Sympathy for the Devil
Sep. 12th, 2025 06:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shewhomustI don't exactly sympathise with Peter Mandelson: he is, as he has been since 1985 (according to the Guardian's handy summary, the Prince of Darkness. But that being the case, it seems unfair how much fuss is being made about things which have long been part of his public image.
He was famously "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" and always ready to share the benefits of those riches with them. From the wealthy friend who paid his mortgage to the Russian billionaire with whom he shared a sauna to the pleasures of Jeffrey Epstein's lovely house and interesting friends, this is the story of Peter Mandelson's life.
The reasons not to appoint him as our ambassador to the US are obvious: but what I can see in his reputation is that he would fit right in to the Court of Donald. The value placed on wealth, the flexibility about rules and ethics, a high tolerance for the scent of brimstone: who else has all these qualifications?
And all this was fine, until the latest cache of e-mails came to light. I have read the reports in the paper; I haven't read the e-mails themselves. But it seems that what we absolutely cannot forgive is that Mandelson stood by his friend when everything fell apart. He continued to support him, he thought he had been unfairly treated, he encouraged him to fight: and he was wrong, absolutely he was wrong. But it's a more likeable way of being wrong than taking all the benefits of friendship and then abandoning your friend when those dubious benefits cease to flow.
He was famously "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" and always ready to share the benefits of those riches with them. From the wealthy friend who paid his mortgage to the Russian billionaire with whom he shared a sauna to the pleasures of Jeffrey Epstein's lovely house and interesting friends, this is the story of Peter Mandelson's life.
The reasons not to appoint him as our ambassador to the US are obvious: but what I can see in his reputation is that he would fit right in to the Court of Donald. The value placed on wealth, the flexibility about rules and ethics, a high tolerance for the scent of brimstone: who else has all these qualifications?
And all this was fine, until the latest cache of e-mails came to light. I have read the reports in the paper; I haven't read the e-mails themselves. But it seems that what we absolutely cannot forgive is that Mandelson stood by his friend when everything fell apart. He continued to support him, he thought he had been unfairly treated, he encouraged him to fight: and he was wrong, absolutely he was wrong. But it's a more likeable way of being wrong than taking all the benefits of friendship and then abandoning your friend when those dubious benefits cease to flow.
no subject
Date: 2025-09-12 06:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-09-12 08:49 pm (UTC)I have little to contribute, but I think you're right about the ways and sympathies of being wrong.
no subject
Date: 2025-09-13 09:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-09-13 09:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-09-13 10:04 am (UTC)You're welcome. I'm glad no one seems to be being weird about it.