The author of this article is Clive Pinder.
It was first published in ‘Briefings for Brexit’ and we re-publish with their kind permission
Leavers and Remainers have different but equally valid sets of principles.
Brexit, the most existential political quandary of our time, is being framed as an issue of ‘right or wrong’. It isn’t. Nor is it a ‘left or right’ issue; with the votes of 61% of Labour and 73% of Tory constituencies evidence that traditional political divisions were bridged by a majority vote to ‘Leave’.
While the political elite and the establishment will always prefer the status quo, trying to frame such a critical socio-political issue in terms of who is right and who is wrong is not only intellectually lazy, it is politically disingenuous.
The issue that divides the nation isn’t that one group is wrong. It is that one group holds a different set of principles and values to the other. Neither set is misanthropic, nor malevolent.
‘Remainers’ believe in the power of collectivism; that individuals and their nation state should put aside their innate values and beliefs in the interest of a greater good; that the world would be a better place as a one planet collective where separate creeds, tribes and cultures coalesce into a world that sings ‘in perfect harmony’. A federated world guided and controlled by a mother ship that guarantees ‘liberty, equality and fraternity’ for every single individual.
It is a bold and noble aspiration – an ambition that shouldn’t be ridiculed as naïve or progressive; rather respected for its inspiring imagination. One worthy of a song by one of the greatest songwriters of all time. After all, it makes sense to address the threats of climate change, excessive and irresponsible capitalism, international tax loop-holes, extreme religions, international terrorism and the impending challenges of a world dominated by networks that democracies no longer control, and intelligent machines that may be uncontrollable.
‘Leavers’ on the other hand believe in the power of individual rights with mutual responsibility; that nation states should be run by directly elected and accountable representatives who have direct control over a country’s borders, laws, security, currency, economic policy, taxation and trade; that cultural identity, national values and patriotic personality should be celebrated in a world of diversity and individuality. A world of independent yet interdependent nation states.
This concept of ‘mutual individualism’ has been promoted by philosophers across the ages. Plato promoted the liberal democracy of Athens as the most appropriate form of government primarily because he understood that a need for identity and equality lies at the core of Homo sapiens.
These contrasting and equally commendable principles and values cannot be distilled into facts. They represent feelings. They echo history. They are formed in a crucible of emotion, not in the logic of debate. Great Britain is today an “emocracy”, a term coined by Ayaan Hirsi Ali to reflect the reality that today politics is as much about ideas, principles and values as it is about policy, facts and reason.
With that reality in mind, it seems fair and reasonable that when debating the binary choice given to the British people, a choice in which a majority chose to “leave the European Union”, whose government explicitly committed to “implementing their decisions”, whose Parliament was elected by 80% of the country on manifestos to deliver Brexit and whose MPs overwhelmingly voted for Article 50; that the minority don’t dismiss that majority as being “wrong”. They just have a different set of principles and values to those who chose to vote ‘remain’. ‘Remainers’ may believe their principles and values are better. They may be right.
However, a majority was motivated by a different, yet equally considered, code. What is the point of a liberal representative democracy if not to champion and reflect the principles and values of the majority? As Plato put it: “You cannot conceive the many without the one.”
from PMB Surely Plato’s Republic could be read as arguing for rule by the philosopher class rather than supporting Athenian democracy. Otherwise I’d say there is a lot of truth in this article. The ‘Remain’ camp do see the EU as a good unifying movement in a potentially dangerous world of competing individual nations. I should imagine they are seeking to ‘mend’ the problems of the last century with it’s 2 world wars. Undoubtedly this is an unconscious motive. ‘Leavers’ are in a sense also looking backwards to the glorious past when Britannia ruled. Certainly in that case neither is ‘Right’.
However, I’d say that ‘Reason’ supports the Leavers side. From the Roman Empire through Napoleon, Prussian belligerence, Communism and Nazism has any attempt at building a European Empire been successful in bringing peace, prosperity and happiness? I just think – If mainland Europe want to try it let them. The UK wants to be Independent. (Oh and if Scotland really wants to leave the UK let them rejoin EU – including the euro.)
The whole Brexit debate is another classic Hegelian Dialectic and is being used to further ‘divide and rule’ the ordinary people.
The ‘Elites’ have no intention of delivering Brexit, but they have engineered a situation where the people have been divided into factions, and are being distracted by arguing and debating amongst themselves as to the merits of leaving the EU or remaining in the EU.
Indeed some three years after the referendum result was announced, the people are pretty much still divided over this issue, and are still debating and arguing, and in many cases bickering and squabbling.
Where the Elites are rubbing their hands in glee, is the fact that even where the people have been already divided politically into the ‘red’ (Labour) and ‘blue’ (Conservative) sides, both sides are now being divided over the issue of Brexit, so you have for example Labour ‘leavers’ and Labour ‘remainers’ squabbling amongst themselves, and likewise Tory ‘leavers’ and Tory ‘remainers’ bickering amongst themselves.
You can argue that the same principle is being applied with ‘Leave’ voters, now being divided into Brexit Party or UKIP ‘factions’, which are now arguing and bickering amongst themselves.
So yes, I agree with the sentiment that this is not about ‘wrong or right’. In essence, both ‘sides’ are right, as much as they are both wrong. It depends very much on your viewpoint or opinion.
But the point is that this is all very much a moot point. While we are all busy being distracted by arguing and debating about which is the better choice, the Elites are still lording over us and continuing with their ‘agenda’ regardless of what either ‘side’ actually thinks.
Nothing is ever seriously going to change unless we, the ordinary people, understand that we need to stop fighting each other, and understand who the real problem is, namely the Establishment Elites.
The idea that if you abolish conflicting parties you abolish conflicts and that the larger a power becomes the more responsible it becomes is the logic of tyranny throughout the ages and the logic of corporatism and collectivism in the 20th century. Rodney Atkinson.
Nah. The Leavers are right.
Clive. You are spot on. As fast as the globalists try to gather everyone together, so the individual parts of each nation begin to highlight their cultural differences, in food, dress, speech, geography, and attitudes. The independence for Scotland but their desire to remain in the EU is a classic oxymoron, and so may I say is their present leader. I have copied and pasted your article into a WORD file and would appreciate your permission to pass it on.
This was not original to Independence Daily. As stated at the top, we republished with the permission of Briefings for Brexit. It is they whom you should approach for permission to pass it on.
Indeed you may say so.
“,,,mother ship that guarantees ‘liberty, equality and fraternity’ for every single individual.”
If they believe that will result from membership of the EU then they are seriously misinformed. Sadly, if they get their way, their awakening to that reality will come too late to do anything about it.
Independence is one of the most basic and obvious aspirations of the individual, the family, the local community, the nation. Yet rarely in history has there been so much effort put into subjugating the individual, the family, the local community, the nation, to a globalist hegemonic agenda aimed at reducing human life to that of just another form of animal life to be exploited.
Edward, thank you for that. Spot on as far as I’m concerned.
Nailed it.