Friday, 21 October 2016

Brexit: Experts and Groupshock..

Fishing boat for Brexit.

 It’s time to get over the shock. The EU Referendum was four months ago. For the sake of our country we now need to work together to create a confident, secure and vibrant society capable of adjusting to transformation. This is not happening at present as too many are enthusiastically trying to scupper or stall the implementation of Brexit: via political manoeuvres, the corporate media, social media and through the courts. I do have some empathy for the hurt experienced by Remain voters: it’s like following your football team the whole way through the cup competition only to be hammered in the final by a team of lower ranking.

What I find most telling in the aftermath of the EU Referendum was the scale of the genuine shock at the result. A feeling of devastation at the result was to be expected from whichever team lost.  But the fact that millions of enthusiastic Remain voters were shocked as well as being devastated needs to be addressed.

Groupshock is perhaps a new word: it is an extension of, and a consequence of, groupthink. Groupshock was particularly prevalent in London, Scotland and Northern Ireland: the main regions where a majority voted Remain.

The Remain campaign was primarily fuelled and financed by leaders of the Westminster Establishment (using public money) and vigorously supported by the EU, governments of individual EU states and the vast majority of other world leaders. They were joined in their Remain campaign by a host of other interdependent corporate bedfellows from the domains of banking, law, corporate media, multi-national corporations and the industries of university, arts, science, and global charity etc.

To increase chances of success the above outfits then engaged “experts” to promote their cause. It is likely that another consequence of the EU Referendum will be the now necessary updating of the dictionary definition of the word expert. The word expert used to relate solely to a person who had expertise in a particular field. To qualify for the title of expert today you actually need to be engaged by a government or corporate sponsor. Experts are only experts when they have vested interests in some establishment at heart. The same experts who have, and still are prophesying post-Brexit doom failed to warn us in advance of the global recession of 2008.

 Long before that big recession some of us simple folk, who would later go on to vote Leave, were convinced that the housing market would soon collapse. But the experts were actively enticing us to enter the negative equity club right up to the last minute. They now expect us to believe them when they tell us that remaining subservient to the EU is good for us. I’m not saying that experts no longer have value. On the contrary, they are indeed a precious source of earthly enlightenment and understanding. We now know that what they tell us is, “good for us” can be understood as: possibly good for them and probably bad for us.
Celebrities were also engaged to persuade the uneducated masses that obedience or devotion to the institution can reap benefits, even for the masses. Not too sure how well that worked out for the cause of Remain though.

Pivotal moment for Brexit on theThames?

So with all this bombardment of propaganda from lofty corporate bodies, their experts and their celebs, we can begin to understand why so many were shocked at the referendum result. But I would like to further explore the root causes of this widespread groupshock and therefore it is necessary to examine the breakdown of those who voted Remain.

Enthusiastic Remain voters have analysed and broadcasted afar what they believed constituted a Leave voter. The believed Leave voters were largely uneducated, stupid, ignorant, senile, racist, Europe-haters.  But I’ve not come across any such analysis of Remain voters, so here’s my attempt at that.

 I reckon there were three basic types of Remain voters.

 Group A:  Those anti-United Kingdom: the New Left.
 Curiously many of the above would align themselves with socialism and the Left: the very groups who have persistently railed against the EU regime and their corporate lobbyists. Their call was always a clarion call for workers to unite in opposition to the excesses of that regime.  Until very recently, that is.

Many from the traditional Left did stick to their long-held beliefs and voted Leave. These included members of Labour, Communist Party, Workers Party and the People Before Profit Party in Northern Ireland. But, like the definition of expert, the definition of socialism and the Left is also going through transformation. I’ll call it New Left to distinguish it from the old traditional Left and the old New Labour, which wasn’t really all that Left at all.

The New Left perhaps sees more opportunity for their political goals and personal ambitions within that EU regime and under its complex cover of excessive bureaucracy? Or could it be more related to their belief in global open borders and unrestricted freedom of movement: their opposition to sovereignty for nation states?  Initially there would seem to be a bit of a conflict here as they will recognise the EU has been moving towards a federal-style super nation state: with open borders being restricted to only those chosen few smaller states within that super state. But I suppose though, the recent migrant crisis within the EU offers opportunity for their global vision? I’m no expert: I’m only guessing. But regardless, their aspirations need to be understood, acknowledged and respected within a new sovereign UK.

Group B.  Those Inextricably Linked to EU Regime.
This group includes leading politicians, civil servants, regional government bosses and corporate bosses of big business, banks, media, charities, the arts, and universities: middle and senior management of all the above. Careers, salaries, pensions are all wrapped up in the current system particularly within the Public Sector. So who could blame their devout loyalty?  They differ from Group A in that they are more prevalent within the Conservative Party, the Liberals and among the old New Labour Blairites.

