I work in sales. One thing that we have in common with politicians is the skepticism with which others regard us. It is understandable: in this field, the famous usually get to the top by overpromising and underdelivering. When speaking or reading from a politician (or a salesperson), there is an underlying mistrust; we know we’re trying to be convinced. I know firsthand that there are plenty of honest and well-meaning people in these fields, but I am not immune to such suspicion myself.
So when it comes to political memoirs, I give them the extra pinch-of-salt treatment. Not only because of the suspicion of politicians, but also because biographies already follow our natural tendency to overplay positive influence and blame external circumstances for shortcomings.
That said, Politics on the Edge surprised me. Probably the author’s background in rhetoric helped, but the tone and voice are refreshing. It is, of course, a book that leaves him in a good light. But reading it did not give me the sensation that Rory Stewart thinks himself someone with extraordinary capacity for politics or with an overplayed sense of self-worth. Rather, someone who tried to do what he thought the right thing was, and, more importantly, with an approach I find particularly necessary.
At the start of the book, Stewart recounts (with a healthy dose of nostalgia) his days as a diplomat in the Middle East. What he describes is the difficulty of the US and British governments in understanding the type of intervention needed to help developing countries to, well, develop. He seems frustrated by the inability of decision-making bodies to listen to people who live the daily reality of the countries they are trying to help. He nonetheless had positive experiences in which real involvement from people who cared and worked together created progress.
Motivated in part by the impact made, and frustrated by the limits imposed by the politicians in power, a young and more idealistic version of him decides to make the jump into politics back in Britain. As one can imagine, it is challenging to become an elected MP. But with a combination of the right people, antagonizing some others, and benefiting from external circumstances, he was quick to get into Parliament.
Once in Parliament, Stewart does seem to have a hard time navigating it. One gets the sensation he is the type of coworker who is generally liked, but seems a bit awkward, challenges often, and has an obsession with detail that can sometimes seem excessive. But because politics is not the typical job, his way of being made him a fair number of enemies. He is very open in the book about the people he found to be incompetent, and I can imagine those people must have gotten annoyed at him more than once. I know I would. I am left with curiosity about what the people he is most critical of (mainly David Cameron and Boris Johnson) thought of him.
Still, Stewart seems to either downplay his political aptitude or overplay the dislike people in charge had for him; he ends up getting placed into ministries relatively quickly. In less than four years, he gets tossed around different departments, ranging from forests to international development and prisons. For most of these jobs, he seemed not to have any relevant previous experience that would qualify him for them – something that seems to be the norm rather than the exception. Against what were some pessimistic views on how much he would be able to achieve, he seems to have done better in those jobs than expected.
The book ends with his run for the leadership of the Conservative Party, which, if won, would have made him Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He writes about his frustration with the direction his party was taking, especially regarding Brexit. Most importantly, Boris Johnson was the favorite, and the people Stewart thought could win against him didn’t run. So he made the decision to run himself.
He would end up resigning the same day Johnson got elected, shortly after a very anticlimactic performance at a public leadership debate.
There is one thing I really like about Rory Stewart, and it is something that becomes clear from the first chapter: he believes in talking to people, seeing first-hand what effect policies have, and bringing different voices together. He had a very transparent approach to politics. There is no pretension of knowing better than people who are actual experts: Stewart would spend a big part of his time speaking with those most affected by the problem he was given to solve, trying to paint an accurate picture of the situation and possible solutions.
Now, as I said at the start, I understand this is a political memoir, and he might have overplayed his role in some aspects. In others, he may not have recognized his faults. But I believe that to be human nature, and most of us couldn’t avoid doing the same. It is also normal that one will disagree with his views or actions in one regard or another – it’s a sign of brainwash to agree with everything a politician does.
What I take from this book is that the attitude he has is the one I would hope our politicians have. And that those who have it get a landscape in which smart change is possible.
If all our politicians were a bit more like him, they would all be a bit more annoying. But they would make our countries better.
leo burghaus 
Leave a comment