Cameron can do this (and it has been done; many great leaders started off as flunkies to the ancien regime. Vulpes Vulpes co-wrote the last Conservative manifesto with his boss Howard (aka Bubo Scandiacus), after all). The Queen of Swords is a cold, calculating creature, however, and not a direct and experienced manipulator as her consort the King of Swords is. Anderson’s advice is correspondingly pithy but does not offer the party the dynamism it needs to function as a worthy opposition, let alone a potential and pro-active government. She is – in the words of a previous Conservative campaign slogan – all talk and no action.
6. Warning.
Temperance. Temperance ill-dignified is mere patience and tolerance of the status quo, and although this is a card of great healing, it is also a card of potential complacency and withdrawal into fantasies of “if...” and “when...” The all-too-subtle warnings in this article are that what Bruce is saying even needs to be said, particularly at this late stage in the game when the opposition party should have its plans and manifesto and long-term strategy for government already drawn up. This advice may end up being water off a duck’s back if Cameron cannot now come out and say more than “hurry up and hold an election so we can have a change of culture at the top”. Will people even be voting on this at the election? If the only way for the Tories to enunciate any concrete plans is to say “we will write the manifesto when we get into government and see what the state of play actually is”, then not only this battle but the war itself is lost.
7. Solution.
The Devil. There has to be a change in the current system, and because the seeds of this election have already been sown, this will be a poll determined by events and not controlled by either party or factions within them. The card points to a painful transition back to an uncertain future where politicians cannot dictate events and cannot rein in certain destructive forces which have already begun to lose control. Bruce’s advice seems wise but even if Cameron were to follow it – by no means certain – he could not hope to dictate that future and could not hope to govern by spin-doctor as he probably hoped he might in 2005. Unless the Conservatives take on board everything Bruce is saying and begin to articulate their platform for the next election well in advance of their last chance to face the nation at their autumn conference, they are not going to be able to control events – and the Devil always likes to take the hindmost down with him, particularly in the Conservative Party.
8. Outcome.
Page of Swords. The things Bruce says have found some resonance with whom they are aimed at, but this again is not a deep enough penetration to effect real change of direction for either party. Cameron should have been articulating what Anderson is saying now, if not for the last three years, then for the last three months as his ratings begin to re-assert themselves after a problematic autumn and winter. He doesn’t, however, seem to be taking things as seriously or directly as one might hope. Howard, at this stage of proceedings, a year before the last election, was much more pro-active. The most recent Sunday Express front page, “LABOUR DEATH THROES” reminded me of the splash “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, MR BLAIR” which heralded their return to active support for the Conservative Party in April 2004 after years both as a left-wing rival to the Daily Mail and then studied indifference to IDS and Blair alike. Comparing that issue (and subsequent days’ papers which lavished praise on Michael Howard as distinct from Tony Blair, and even invited Bubo Scandiacus to write an op-ed) and the less definitely pro-Conservative tone of the similar article this time round, suggests the Tories have lost ground, not gained it, with the general readership that the Express is aimed at. Cameron needs to take Bruce’s words and run with them, whilst putting out some more detail. However, since he, unlike Howard, is a product of the idea that a government or opposition can manipulate, control and direct their way into office without much policy substance, he finds himself in the paradoxical situation that if he was able to take Bruce’s advice on board, he would already have done so.