Like Group A, nothing is going to change the opinion or aspirations of many people in this group anytime soon.

Group C.  Those Once Undecided.
Among this group were those sceptical of the EU but believing that the problems could best be sorted by remaining part of it.  The prime consideration of those in this group was not political but what was best for their financial security and well being: for themselves and future generations.

In the end they decided the safest option for their circumstances was to vote Remain.  This is not to suggest that many people in this category were also not shocked, devastated and frightened by the result. I have many friends in this category and I have been very respectful of their concerns.  I fully understand their rationale and their anxiety. It’s just that I see things differently and firmly believe that by escaping EU rule their futures will be more secure: enhanced with new opportunity. There would be no point in me writing this piece if it wasn’t for the existence of this Group C.

I accept that my attempt at dissecting Remain voters is by no means full proof. Some Remain voters may well not see themselves fitting in neatly to any of my three groupings.  I’m no expert. I’m just trying to figure it out.

One thing that does seem to link the majority of Remain voters is university education. University education was once for only the small minority of the population who were academically gifted, but it seems that now almost half of the overall population have been through the university system or are currently in it. They are being trained, or were trained, to not only be competent and successful within their field of expertise but also trained how to perform and comply with the system. It is a massive industry, interdependent with all aspects of government and big business: the central hub in a sophisticated entanglement of global corporate powers. It is the industry that determines if someone has been adequately trained to work in their field or not. It sorts out the haves from the have nots. It naturally follows then that many students, once renowned for instigating change, now want to maintain the status quo.

This is not a wild swipe at university per se. We need universities to train our professionals: it is just that the industry it has become needs to be understood for what it is.

University means more than just determining vocations: it determines the social group to which you belong. It also determines who your friends and followers are on social media and this starts to explain the groupshock of many Remain voters. It seems they simply were not adequately exposed to comprehensive, rational viewpoints outside of their social or social media group.   They were genuinely totally shocked.

 If nearly everyone on your social media site is in agreement with you it is easy to have delusions of being in a secure bubble protected from malevolent lesser beings: of being part of a supreme infallible mutual appreciation society. They had their communal hymn sheet and were very content singing along in harmony with their friends and colleagues of their New Age congregation.

 I was dumped by several social media friends and followers over Brexit and I expect to lose a few more when they read this.

A recent common proclamation has been, “nearly everyone I know voted Remain”. This statement is delivered with a sense of pride: asserting their claim to be part of the new certified enlightened elite. If they don’t really know many Leave voters, is it any wonder they are misunderstanding their motivations for voting Leave?

 I had various reasons for Voting Leave as I outlined in Why I will Vote  on June 19th 2016. There is no point in rehashing the various reasons as nothing has happened to change my mind on any of the issues to date. You will notice however that I highlighted my dominant reason as being related to sovereignty.

Rather than being shocked on the morning of June 24th, I was instead greatly relieved.  The feeling of relief was actually overwhelming as against all the odds, according to the media, the majority of British people had voted to hold the establishment to account. This was actually a courageous thing, especially for those who openly campaigned for Brexit. This has set Orwell’s Big Brother scenario back for at least a few more decades. Big Brother has to be one big angry man with a vengeance right now.

 We shouldn’t underestimate the short term risks for those who dare to challenge Big Brother, dare to challenge authority, dare to address abuse of power or merely dare try to work in a specific field without the relevant university certificate of approval. Those who dare will often find that servants of the establishment will, under the cover of darkness, erect brick walls and dangerous pitfalls along their chosen path. I know a lot about this: I could write a book about it. And I probably will.

My overwhelming relief at the result was somewhat stifled when I found out that a majority of people in Northern Ireland had voted Remain: trading traditional quests for freedom for the perceived security and riches reaped from compliance to the establishment.

In fairness to Northern Ireland voters, we also had to deal with the repeated threat from the establishment that Brexit would necessitate a hard border across the island of Ireland: a hard border that they claimed would undoubtedly result in a resuming of traditional hostilities. Was this just calculated spin or calculated lies? Regardless, this line is still being spun on a daily basis even though there is no remote possibility of a new hard border. It's just wishful thinking and curiously this time around it has nothing to do with Ulster Unionism. As the recent Nobel Laureate once said,
" the times they are a changing". They certainly are.

No going back to this.

In the world of politics and media it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between truth, lies, creative spin and blatant deceptive spin. It was interesting that regardless of what side of the referendum debate we were on, it was always the other side who were spouting lies and spin.

