Read on Twitter
I read the article and it basically amounts to "my politics, my ideas and my friends are the natural and rightful leaders of the country" wrapped up in a pseudo-intellectual argument about moderation in order to be fit for print in the UK's "serious" paper of record.
There is nothing moderate about wealth and power being concentrated in the hands of a few of your peers or in the particular corner of the world you happen to inhabit. There is nothing moderate about not seeing this reality or pretending not to see it.
There is nothing moderate about wanting to perpetuate this situation and obstructing those that want to change it. It may be reasonable *for you* to want to protect your interests, but stop pretending that it has anything to do with reason or fairness in a more general sense.
Also, who are these uncompromising people who insist on perfection, are incapable of settling, listening or respecting the points of others? Does Finkelstein actually know any or is this is just a constructed opponent so that he can rationalise the worst of his own choices?
I think there is a non trivial number of UK "moderates" who realise that their support for Johnson compromises their reputation so have constructed this idea of Johnson as an option they had to, as moderates obviously, settle for, in the face of the danger that was Jeremy Corbyn.
