Comparing present political leaders with past ones is a popular parlour game — one that leaders also like to play. Because Boris Johnson wrote a famously bad biography of Churchill, he looks in the mirror and sees the man whom Margaret Thatcher liked to call “Winston”. Even more improbable is the comparison recently made between Mr Johnson and Charles de Gaulle. Why not Charlemagne, Abraham Lincoln or Pericles while we are at it?
There is a fashion nowadays to view leadership as a kind of transferable skill. Audiences flock to hear former politicians such as Bill Clinton, Tony Blair or Nicolas Sarkozy distil their thoughts on leadership. But because the context in which leaders operate is never the same, this exercise is futile — except as a way for the speakers to top up their pensions. One could adapt to leaders what de Gaulle once said about constitutions: “The Greeks once asked the sage Solon: ‘What is the best constitution?’ He replied: ‘Tell me first for what people and in what period?”
Having said that, if there is anyone who possibly does have something useful to say about “leadership” it might be de Gaulle. Before entering history in 1940, he had written a cerebral semi-philosophical book on the subject upon which we might do well to meditate. His key idea was that leadership required a combination of reflective intelligence and intuitive action. As he once remarked: “Behind the victories of Alexander lies Aristotle.”