Kemi Badenoch and the reality of Tory inclusivity

Nesrine Malik is right that, as with Rishi Sunak, Kemi Badenoch's elevation to Tory leader is "a first that signifies nothing" ( Opinion, 4 November ). Conservatives are fond of downplaying the significance of colour as purely happenstantial, yet boasting about their promotion of those possessing it. It is a pity then that skin colour seems to signify so much they find problematic in those beyond the embrace of Westminster and Tory constituency parties.

Badenoch is chief among those on whom the party's inclusive credentials depend, but who spend their time in the vanguard of culture and immigration wars, attacking, undermining and inhibiting those for whom colour is a defining characteristic.

Individuals such as Badenoch indemnify the party against charges of discriminatory rhetoric while embodying the licence for it to flourish. People of colour have as much right to be blinkered and spiteful as anyone else, but Malik is right to maintain that it is not a cause for celebration. Paul McGilchrist Cromer, Norfolk

In characterising Kemi Badenoch's election as "a first that signifies nothing" and her ideas as potentially "an effective basis for a sprawling politics of grievance and resentment" ( John Harris, 3 November ), your commentators misunderstand the new national identity politics of the right.

As in much of Europe, populist far-right and mainstream conservatism are shaping a nationalist politics of the "cultural majority". Eschewing white ethno-nationalism, the "cultural majority" coheres around a conservative telling of national history, institutions and tradition.

It rejects liberal values but, in principle, is open to all ethnicities – as the numerous Conservative ethnic-minority leaders demonstrate. It is a potent force because the centre and left offer no alternative story of national identity, belonging and patriotism. Prof John Denham Director, Centre for English Identity and Politics, Southampton University; communities secretary 2009-10

Katy Balls is absolutely correct to suggest that the leader of the opposition is more likely to keep us all guessing while she frames her personal strategy for competing in the next election, if only to keep her competitors guessing ( 'High energy, high risk': Tories already wonder if Kemi Badenoch will last until the next election, 4 November ). Balls does, however, overlook one person, other than James Cleverly and Rishi Sunak, who will be patiently waiting in the wings for the Tory leader to make the inevitable un-populist decisions.

Boris Johnson, of course, will not want to be called back from the wilderness to save the day too soon. The next election is at least four years away and he clearly could not bear to waste time in opposition. Rather, he will wait until the election is in sight, let's say 2027. That is when the Tory backbenchers and the Reform party will be nipping at Badenoch's heels, and the Liberal Democrats will once again shave their beards and hide their sandals ready to have another go at the blue wall. It is then that Boris will "reluctantly" fight a convenient byelection. He can then be cheered home by the mass of Tory party members to save the day and give them what they all, deep down, knew they really wanted in the first place. It will be fascinating to watch. Shaun Soper Midhurst, West Sussex

Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our section.