Friday, 23 December 2016

Aftermath part 2 - Poisoning the Well

"In order to help the people understand that they're on the wrong side of history, they had to realise how unpalatable they were. Some unforeseen force, some fear was needed to drive them away from their position. An existential notion so distasteful that, with the right framing, it would be impossible to defend."

It started with stunned silence - but the losing narrative soon changed

I'm not sure that the depth of our current situation has become clear at all and we may be heading in to an unprecedented sea of discontent, for which there is no easy means of resolution. I'm not talking here of the uncertainties over trade, commerce and prosperity for the UK in a post Brexit world but moreover something for more insidious and far reaching.

This referendum hasn't been a one off democratic event. That description is far too benign to describe what's really just happened. Before we joined the EEC in 1973, we'd moved away from the notion of Empire and the 'benevolent' autocratic subjugation of other nations, substituting hard power with trade and soft influence. Our form of democratic government, aligned with our own sense of national identity and purpose allowed us not once, but twice to intervene in world wars instigated on the continent. The UK, guided by a democratic system which has eschewed all forms of political extremism for many years - has helped save the continent from itself, a price paid for in blood and trauma by its citizens. The UK can in no way take credit for the rise of Hitler or Mussolini, only their downfall.

Yet if the wake of the referendum is anything to go by, the UK shouldn't be seen as a virtuous and ingenious nation capable of punching well above its weight. Instead, if many embittered Remainers are to be believed, we find that the nation is a shameful place jam packed full of racists, xenophobes and wilfully ignorant morons hell bent summoning fascism to our very shores . Along with those sentiments, words such as 'nationalism' and 'populism' are being bandied about online and across the liberal wings of the press to add to the sense that a vote of ignorance is about to usher in the devil, last seen rising out of Germany just before world war two.

Particularly, to have pride in a nation, its ambitions and its achievements is now considered to be a sinister tell tale warning sign of fascism to come. Why? Because globalists, fuelled by their own ambition to enforce their integrationist ideology on the unwashed masses, have gone for the kill by short circuiting the path between national pride and authoritarianism.

Let's look at fascism:

philosophy or movement; nation or race is supreme; authoritarian leadership (typically dictatorship); socio-economic control with extreme oppression of opposition.

Are we fascists yet?

Clearly, by any stretch of the imagination, love of a nation does not equate to the want of fascism.  Especially, if the nation in question is the UK, underpinned by a parliament first established by Simon de Montford in 1265 - or where all were subject to the rule of law, as established by Magna Carta 50 years before that. In the context of the referendum, the latent desire of many Leavers I met was to protect the integrity of that very system because they know that it has served us justly for many many years, helping us navigate through the darkest hours of European history. It's not perfect by any means. Although we elect MPs to serve in the House of Commons and can hold them accountable at the ballot box, the bicameral nature of parliament means that unelected members of the House of Lords can both raise legislation and intervene in laws proposed in the other house. The model is not satisfactory and has required revision for some time now, yet the people and democracy are safe guarded to some extent by the primacy of the house of Commons and The Parliament Act.

By contrast, the system being imposed by the EU is seen to fall short of that mark because it fails to provide the direct link between electorate and the law makers that the UK have grown to trust. Instead, we have a system which is hard to fathom by the majority, with tiers of separation which gives rise to the impression that the Commission (law makers) are operating without a yoke. The absurdities of this system, which I'm convinced is designed to neuter national power rather than amplify it, is beyond the scope of this particular post, but suffice to say that concerns are warranted.

The upshot of all this is that the instinct of Leavers is to retain the Goldilocks state of democracy. One where they will fight to the death to defend it from fascists, as they did in world war two - and they will upend the political apple cart if they feel that their link to government is being eroded. For such a noble desire, is it really right that many activist Remainers are distilling a hateful brew? The bitter truth here appears to be difficult to swallow.

The language of losing

Over time, the language of losing from the more vocal of the 48% has evolved. It began with a near blissful silence in the days that followed the vote, but that blessing was short lived. Soon we heard mutterings of discontent focussing on the 'stupidity' of leavers who were obviously not intelligent enough to know what they had voted for. The story moved on to one of the people having been deceived by the Leave campaign. Lies had been told (only on one side mind you) and the gullible had swallowed them whole. Then the mood grew to anger. Anger that the wilfully ignorant were wrecking everything that intelligent and virtuous people had worked for over the last forty years. Then the narrative moved on again to question the worth of democracy itself; what good can it be if people like us have to accept what people like 'them' want? But that was always going to be a tall order to sell, in spite of the obvious want of technocratic imposition to guide people without fear of interference.

Broad brush generalisations of stupidity and xenophobia, a common comforter for the losing side

Better still was the idea of a second referendum where people could chose again, but chose correctly this time. In order to help the people understand that they're on the wrong side of history, they had to realise how unpalatable they were. Some unforeseen force, some fear was needed to drive them away from their position. An existential notion so distasteful that, with the right framing, it would be impossible to defend. What other than the notion of Hitler and his ilk returning through the misguided actions of the people themselves. Xenophobes. Racists. Fascists. You have one last chance to save yourselves before the continent is mired in unthinkable horror. Come over to Remain or condemn us all to a future of oppression and warfare.

The hunt for authoritarianism

Yet if authoritarianism demands unquestioning obedience to an ideology espoused by the few, where's the evidence that this is happening? Disturbingly, I see more of this pressure coming from globalists keen to usher in their narrow view of the future at alarming expense.

Here's the VP for External Affairs and Dean for Europe at Aberdeen university, holding up the reversal of the Swiss referendum as an example for Brexit:

Willing democracy to come second place to the EU

She also happens to be former Chief Scientific Adviser to Jose Manuel Barroso, so no surprises perhaps that there's not a taint of horror at the notion of democracy being over-ridden. The point I'm making here, and I want you to consider it very carefully, is that there are many people who consider democracy a threat to their own interests and desires and would happily impose their ideology on the majority.

Here's another example of a very worrying trend:

Again - democracy gets forgotten in all this.

Picture what's being said here. Scientists for EU echoing a report that the EU is cracking down on Eurosceptic groups. A follower praises the action, suggesting that Ukip should be shown the door. To paraphrase: The EU is clamping down on democratically elected opposition; Remainers celebrate and demand the eviction of those who would challenge the EU's authority. In spite of the fact that it's the mandate on which they were elected.

Are alarm bells ringing now?

This is why the battle for Brexit is multifaceted. On the one hand it's a straight question about the UK's political alignment with other members of Europe. On the other, it's about saving ourselves from a new emerging class based system where weight is given to the views of the entitled few over the many. In the democratic world, 'one person - one vote' protects the rights and needs of every man. In the post democratic world, it's easy to see the weight of decision making aligning to privileged intellectuals who do what's best for them. You only need look at the likes of Christine Lagarde and the outcome of her recent trial to know that there's one rule for us and another for them.


Emotive language is being used to shape our understanding of what's happening. An information war which is as full of falsehoods as the lies it claims to call out. It does not care who it tars with the brush of racism or fascism, so long as it achieves its desired goal: To cow the people in to submission by virtue of a form of moral entrapment. Introducing a boolean state where taking any position but their own righteous stance leaves you mired in the most caustic and repugnant of accusations. By these means, they poison the well. Drink at your peril.

To the contrary, this kind of engineering, designed to manipulate thinking in one direction is a form of authoritarian control in its own right, as demonstrated by the mob handed demonisation it metres out. It is the enforcement of an ideology by the few on the many. It is the removal of opposition (essential to democracy). It's a new form of 'intellectual' fascism where a globalist class subvert the nationalist class not by brawn but by guile.

1 comment: