Labour Brexit, Project Fear and Doing Cartwheels on the Stairs
Is it the role of politicians simply to reflect public opinion, or should they attempt to shape opinion for the greater good? Should they just give us what we want, or should they tell us what we need? Does unadultered democracy in its purest form lead to utopia, or Boaty McBoatface, Honey G, and the reinstatement of public hangings?
Most of the time there's a significant overlap between "things the majority of the public want" and "things that are good for the country". But there will always be bits that don't match up, and what do you do then? I guess those are the times we should be greatful we live in a country where we can have honest and open debates about these issues. Cough. Cough. Splutter. Cough.
These are the times for politicians to earn their stripes. Would you really press ahead with something you think will be harmful, just because people seem to want it? Yeah, probably. Might lose some votes otherwise. Anyway, although the shite has been set in motion, it's often a different election cycle by the time it makes contact with the fan. And there's certainly enough time to don protective gear and start shifting blame by then.
But let's take a hypothetical situation, where a hypothetical politician has to deal with the fallout of a hypothetical vote from hypothetical voters which determined by a hypothetically small margin that they'd leave a hypothetical union of hypothetical neighbouring countries. And let's say this hypothetical politician thinks that's not in the interests of their country. What to do? Where to start?
I guess part of the response depends on whether you're driving the country at the time. If you're a passenger it's pretty easy to shout helpful or unhelpful advice from the backseat. And if worst comes to the worst bail out: tuck and roll, and hope you land somewhere soft. The key thing is to not try and grab the wheel, it's much easier to say you'd do a better job than to actually try and do a better job.
But if you're in the driving seat, you've got some difficult decisions to make. Keep going even if you think the bridge is out? Pull over and stop? Speed up so either you manage a one in a million Dukes of Hazard style jump or at worst get it over quicker? Luckily this is all hypothetical right? The only other thing you might consider is checking with the passengers why they decided to go this way, and if they still want to keep going.
One of the biggest problems with the Brexit vote is the lack of understanding of the motivation of voters, whilst at the same time interpreting the result in any way that is felt to be politically expedient. If my wife finally got annoyed at the kids' crayon drawings on the walls of the front room and convinced me to redecorate, I wouldn't immediately take that as a mandate to paint a huge cock and balls as an edgy feature wall. I'd go for some sort of bland compromise, probably beige which is the Norway-option of home decor. But compromise was never sought. For Brexit, it was the government's way or the highway. And any dissenters were labelled "traitors", "saboteurs" and "enemies of the people".
People voted in different ways for different reasons. We can only properly explore that if there's an open and honest debate. But there wasn't. Any risks were labelled "Project Fear", which acted to shut down debate, and reconfigure expectations such that anything that didn't immediately result in a Mad Max style post-apocalyptic wasteland could be considered a measured success.
And in the two years since the vote, Brexiteers jump on the fact that we aren't now bartering for turnips with stone currency as evidence that Project Fear was misguided, rather than accepting that both the timeline has been delayed, forecasts are still terrible and that measures were put in place to mitigate the risk.
Some folk still think the Millenium Bug was a massive hoax, rather than a disaster averted by countless highly trained professionals working in a coordinated fashion to prevent disaster. My five year old, like most small boys, often gets up to various degrees of dangerous buffoonery. Every time he climbs up the bookcase or tries to do cartwheels on the stairs I tell him "Don't do that, you'll hurt yourself". But he doesn't hurt himself. Either becuase he's lucky or because I put in preventative measures. But he doesn't care. He doesn't recognise that I'm constantly catching him mid-air or stopping him juggling with knives. He just thinks it's Project Fear. I'm just preventing his democratic right to stick forks in the electrical sockets.
And I'm not saying that Leave voters were like children, unable to grasp the complexities of the situation. When things are shit, you want to do something. This was something. But it's not the right thing. It won't address the structural problems built up over decades by domestic governments but blamed on the EU and immigration. Continuing down a path you know will be harmful won't address these problems, it will just make them worse.
Now is the time for Labour to stand up and be counted.
Most of the time there's a significant overlap between "things the majority of the public want" and "things that are good for the country". But there will always be bits that don't match up, and what do you do then? I guess those are the times we should be greatful we live in a country where we can have honest and open debates about these issues. Cough. Cough. Splutter. Cough.
These are the times for politicians to earn their stripes. Would you really press ahead with something you think will be harmful, just because people seem to want it? Yeah, probably. Might lose some votes otherwise. Anyway, although the shite has been set in motion, it's often a different election cycle by the time it makes contact with the fan. And there's certainly enough time to don protective gear and start shifting blame by then.
But let's take a hypothetical situation, where a hypothetical politician has to deal with the fallout of a hypothetical vote from hypothetical voters which determined by a hypothetically small margin that they'd leave a hypothetical union of hypothetical neighbouring countries. And let's say this hypothetical politician thinks that's not in the interests of their country. What to do? Where to start?
I guess part of the response depends on whether you're driving the country at the time. If you're a passenger it's pretty easy to shout helpful or unhelpful advice from the backseat. And if worst comes to the worst bail out: tuck and roll, and hope you land somewhere soft. The key thing is to not try and grab the wheel, it's much easier to say you'd do a better job than to actually try and do a better job.
But if you're in the driving seat, you've got some difficult decisions to make. Keep going even if you think the bridge is out? Pull over and stop? Speed up so either you manage a one in a million Dukes of Hazard style jump or at worst get it over quicker? Luckily this is all hypothetical right? The only other thing you might consider is checking with the passengers why they decided to go this way, and if they still want to keep going.
One of the biggest problems with the Brexit vote is the lack of understanding of the motivation of voters, whilst at the same time interpreting the result in any way that is felt to be politically expedient. If my wife finally got annoyed at the kids' crayon drawings on the walls of the front room and convinced me to redecorate, I wouldn't immediately take that as a mandate to paint a huge cock and balls as an edgy feature wall. I'd go for some sort of bland compromise, probably beige which is the Norway-option of home decor. But compromise was never sought. For Brexit, it was the government's way or the highway. And any dissenters were labelled "traitors", "saboteurs" and "enemies of the people".
People voted in different ways for different reasons. We can only properly explore that if there's an open and honest debate. But there wasn't. Any risks were labelled "Project Fear", which acted to shut down debate, and reconfigure expectations such that anything that didn't immediately result in a Mad Max style post-apocalyptic wasteland could be considered a measured success.
And in the two years since the vote, Brexiteers jump on the fact that we aren't now bartering for turnips with stone currency as evidence that Project Fear was misguided, rather than accepting that both the timeline has been delayed, forecasts are still terrible and that measures were put in place to mitigate the risk.
Some folk still think the Millenium Bug was a massive hoax, rather than a disaster averted by countless highly trained professionals working in a coordinated fashion to prevent disaster. My five year old, like most small boys, often gets up to various degrees of dangerous buffoonery. Every time he climbs up the bookcase or tries to do cartwheels on the stairs I tell him "Don't do that, you'll hurt yourself". But he doesn't hurt himself. Either becuase he's lucky or because I put in preventative measures. But he doesn't care. He doesn't recognise that I'm constantly catching him mid-air or stopping him juggling with knives. He just thinks it's Project Fear. I'm just preventing his democratic right to stick forks in the electrical sockets.
And I'm not saying that Leave voters were like children, unable to grasp the complexities of the situation. When things are shit, you want to do something. This was something. But it's not the right thing. It won't address the structural problems built up over decades by domestic governments but blamed on the EU and immigration. Continuing down a path you know will be harmful won't address these problems, it will just make them worse.
Now is the time for Labour to stand up and be counted.
Comments
Post a Comment