Kiss and Tell
The story so far: Old Blighty has been hit by a scandal of major proportions. People in high positions met in princely places and discussed matters not supposed to be talked about even on a yacht. In brief: Nat Rothschild, son of Lord (Jacob) Rothschild, is a partner in certain ventures of Oleg Deripaska, the richest of Russians and the sleaziest of all oligarchs--so sleazy, in fact, he’s not permitted to enter the Unites States. The Rothschilds have a large property in Corfu, the Greek island that was the pearl of the Ionian before cheap tourism, and entertain there regularly. One of Rothschild’s guest last August 15 was George Osborn, an old school friend and front bencher Tory waiting to become Chancellor of the Exchequer in the next election. Another was Peter Mandelson, a man twice forced to resign a cabinet office after sleaze allegations and since the party elevated to the peerage and into the cabinet for a third time. Mandelson is known to drip poison and is a master plotter. Once back in London after the Corfu holiday, George Osborn innocently gossiped as to how surprised he was that Mandelson had been made a lord in view of the fact he was saying the worst things possible about prime minister Gordon Brown. That is when Nat Rothschild wrote a letter to the Times pointing out that gossip should not be repeated and that Osborne was guilty himself of begging money for the Tories from his partner Deripaska. It’s been headlines ever since, with Osborne fully denying that he ever did, and the fact that no money exchanged hands being established. Rothschild’s gossip, however, seems to have hurt the Tories.
If there’s one invitation I regret turning down it’s the one that Lord Rothschild extended to me on the request of countess Maya Schoenburg, whose 50th-birthday celebration took place in Corfu last August 15th. Had I known the cast of characters who were present, and the bruhaha that ensued, I would have sailed on my boat through the Corinth canal, down the Gulf of Patras, and up the western Greek coast to Corfu--come hell or high water, as they say. Oleg Deripaska, George Osborne, “Lord” Mandelson as he then wasn’t, a couple of Rothschilds and the birthday girl, who happens to be a cousin of mine by marriage and whose birthday is the same day as yours truly. What a story I missed out on! Now I read that Nat Rothschild writes that gentlemen do not kiss and tell. He is obviously correct in this, except for the fact that without kissing and telling history would not be as we know it.
I believe it was Sainte-Beuve who called the Duc de Saint-Simon the spy of the century, and thank God the duke was. Were it not for Saint-Simon’s chronicles of life at Versailles, a great majority of us would probably adhere to a Sam Goldwyn version of what went on in the rarefied and ritualized society of the Sun King. Mind you, a good gossip dwells on the kind of telling detail that Saint-Simon used in order to describe society, which George Osborn certainly did not. I recently met Osborn at a party and found him charming and nice. (I used to play large stakes backgammon against his father 35 years ago at the Clermont club.) I don’t doubt a word of Osborne’s. Mandelson would feel perfectly at home in 15th century Florence or 13th century Constantinople. The great Nigel Dempster used to describe gossip as follows: “ Four hundred years from now, people will read me in order to find out what 20th century life was really like.” He goes on further to explain his keyhole type of journalism: “I look at people’s sex lives, especially those of prominent people, because the personal habits that manifest themselves only when observed close up are the ones that lead to detection of flaws that might influence public performance.” Dempster was the first to scrutinize the sex life of Prince Charles and of the girls Charles went out with. Before him, everything one read about the royal family was like the stuff Madison Avenue puts out for its best clients.
Just look at the Kennedy case. When JFK was inaugurated in 1961, the media had gone soft at the knees for him and his family. Here was a 43-year-old president elect with Hollywood looks who was also a war hero, married to a woman who was among the most beautiful on earth, and with a beautiful little daughter who owned a pony named Macaroni. It was straight out of central casting and then some. Some of us looked closer, however, if I don’t say so myself. I knew Danielle Pons, niece of the French ambassador to Washington at the time, and what she had gone through after meeting the boy-president. I had gone to parties and seen the Kennedys up close, their wild drinking, doping and rough treatment of women. After Kennedy’s assassination in 1963, the stories began to leak out. Now it’s common knowledge. But without the gossip, the Kennedy PR machine--and it’s a very potent one--would have triumphed over the truth.
Did the gossip make a difference where politics were concerned? Yes, of course it did. Without it Ted Kennedy would have become president, and as flawed as he is, history most likely would have been different. Without gossip, history comes out flat, dull, and far removed from its original purpose. Public accomplishments are simply not enough. If they were, we’d have passportlike descriptions of the various characters in history, and that is all.
