« | Home | »

The Gospel According to Tony


And the Lord spake unto his good and faithful servant, saying, Thou art my son, in whom I am well pleased. And though there be some that pretend to adore Mammon through God; yet others cherish God, by the offices of Mammon.

Thou knowest well, my son, many there are that give by taking; and their name is Legion.

But twice blessed are they that take, by giving.

The whoremongers have scourged the righteous with kisses; but thou hast loved the children of the whore of Babylon, with fire from the heavens and the temper of thy sword.

Thou hast plucked out the heart of Mesopotamia, even from the Tigris to the Euphrates. Thou hast kindled fear with the banners of the Lord of Hosts and stricken thine enemies with the fear of the wrath of thy love.

Blessed therefore be the warmakers, for they shall be received into the bosom of the Church; their speech will be recompensed with gold; they shall be called the brokers of peace.

Blessed too are they who hide their bushel under the light of their tax-deductible charitable gift. For they shall see in their flesh, that they dwell among the elect, and their legacy shall grow tenfold. Verily, it shall grow an hundredfold.

And His servant answered Him, saying, I am ready to meet Thee, and to answer for all that I have done. And the Lord was with Tony, and he was a lucky fellow, all the days of his life.

Comments on “The Gospel According to Tony”

  1. A.J.P. Crown says:

    This is a translation, the Lord and Tony converse in Latin.

  2. bluecat says:

    Sale of indulgences is no longer practised, surely?

  3. pinhut says:

    There is no ethical means of spending blood money.

  4. Joe Morison says:

    I often wonder what it’s like being Tony Blair. Of course, on the surface it’s all perma tan and smiles, and a life of jet setting self-congratulation; but i think if one could dig deeper it would be pretty bleak. He always seems to have had the ability to believe the lies it was politically expedient for him to espouse. Neil Kinnock recently called him a method actor; but with actors, the role comes to an end – Blair is trapped for life, the knowledge of the wrong he’s done having to be constantly hidden from, and that must do terrible things to the psyche. It’s nothing compared to immeasurable suffering his policies have caused, but i feel sorry for him.

  5. ski says:

    No sorrow for Blair here. I used to believe he was a complete and utter fraud – the method actor as mentioned. Now I have moderated my opinion somewhat. I actually think he now, perhaps has always, believed that Iraq was right. And that for a long time he had been believing his own divine inspired judgements: he was, in short, a megalomaniac with funamentalist touch.

    • Joe Morison says:

      I’m sure he believed that what he was doing was right. Monstrous things are so very often done by people who do.

    • Geoff Roberts says:

      Your last sentence could be applied to Hitler, Stalin and a few other twentieth century characters. A bit over the top? How would you describe GW Bush?

      • Joe Morison says:

        I guess that both Bush and Saddam thought that what they were doing was in the best interests of Iraq: Bush believing that he would transform the country into a mini-West, all apple-pie order and dentally fixed smiles; of course, another ‘good’ outcome would be a safe oil supply for the morally best country in the world (which he clearly believes the US to be). Saddam would have thought something like, the only way Iraq can enter the modern world is for a strong man at the top: to keep the fundamentalists down, give women some sort of equality, stave off civil war it is necessary for me to impose my will – the executions and torture and personality cult are necessary, the alternative is worse (and from our perspective, hideously, one can see his point – one of Bush’s most bizarre achievements was to create a measure of understandable sympathy for one of the world’s least sympathetic people (after all, he did die well, didn’t he?)).
        Thinking one is doing the right thing is almost irrelevant when it comes to censure. If someone believes that ‘Jesus hates fags’ (as their placards have it) and that God desires their lynching, that lynching condemns them as much as if they’d done it for fun. A person should be judged from how loving their actions are, not from whether they thought they were ‘doing good’.

  6. Geoff Roberts says:

    My take on Blair is a different one. He certainly uses his faith as a justification for his actions and decisions but the consequences are never predictable and may even have short-term positive effects. It’s very difficult to assess objectively what a leader has done until the documents are on the table.

    • A.J.P. Crown says:

      Both Blair and Bush have strong Christian “personal” beliefs and they started wars in two Muslim countries. I don’t tar all Christians with the “warmonger” brush, nevertheless it’s not a coincidence. Next time Christians run for office, maybe pacifists should think twice before voting for them.

      • Joe Morison says:

        I don’t think religious faith is the problem, i think it’s moral certainty. A Christian like Rowan Williams sees his faith as a means to doubt and questioning; it’s fundamentalists, whether atheist of religious, who can do awful things in the unquestioned belief that they are doing good.

        • Geoff Roberts says:

          I’d say that it’s a potent mixture of faith and moral certainty, similar to the brew which motivates Muslims to carry out suicide bombings in order to punish the sinful Christians. John Updike’s novel ‘The Terrorist’ was a not very convincing attempt to get inside the mind of a young Muslim and show his transition into a campaigner for moral justice.
          We simply don’t understand the processes that motivate a young Muslim to attack a western icon or a western leader to attack a foreign land. The United States has been a major attacker of small countries for a hundred years or more. Didn’t Nixon order the attack on Cambodia to show the Vietnamese that he was capable of anything?

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: And in Breakout, Parker, in prison, teams up with a black guy to escape; another white con dislikes it but accepts the necessity; Parker is absolutely...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement