The Great EU Conundrum - Part 2
The Vision of what the EU could be
In the first part of this article, posted here, we asked three questions:
Is the EU a good thing?
Has the EU made an irrevocable democratic decision
Is it morally right to ignore the visions and ideals of the young?
We have seen how in many ways the EU is a bad thing, one of the worst aspects of corporate manipulation and financial shenanigans. But is there another way to see this?
The importance of the EU.
The EU is important for all the reasons the young will explain, the ones who are now marching in their thousands in the streets of London and gathering in European capitals urging the UK not to leave. They intuit, as this writer does, that there is also an ideal behind the EU that is of supreme importance. This ideal was hardly articulated by the Remain campaign with their fixation on Economic indicators and forecasts. It was of a creative Union at peace with itself, enjoying its variety, its cultural differences, its geographic variations, where those who wished to, could travel and work freely.
This is indeed a vision worth fighting for. And worth dying for, as did many in World War Two.
Some of the founders of the EU were guided by a vision much like this, as is quite evident in their writings, and no-doubt, some were not (the ones in the pay of the CIA, allegedly.)
The fact that the vision of a true community of nations, neighbours celebrating difference and well as communality, only partly came into being, does not mean the vision was wrong or that the ideal is bereft of further meaning.
It is this world that the young in the UK – and beyond, all across Europe – see quite clearly in their mind’s eye. This is what motivates them. We ignore their dreams at our peril, for paying no heed to these deeply held convictions will simply alienate a whole generation - and us ‘Oldies’ may come to rue the day that we did that.
Is the EU a good thing?
Has the EU made an irrevocable democratic decision
Is it morally right to ignore the visions and ideals of the young?
We have seen how in many ways the EU is a bad thing, one of the worst aspects of corporate manipulation and financial shenanigans. But is there another way to see this?
The importance of the EU.
The EU is important for all the reasons the young will explain, the ones who are now marching in their thousands in the streets of London and gathering in European capitals urging the UK not to leave. They intuit, as this writer does, that there is also an ideal behind the EU that is of supreme importance. This ideal was hardly articulated by the Remain campaign with their fixation on Economic indicators and forecasts. It was of a creative Union at peace with itself, enjoying its variety, its cultural differences, its geographic variations, where those who wished to, could travel and work freely.
This is indeed a vision worth fighting for. And worth dying for, as did many in World War Two.
Some of the founders of the EU were guided by a vision much like this, as is quite evident in their writings, and no-doubt, some were not (the ones in the pay of the CIA, allegedly.)
The fact that the vision of a true community of nations, neighbours celebrating difference and well as communality, only partly came into being, does not mean the vision was wrong or that the ideal is bereft of further meaning.
It is this world that the young in the UK – and beyond, all across Europe – see quite clearly in their mind’s eye. This is what motivates them. We ignore their dreams at our peril, for paying no heed to these deeply held convictions will simply alienate a whole generation - and us ‘Oldies’ may come to rue the day that we did that.
Are we stuck with the decision now it has been made?
The letter from A. C. Graying sets out the case for Parliament to act as it should, constitutionally, far better than could be done here. Reading the letter is a must, for anyone who loves the U.K. whether they are a Remainer of a Leaver.
It can be found here. No, we are not stuck with this snapshot of sentiment - that may well now have changed significantly, once the real awareness of what we have collectively done sank in. It is, legally, a recommendation to Parliament. A referendum on Capital Punishment would result in a return to hanging, with little doubt, but Parliament has resisted both the referendum and, well informed about carefully constructed arguments, has rightly resisted every siren call to go back to days of dawn executions.
The referendum on the EU should be treated the same way.
There are good reasons why. We are making a change that will have ramifications for decades, if not centuries. It is a constitutional change. The ardent Brexitiers want to rush. (We may rightly ask “why?”) The more savvy amongst them know full well that the appetite for going it alone may well wane, when he lack of financial advantage, and the inability to totally control immigration become apparent.
Parliament is there to think for us. That is what our democracy means. If the USA or Switzerland were faced with a similarly great constitutional question, in their rule books, a simple majority would not be enough. Such a huge question would require a two thirds majority or a double majority (in Switzerland).
We have no written constitution for questions like this, but the tyranny of a small majority undoubtedly would have been challenged by Farage and his ilk, had it gone the other way. He is on record as saying so.
We must expect at the very least the invocation of Article 50, taking us out, only happens through a vote in Parliament. Preferably, that vote who'll then be followed by a general election. This issue is too important for it to be settled on the basis of downright falsehoods that were offered to the nation, and are now quite clearly seen as lies.
It can be found here. No, we are not stuck with this snapshot of sentiment - that may well now have changed significantly, once the real awareness of what we have collectively done sank in. It is, legally, a recommendation to Parliament. A referendum on Capital Punishment would result in a return to hanging, with little doubt, but Parliament has resisted both the referendum and, well informed about carefully constructed arguments, has rightly resisted every siren call to go back to days of dawn executions.
The referendum on the EU should be treated the same way.
There are good reasons why. We are making a change that will have ramifications for decades, if not centuries. It is a constitutional change. The ardent Brexitiers want to rush. (We may rightly ask “why?”) The more savvy amongst them know full well that the appetite for going it alone may well wane, when he lack of financial advantage, and the inability to totally control immigration become apparent.
Parliament is there to think for us. That is what our democracy means. If the USA or Switzerland were faced with a similarly great constitutional question, in their rule books, a simple majority would not be enough. Such a huge question would require a two thirds majority or a double majority (in Switzerland).
We have no written constitution for questions like this, but the tyranny of a small majority undoubtedly would have been challenged by Farage and his ilk, had it gone the other way. He is on record as saying so.
We must expect at the very least the invocation of Article 50, taking us out, only happens through a vote in Parliament. Preferably, that vote who'll then be followed by a general election. This issue is too important for it to be settled on the basis of downright falsehoods that were offered to the nation, and are now quite clearly seen as lies.
Do we have the moral right to leave?
We know for sure, that this vote split along lines of geography (acceptable), educational background (that should perhaps make us think) and age (that should certainly make us think?
Do the over 50’s have a right to dictate the long term future of the under 40’s?
This is not a question that can just be shrugged off with “oh well, only 30% of the under 25’s voted”. Perhaps they caught the whiff of hypocrisy. Perhaps they never thought in a million years that the resurgent Remain Campaign (in the polls) could actually be defeated. But they truly know now.
Top ignore the young in our country is not a good long term plan.
So to those who have read this far, and who are keen Brexitiers, you might wish to consider how you would explain to a hall of 20 - 30 year olds, why you are right and they - all 70% of them) are wrong.
Let us hope our elected MPs in our sovereign Parliament, exercise their democratic rights with the fervour expected by the leave Campaigners … or else what on earth as this all about.
Do the over 50’s have a right to dictate the long term future of the under 40’s?
This is not a question that can just be shrugged off with “oh well, only 30% of the under 25’s voted”. Perhaps they caught the whiff of hypocrisy. Perhaps they never thought in a million years that the resurgent Remain Campaign (in the polls) could actually be defeated. But they truly know now.
Top ignore the young in our country is not a good long term plan.
So to those who have read this far, and who are keen Brexitiers, you might wish to consider how you would explain to a hall of 20 - 30 year olds, why you are right and they - all 70% of them) are wrong.
Let us hope our elected MPs in our sovereign Parliament, exercise their democratic rights with the fervour expected by the leave Campaigners … or else what on earth as this all about.