There are two kinds of gossip: the puerile kind, which is time-wasting by half-wits, and the other, which informs and helps to define the age. Anything to do with Paris Hilton, Elizabeth Hurley, and their ilk is obviously a total waste of time, and it is also demeaning. The idea of writing about something la Hilton did or said should be anathema to anyone with the slightest sense of dignity. On the other hand, Homer’s songs about the Trojan War and Ulysses’s wanderings are an example of the latter. They could not have survived without the impulse to pass on a good story. Of course, in those days people gossiped about the bravery of their heroes and how they managed to beat the will of the gods--not about, say, what Madonna and Guy Ritchie are saying against each other.
The rules have obviously changed. Reporting on something that took place on a private yacht or house in Corfu would have finished the career of the reporter one hundred years ago. But back then, people did not deal openly with gangsters like Deripaska, which the Rothschilds are dealing with--they are partners in the building of a large marina in Montenegro--and Mandelson has been spreading the dirt about political opponents since he was wearing short trousers, the poor little dear. In other words, Osborn found himself in louche company and perhaps acted a bit louchely himself. Malcolm Muggeridge, a serious man if there ever was one, said that “who sleeps with whom is intrinsically more interesting than who votes for whom.” Had the British electorate known in advance that Ted Heath was, at best, totally uninterested in sex, they would have been prepared for the kind of stealth surrender he showed when it came to Britain joining the EU. A hot-blooded man Heath was not.
Mandelson seems to me the same type, but smarter, more vicious, a winner. If Osborn had not kissed and told we would be the poorer for it. Mandelson, after all, knows how to play the press better than most. Do kiss and tell, but never about the ladies, only about politics.
Comments
I don’t think Mandelson is a winner, smart and vicious or not. He’ll be a liability very soon.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
It wasn’t gossip that sank Ted Kennedy.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I wholeheartedly agree with Taki that the sex life of those in power is worth (and needs) watching. Ultimately the driving force of men’s actions are women (well, there are a few where it is about men). Men do acquire wealth and power and throw conscience overboard just to have the chance to mate with the lust object of their choice. Otherwise they would be perfectly happy just to sit in front of the TV with a six pack of beer, watching sports and not moving a muscle (they are the ones that have given up their pursuit).
Thanks to the instantaneousness of gossip reporting, we are now in a position to see the plain ruthlessness of these “leaders” in real time and mostly unfiltered. But then, where is the outrage? Have we become so cynical that we don’t expect even a modicum of moral veneer?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
“Of course, in those days people gossiped about the bravery of their heroes and how they managed to beat the will of the gods--not about, say, what Madonna and Guy Ritchie are saying against each other. “
My my, someone has quite an idealized view of dead people.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
The Times relentlessly rubbishes its own Osborne scoop (give that one a moment to sink in), while the News of the World publishes details of Osborne’s cocaine-fuelled past with a sadomasochistic prostitute.
What is going on in Murdoch’s London stable? Which side are they on? Which side is Murdoch himself on? And why?
, http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com
Click to flag this comment as abusive
The will(s) of Greek gods were capricious and even more self-centered apparently than those of most mortals, billionaires I suppose excluded.
Great article Taki’san.
How droll are the capricious rich. They don’t make themselves available to truth, they don’t even think it exists, but of course it does only within context like does perfection within context. (Thus the Value of the right gossip.)
Malcolm M. was right-on got to ‘watch’ them suckers. No one should possess more than say one hundred million bucksteroos. But ohh, how they’d suffer, the poor dears. They might even have to learn a truth or say two.
IN the ‘mean’time they’ll love writers – see if they can’t steal something off of them too. That’s one way of getting some truth into their lives. The other way is more arduous in having to become honestly available to it.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Sing, modern Muse, of the wrath of Chihuahuas
True overthrowers of Illium’s towers
Helen would never have been so embarrassed
If only Achilles had run off with Paris
Click to flag this comment as abusive
So let me get this straight. One Osborne gossips among “friends” and gets butchered for it. While if some Rotshield make gossip public in the press, he comes off as a hero?
Let me be the first to disagree with the notion that we have to watch the sex lives of politicians or prominent people. I don’t want to watch or know. What is there to find out? That pretty much every man out there is sleazy? Gee, what a shock. That no matter how cold, sterile, religious, and inhuman they present themselves, they all like sex? No way! Let’s just agree that all males are slimeballs, with the British excelling at it.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
McCain was cheating on his wife with Brazilian strippers and beer heiress and was shunned by the Reagan’s or at least Nancy. He celebrated his 70th on Oleg’s yacht with swindlers and Oleg’s lobbyist buddy campaign worker but he is the “conservative” in the race. Does this mean he has proper character since he is appropriately sleazy and dishonest?
