(May 9th) Is David Cameron really trying to make me think there might be a war if we leave the EU. I’m not a lefty poo pooing DC because he is a righty, I quite like him sometimes, needs to keep track of his kids more, but hey he is busy. This war thing is going too far, the remain campaign line today seems to be this:
I’m paraphrasing some smart clever looking chap (Christian? Hunt was it) this morning.
1/ War will be more likely if we leave.
2/ Isolationism historically has been bad.
3/ Oh and we have access to a huge common market.
Taking those points:
1/ WAR: That last time we had a war between north European countries there were many peasants who had never see a foreigner, never tasted any foreign food and were completely ignorant of “abroad” (much like modern day USA, sorry couldn’t resist I love America). Anyway populations were much more gullible and easily lead. Today we have the internet and incredibly complex and entangled economies, we have holiday homes in Europe and much much more. We are NOT going to war. Obviously there have been conflicts in Europe. I’m thinking the Balkans in the 90s but that was about race and religion, as per usual, and no amount of common market would have stopped that kind of hatred. The only thing that stands a chance of stopping war like that is common wealth, i.e. everyone is so rich they don’t want to break their nails killing the people from the other religion anymore. So this war point is a silly one.
2/ ISOLATIONISM: Firstly no one is proposing isolationism, just the opposite in fact. Accusing Brexit of being isolationist is simply exaggerating the opposite view to a ridiculous level. This is such an old cheap debating technique the ancient Greeks even had a phrase for it. Also I’m not sure what/when this historic isolationism was that they are referring to. I thought since 1066 we had been pretty much right in the thick of global events, tramping all over the world getting involved in everything whether we were invited or not. I think we even had an empire. Besides which I’m not sure this point follows anyway, we were in the last two wars because of a complex multinational arrangement of agreements and treaties all designed to keep the peace. So I don’t see that, whatever it is (this isolationism) that DC is accusing Brexit of, how can it be characterised by what we were doing in the run up to either of the last two WWs. So this point is smelly too.
3/ ACCESS : Yes we currently have access to a huge common market, well we will still have access to that market it just might not be completely free or it might be we don’t know. But they seem to be hoping that I will assume that we will have NO access to that market if we leave and everyone that works for a company that ever sold a single widget in the EU will lose their job. Not true (I might be guilty of reductio ad absurdum here, the thing the Greeks has a phrase for, but no because that really is what they are trying to imply it is not me making what they say sound ridiculous). I did a whole post or trade deals earlier. So this argument is disingenuous like a headline that only tells half a story knowing that the rest will easily be assumed wrongly. Another old trick.
Now, these people have had months to work out their arguments and how to present their cases and I’m moaning about Brexit too here. I’d expect something that at least sounds like the truth but these arguments don’t even have the shape of the truth let alone smell like it.
This next bit is complete conjecture on my part but it smells like the truth don’t it: So DC and spin doctors sit in a campaign planning meeting (there must have been one). They are all convinced they are right so they are no longer truth seeking. What they are doing is thinking of ways to convince us of their point of view. They know we are too thick to understand the real reasons in detail so they try to keep it fact free like %0 milk no that’s something else. I’d love to know what their real reasons are because they are clearly making this sh*t up (IMHO) 🙂