Rupert Lowe, MP, is a real leader and statesman.

I’ve developed a liking for Rupert Lowe at a distance, being the colonial that I am. I was therefore glad to see this interview in Islander #5. I’ve no great quarrels with his statements, though I read the interview with interest, so today’s bit will be shorter (because I expect I’ll need a full article to deal with Dr. Parvini’s article next).

First, I find his admiration for Cromwell heartening and intriguing. Cromwell is a man I’ve found many perspectives on but never had the time to deep-dive and figure out the truth. In Cromwell is much to admire- and much to be dubious about. Such, perhaps, is the nature of great men.

Second, Lowe speaks of his reason for entering politics: he looked at what his government was doing, tried to remonstrate with said government, and decided, upon getting insufficient response, to go to work in the field. Such is a highly admirable backstory, an attitude to be desired from the citizenry- intelligent involvement in politics- and to be praised, as a worthwhile foundation, in politicians. (Though I lean towards considering Lowe as a ‘statesman,’ not merely a politician- somebody who truly endeavors to work out virtue and leadership in civil government).

Third, Lowe (quite rightly) condemns collectivism and endorses individualism. I concur at the broad level (which is all the time permits in the interview). I caution, however, that individualism must not be unbalanced. Men are not merely individuals; we live in relationship to each other and (most crucially) to God. A worldview and policy which does not honor that Divine relationship, which does not foster, in the way proper to the tool, those human relationships, such a worldview or policy will produce immense suffering, directly (through its own errors) or indirectly (through the errors of those attempting to correct it). In a way, as Dr. Parvini will nearly discuss, Communism and its ilk were and are the reaction to individualism unbalanced from virtue, from relationship, from God.

Fourth, Lowe speaks correctly of the nature of a “serious country” does: “It acts in its own interest” (13). On the one hand, I’d urge that a virtuous country acts in its people’s interests (but also that its people’s interests, properly understood, are, as they relate to the state, the country’s interests). On the other, Lowe is thoroughly correct here, making an observation America and the West seem generally oblivious to. But more on this in a later part of the review series.

Fifth, Lowe says (and I’ll leave it at his euphonic words): “We’re ruled by lawyers rather than the rule of law” (13).

Sixth, Lowe declares that Britain is a “Christian country” (14). He acknowledges that this doesn’t mean everybody will be a Christian, but notes that Christianity leads to deep-rooted cultural values of kindness, duty, and honesty. Again, the short space afforded the topic leaves little room for development, but I hope Lowe has the depth of theology and faith to truly apply Christianity. To stop short at ‘civil religion’ or even ‘merely-cultural Christianity’ would be a disaster leading in short order to the same mess we’re in now (we tried that already, insofar as it is possible).

Seventh, Lowe comes out with another worthy quote I’ll release to all y’all: “Committees make decisions at the level of their least intelligent member. Mediocrity is built in.”

(I note, though it’s only a note, that Lowe seems to prefer ‘country’ to ‘nation.’ This could be an accident of arrangement or editing; it could be merely a vocabulary preference without intention within it. But, if it is intentional, it speaks to my ear of a recognition that the country, not the nationstate, is the important thing. The interpretation is thoroughly tenuous, however.)

In parting, I pray God’s blessing on Lowe, in his soul and in his work. The interview is not lifechanging, but it is an excellent look at a man worth voting for and listening to.

God bless.