“Then, as now, comes to the fore, in this case with its ministers working in search of Boris Johnson’s departure, and with the participation of all these new candidates to succeed him, that mind in the political conduct which distinguishes him. From the Britons, who in spite of their faults have since They build a democracy that never stops growing.” – Eduardo Barajas.
France Press agency
Boris Johnson realized he had to leave his party leadership when Sajid Javid and Rishi Sunak resigned in less than ten minutes. The first was a long time ago the Secretary of the Treasury, that is, the Minister of Finance, and now he is the Minister of Health. The second was the Minister of Finance and sat next to Boris in the Cabinet. While accepting the resignations, Johnson appointed Nazim al-Zahawi, who would later be Minister of Vaccination and Education, as chancellor. He agreed not to leave the position of economic leadership vacant, but called on his boss to withdraw. Within hours Suella Braverman, the Solicitor General for England and Wales, the first Conservative woman to hold the position, and Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, went to 10 Downing Street to persuade Boris to resign.
The letters of resignation of those who left were impeccable in British style, filled with quiet arguments, refinement in the use of language, recognition of achievements and firmness in the decision, all in a few words, with impressive political clarity and personal models. Estimation. The responses were friendly and almost festive. After all, it was only a matter of political issues. No runner. Good example in pedagogy.
The names of these five ministers now make up a large part of the list of candidates to replace Boris Johnson as party leader and automatically go on to rule the country and succeed such legendary figures as Harold Wilson, Winston Churchill, Lloyd George and Anthony Eden. and Clement Attlee. They are all Conservative Members of Parliament, and they have so rigorously agreed to seek votes in one constituency or another to win an open democratic contest. But they are united by the grace of fate in common, which is that while they are wholly British, i.e. with the bearing of culture corresponding to the Members of Parliament, they are the children of immigrants from India and Pakistan, Iraq, Mauritius and Kenya.
Contrary to the notion that British society is stratified and rigid, no other European country than that which had a colonial past could emerge, as a result of its free democratic play and choices of mobility within society, and above all the political establishment, such as showing enrichment, with members of families Former colonies, or from non-Christian or non-religious countries and culture, with real options to rule the former imperial power now.
Richie Sunak hails from a Punjabi immigrant family from British India who ended up in Kenya; His father is a doctor and his mother is a pharmacist. Sajid Javid is the son of Pakistani immigrants. The bus driver is his father. Nadim al-Zahawi was born in Iraq to a Kurdish family who fled to Great Britain in the face of Saddam Hussein. Soila Braverman, from an Indian family from Kenya and Mauritius. Priti Patel comes from a family from Gujarat, India, who ended up in Uganda before arriving in Hertfordshire.
All have been ministers in several governments, have stood out in Parliament, are active in the media, behave in the most discerning Conservative spirit, and have always been champions when it comes to the party’s great definitions. Many of them have had to overcome difficulties arising from questions about issues that have come to light in countries where the actions of politicians are under close scrutiny. Their origin, race, or religion was by no means a problem. There they are on stage playing with their full rights in an effort to lead their party. They are public figures who give a diverse and particularly intimate tone to British political life. The key to his success was, undoubtedly, the combination of his efforts and a good education.
A hundred years ago, when Gandhi was pushing for independence from India, appealing to the values and deep feelings of British society to condemn the excesses of the imperial authorities, very harsh debates took place in Parliament about the Amritsar massacre, in which there were 379 people. The Indians were massacred by order of General Dyer, who used this method as a deterrent against independence aspirations. Subsequently, fervent conservatives criticized the Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, for daring to denounce the repressive model used. And when Dyer’s supporters unleashed heavy artillery on Winston Churchill’s sermon, Churchill joined in the condemnation, despite his traditional pro-Empire sentiments, leading to the independence process.
Then, as now, comes to the fore, in this case with the work of its ministers seeking the departure of Boris Johnson, and with the participation of all these new candidates to succeed him, the sensible political behavior of the British, who in spite of their faults have since been building a democracy Never stop growing. It is the same common sense that has led to voters from across the territory of the United Kingdom preferring to be represented in Parliament by figures from immigrant families from the ancient empire and beyond. The same thing that has led different prime ministers, within the internal game of parties, to assign essential responsibilities to these figures.
It is possible that none of them will be the chosen one. But suddenly this is not the most important at the moment, because there they will continue to exercise responsibilities, from the government or from the opposition. And in this long game, there is nothing strange about someone in their case coming to rule one day. Through which many hitherto undiscovered laws of history will be fulfilled. Laws that work for a friendly world with opportunities for all, one of the keys to a quality democracy.
“Award-winning zombie scholar. Music practitioner. Food expert. Troublemaker.”