 For weeks after the referendum it seemed to be a deeply held belief among the groupshocked that the main reason for the result was that Leave campaigners had lied and tricked the uneducated masses into voting Leave. I’m not too sure what all the lies were that they believe influenced me, but one stood out as it was plastered all over my Twitter page by Remain enthusiasts. It related to writings on the side of a bus that they interpreted as a claim that following Brexit £350 million per day could be saved and spent on the NHS instead.

Whatever the exact wording was and what it was supposed to mean had no relevance to how I voted. The notion of £350 million a day is something beyond the scope of my comprehension. My tiny wee Brexit brain just cannot cope with such advanced mathematical theorising. I would go as far as to say that I don’t believe one single person voted Leave as a result of the writings on a bus. The nature of the stereotypical Brexit mentality is that we have a natural aversion to buying anything we see advertised on TV, billboards or busses. For us it was the writing on the wall (for the EU) that was crucial, not the writing on the bus.
I have natural aversion to buying anything advertised on a bus.

It is also extremely likely, considering the impassioned hyped highlighting of this now notorious bus, that many undecided voters actually chose to vote Remain as a consequence of the bus. The Remain campaigners deserve to be complimented on their polished promotional strategies but I do think it’s now time to drop the bus story.

It is also time to get over the Brexit vote. It is time for all of us to start thinking positively for our future. I hate to sound preachy but positive thinking does breed confidence and positive outcome.

It no longer matters if it was a stupid decision or not.  It doesn’t matter if you believe that the majority of Brits are mere imbecile xenophobic peasants who shouldn’t be allowed to vote as they have no understanding of the real world. The fact is that in spite of faults and imperfections of British government we are still a democratic country and we were given the opportunity to vote for our future on June 23rd.  The majority of us voted to regain our sovereignty. We voted for the basic right to be able to hold our locally elected politicians and law makers to account.

We now need to demonstrate to the wider world that we as an independent nation have the self confidence, the skills, the services, the social consciousness and the human values to be significant trading partners, friends and allies with our European neighbours and the world out beyond.  I’m personally looking forward to the opportunity for increased mutual collaboration with the Republic of Ireland.  I had previously predicted this would be one of the positive developments that Brexit could facilitate.

So please stop the daily vitriol, obstructions, protests, threats and legal challenges.  This is becoming very draining and damaging for our economy: it is fomenting social division.  Let’s get on with creatively and collectively rising to the challenges ahead. If we do we can create an historic exciting new transition for us all and for the future generations. Yes and all even includes you lot in Groups A and B.

I can appreciate that it is the responsibility of those of you involved in politics to actively challenge and scrutinise our government. This is essential in any democracy but can be done without exacerbating internal division and damaging the image of our country. There are too many groups, fuelled by shock and anger at the Brexit vote, currently out to wreck our country. For many Remainers it seems their need to demonstrate they were right, and Leavers wrong, is paramount.  Someone has obviously pressed a communal self-destruct button and hopefully the same someone will switch it off soon so that the bigger picture can be considered.

Those of us who are not members of a political party should presently give encouragement to our government who are promising to deliver a positive Brexit for the good of all concerned.  Our new prime minister has been making all the right noises but she must decide whether to definitively deliver the democratic wish of the people or follow in the red-carpeted corporate footsteps of her predecessors. And we shouldn’t be under any illusion that some of her colleagues in government will continue prioritising corporate lobbyists in their pursuit of personal gain.

This is no easy position for any prime minister to be in. In a world where the global corporate roosters rule the roost they will be playing every sleazy trick, in every book in their extensive corporate fowl library, to solidify their positions of wealth and power at the top of the big global midden. And I’m not even going to mention pigs at the trough.
Corporate rooster ruling the roost.

Theresa May exudes confidence, strength, knowledge and determination: essential traits for a nation’s leader. However, the recent Westminster decision to approve the French built, Chinese owned Hinkley Point nuclear power potentially catastrophic monstrosity, as endorsed by experts, is a classic example of the powerful clout of global corporations. This is the nature of global corporate power she is up against, although any economical or environmental fallout from Hinkley will probably only manifest several years down the road.  Should she fail to deliver Brexit the political fallout would be immediate and on a scale unprecedented.

 She is a politician but we should give her the benefit of any doubt for now as significant public support will be essential for her to deliver what she promises. Theresa May just might, maybe, be the first prime minister in a very long time that the history books will record as being for the people.

We all now have the choice of whether to desperately cling to the sinking EU ship - well okay, the floundering EU fishing trawler off the coast of Cornwall - or become active crew members aboard this exciting new voyage of world wide exploration. We can collectively create an exciting new future for ourselves, our neighbours and the next generation - regardless of politics, religion, colour or creed. We can do this once we get over groupshock and stop pandering to ploys of experts.

No comments:

Post a Comment