To say "the EU needs reform" is one of those things those crass know nothing MPs say. It is a wholly empty piece of virtue signalling that one might squeeze out with the same effort and level of thought as passing gas. I sneer whenever I even hear the words "reformed EU" because it says so much about those who speak them.
What it tells me is that such people have never studied the history and philosophy of the EU or the principles in which it stands. Namely supranationalism. It is written into every strand of EU DNA.
To say it can be reformed as something more akin with what it is assumed to be - an intergovernmental forum for cooperation, the supranationalism would have to be erased. In doing so would be to effectively destroy and reinvent the EU. That is something the EU founders anticipated and designed it to reject any such attempts.
It is fundamentally and implacably at odds with democracy in that it was designed to remove democracy in the first place. The eradication of sovereignty is its raison d'etre. They even say so.
And so when MPs say we should stay in and help to reform the EU, they are ignoring forty years of failed attempts. They are ignoring the nature of the beast. In this they are broadcasting their ignorance loudly. Such ignorance is generally offensive in the average person, but I am of the view that MPs have an obligation to educate themselves in the workings and history of the institutions that shape our laws. The EU being a massive component in that.
In that regard, ignorance is not only inexcusable, it is also an affront to voters. And this is why I am less than pleasant to such people. Not least because their arrogance of office makes them feel entitled to assert their ignorance as fact. And this is where I have a great deal of sympathy with Ukippers who are often lambasted for being angry and unpleasant. Frankly, they have every right to be.
Apart from the dregs of Ukip who are unfortunately the loudest, the average kipper, while they may be sketchy on the details and less diligent in getting their facts right, at least knows what the EU is and why it is so offensive to democracy.
Given the magnitude of the betrayal, it is little wonder they treat journalists and MPs with contempt. I find it difficult to contain my own loathing at times, and while I am reputed for being less than charming, I don't think anybody quite realises just how reserved I have been for the last two years.
It is only for the purposes of message discipline that I can contain the urge to call such people "quislings" and "traitors" as indeed Ukippers do - and while I frown on the use of such terms when we have strategic objectives that require a change of collective persona, I cannot actually disagree with the premise that such people actually fit the description rather well. My complaint with Ukip is primarily their lack of professionalism, preparedness and self-discipline over the essence of their movement.
The absolute truth of this is that a reformed EU, that respects sovereignty and democracy is never ever going to happen unless it has a major shock to the system. Only by Britain leaving can we show that cooperation is possible without coercion. That will then see other non-euro states asking why they cannot have the same autonomy, freedom and agility. With such an example set, the EU would have no choice but to resequence its own DNA and reform. As we can see, the mere threat of leaving alone accomplishes little.
But there is a second dishonesty to the "reform" lie. That we must "wait and see". Again this speaks to the ignorance of our political class in that they presume to lecture us on things they know nothing about and wouldn't know where to look. If you're following the diplomatic chatter, we know that at some point in the future we will see a two tier europe with some marginal concessions, but nothing that alters the master slave relationship and nothing that grants us the agility of trading independence and a veto.
Were that the case, even I would be looking very closely at the case for "wait and see", but as a long standing watcher of EU affairs I know full well no such deal is on the table or is ever likely to be. All we can expect is the slow and gradual decay of UK politics (and subsequently the media and our culture) as the necessity for Westminster atrophies, as indeed we have seen today, so beautifully encapsulated in just two tweets as pictured above.
With so many of the parameters of our energy policy already dictated by EU directives and global accords, there is little of substance to debate in parliament, so why would you not go along to the sideshow? As I understand it, the very reason the Trump matter is up for debate is through a system of public petitioning, which in itself is a symptom of how utterly dysfunctional our representative democracy is.
We have seen our politics debased as we have gradually outsourced the matters of substance, as Eurocrats and MEPs use our data privacy as a bargaining chip - something which isn't even theirs to play with. They have no mandate - and yet our own (supposedly) legitimate politicians occupy themselves with displacement activity - and worse still do not see any immediate problem with it. Such is the groupthink of the Westminster bubble and the coprophagic media that follows it.
In this regard, when MPs say "reform", what they actually mean is "remain at any cost" - and presume to tell us that this is right for the country from their position of massively inferior knowledge. What other possible response is there other than to treat these people with the utmost contempt? How else should we respond to such a gross insult? And by what nerve do such people think they have a right to any kind of respect?
No comments:
Post a Comment