I read somewhere that an insider was blabbing he was working himself to the bone righting lies for the government. Especially when Tony Blair came back from meeting with W.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I strongly disagree with the view that exposing the sex lives of politicians serves any socially beneficial purpose. Sleazy politicians are almost invariably revealed by behaviours other than just their sex lives. I incline to the cynical view that most politicians cause less trouble chasing women than doing politics. Ultimately, applauding such sexual exposes serves only to encourage blackmail and the all-pervasive surveillance state.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I want to ‘watch’ them because I like to watch. Wasn’t I clear? I kid. I kid.
Jack Rich is correct. Most men unlike most vomen are sluts. It’s biological vomen are less desperate (more perfect, little planets.) … It’s like the flower and the bumble-bee. When buzzing around the flower thinks oh gosh, that might turn me on. While the bumble-bee is thinking, not too shabby, where’s the next one after this?
It’s mother Nature. She’s got something up Her sleeve, but she hasn’t figured it out yet.
Neither have we.
(What are you going to do.) My suggestion is let’s turn the whole thing into a MUSICAL!?
“I go to the hills…” No wait on a more serious note, Castro did that already. But LOOK that show’s still playing.
I rest my case. Long live Cruba!
(ok, someone get the hook…) My much more proper alter ego is saying you dress up nice, but we can’t take you anywhere. -?- I think Tak’san, would probably even give me the boot.
And so that was life in the 20th & early 21st Centuries.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Every so often a wind comes along and blows aside a curtain behind which stands the puppetmaster.
A few years ago Rupert Murdoch attempted to elevate his less than accomplished son to head his television empire in the UK. The stock market reacted very negatively to this little bit of nepotism.
Who should pop then but Jacob Rothschild who told the media than he would personally be overseeing and guiding the young Murdoch heir in his business dealing.
Why would he be doing this other than to protect his investment in the Murdoch empire? Was he in fact the puppetmaster who pulled Murdoch’s strings. This might account for Murdoch’s fierce and unwavering Zionism.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
This is an addendum to the previous comment about Jacob Rothschild’s odd group of friends.
When Russian oligarch Michel Khodorosky was arrested by Putin’s justice department, Jacob Rothschild contacted the media to tell them that the financial community should be worried because he would be personally overseeing Khodorovosky’s assets while the Russian was incarcerated. Was he again interceding because he was simply protecting his business assets. Was he in fact the person who supplied Khodorovsky with the mysterious money used to buy Yukos Oil in the first place?
Rothschild seems to have a very chummy relationship with a significant number of the thuggish and disreputable Russian obligarchs.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Money talks. (Long live Cruba! - or maybe not – I’m not exactly a ‘communist’, it’s a poker game.) I agree with Joe G. & Michael thomas.
It’s why if you point out a truth about Rot’shield (i.e. ‘protects Rot’) and report it to the media, and Rot (admirably, -though he lies) points out it was you, no the sacred ‘him’ media reports it like Rot’shield’s the hero. He reports to media he owns, just like he owns (very sadly) your CURRENCY. That’s the strategy, it’s smart.
Come on guys, know your history. Goes back to where it all started - ‘give me control of a nation’s currency, and I care NOT who makes its laws.’ -Barron Rot’sheild (i.e. might have been ‘good’, at the *time-?-times change.) And then the Fed was instituted in America (same way) to be like Europe, (not ‘like’ America - was), and here we ‘is’ today, kids. Questions? … oh, wait understandaby, now ‘questions’ of meaning, not allowed.
So we go from here. It’s like if you’re a gambler (the house’s rake – their take of each pot) – Put it in your math, or you won’t know how or now IF you can win. OR - give me MY currency, all nations should be saying; LET MY PEOPLE GO.
P.S. if in America today – so Who would You rather have it all outsourced to-?-Goldman –Sachs or Castro?
Humor: Long live Cruba!!!! At least there it is more ‘like’ socialism for ALL – not just Rot’shield.
But I’ll say this got to give Rot’shields credit… (humor) although they don’t need it, since they discovered how to give it to You, instead.
Got’ currency?! Once we all went from barter societies to the symbol/Fact of money – had better have YOUR OWN currency, then, no? Yes.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Mike Thomas
I am not aware of any definite confirmation, but it has certainly been widely suggested that the Rothschilds were the financial backers of the Oligarchs.
Joe G
“This might account for Murdoch’s fierce and unwavering Zionism.”
This has also been a subject of interest to me. I have read (admittedly on rather dodgy web sites) that Murdoch’s mother (Dame Elizabeth (nee Green) who is still alive and approaching 100) is a jewess, however, I have never seen this confirmed in more upright sources.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Great piece! I am an avid reader of historical memoirs, preferably saucy. Sorry you missed Maya’s birthday party!
Click to flag this comment as abusive