“If it had a mind, you could reason with it. If it had a body, you could shoot it. If it had a heart, you could kill it.” (Poster tag-line for The Blob, 1988)

There were some nonsensical anti-Whitehall headlines over the weekend about Boris v. the Blob, presumably all part of Operation Dogmeat or whatever they’re calling the campaign to save the PM’s skin this week. Nakedly self-serving attempts to whip up outrage seem to be par for the political course, but do they have to be crimes against language as well?

The Blob is a useful and important concept, for anyone interested in the culture war. It’s a sign of how unserious Boris Johnson is that his supporters garbled it so badly. “Boris v. the Blob” was used as shorthand for encouraging civil servants back to the office. But the Blob loses all meaning if made synonymous with Whitehall alone.

I traced the Blob to its origins, which lie in the battle for American educational reform, for my book The Long March. The Blob’s meaning later expanded, via Chris Woodhead and Michael Gove, to cover UK education and then other policy areas. But it has always referred to many different but likeminded groups with the power to influence policy coming together in an informal coalition that stymies needed reform. That is the very nature of the Blob. Whitehall can be part of the problem, but it isn’t the Blob all on its own.

Whatever happens to Boris, we must save the real meaning of the Blob. It’s an essential tool to think clearly about the problems we face.

You can read the whole story in my book. Or this article and this one are two recent contributions that understand what’s really going on.