Of the many inconsistencies associated with the Tory ‘modernisers’, one of the most glaring is the moderniser label itself. As all the cool kids know, modernism is terribly 20th century. We’re very much into the post-modern era now.
(In case you're not up to speed with the philosophical niceties, the basic distinction between modernism and post-modernism is that while the former is all about reason and structures, the latter is all about feelings and appearances.)
In a book review for Prospect, Roger Scruton has some sharp things to say about the influence of post-modernism on the Conservative Party:
As you might expect, Scruton expresses a clear preference for the first of the two books:
And yet, while praising the authors of Britannia Unchained, Scruton finds that their analysis is incomplete:
Scruton is surely right: The persuaders now run the show. In all political parties – including the Conservative Party – power and influence has shifted decisively from men and women of conviction, knowledge and experience and towards the communicators, manipulators and emoters.
Those of us who would fight back face an uphill struggle. "Conservatism", says Scruton, "is difficult, intricate and true. Today’s winning political rhetoric, by contrast, is simple, persuasive, and false."
As if proving his point about the difficult and intricate nature of the truth, Scruton paints a somewhat incomplete picture of the enemy. He gives the impression that the influence of post-modernism emanates only from the liberal left – infecting the Conservative Party from that direction alone. But haven’t we also seen the persuaders at work elsewhere, for instance, in the financial services sector, the advertising industry or the murky world of corporate lobbying?
The reality is that you don’t have to be liberal or a lefty to be a post-moderniser. Press the right buttons, play on the right emotions, and you’ll have no problem selling simple solutions to complex problems.