I find myself asking what I know this morning.
I posted a video yesterday in which George Monbiot suggested that we base our lives on the stories we tell. I think this is true. One reason I have for writing rugs blog is to work out just what the narrative of my life might be. I would suggest that all of us, in our different ways, do this all the time.
At times like the present it is harder to work out what the stories on which we build what we think we know might be. If there is an observation on which most could agree at present it is that we are living in extraordinary times.
We have a prime minister in name only. He cannot command the House of Commons. He cannot call an election. He has wilfully destroyed any chance of having a parliamentary majority. He has torn his own party asunder. And he wilfully says he will not comply with the law. Everything we have been used to as norms of behaviour has been torn to shreds.
But it's worse than that. We know he is a pathological liar. Once it was just bent bananas. Only recently it was a claim that he builds model buses. Both were so obviously fabricated and yet offered as the truth that it was ridiculous that the purveyor of such tales might be believed. But now he is Prime Minister. And the lies go on.
He claims to be negotiating with Brussels. He glaringly obviously is not.
He says we will leave the EU on 31 October but it is now clear that this is very unlikely indeed.
He claims we are ready for No Deal. Nothing can prepare us for a shock of that sort - even if the hit is only 5.5.% of GDP as Mark Carney now suggests.
But worse, he even claims there is such a thing as No Deal, when very obviously that is also not true. It is impossible for any country to trade without an agreement with is neighbours. ‘No Deal' as described by Boris Johnson simply means defaulting to the worst deal possible. It does not mean there will be no deal. That's a lie.
An even bigger lie is that his No Deal will resolve matters. It does instead mean starting negotiation all over again from scratch, from the worst possible position.
Wise people know this. They're saying it as well. And many are paying the price for it, at least in England. In other constituent countries of the UK there may be more sense on this. But in England it seems that many are willing to believe Johnson, even as his party collapses around him.
This may be the hardest part of all this to accept. How is it that the Tories still have an opinion poll lead when there is every sign to anyone with any sense - and I am including Amber Rudd in that list this morning, so it's a broad church - that what Johnson is doing is not just profoundly wrong, but blatantly undeliverable in any meaningful sense?
I am not presuming that those people who think ‘we must just leave' are stupid. They're not. But they are misinformed. They have built narratives peddled to them by thsoe with deep pockets and a willingness to lie that this is an option that is in their best interests, even though it is not. And whilst they are used to all politicians lying to some degree - of which they are quite aware - they are not used to posh, rich men who they think to be people of honour (although the evidence for that is scarce) doing so as blatantly as Johnson does. Farage just paved the way for him on this path. And so they suspend their judgement. In the hierarchical society that the UK still, regrettably, is these are the people who are followed, over trench tops a century or so ago, and into the economic abyss now.
What is the solution? George Monbiot is right. It's a new story. Femi Oluwole said much the same in Ely yesterday at a People's Vote meeting of those wanting to stay in the EU. We have to learn a better song, and sing it fast.
The message is not hard to work out. It is that our leadership has failed us, on many sides. But that we the people do want to co-exist with our neighbours, because we do know we are better when cooperating, and we do know that we have more in common than divides us, whilst recognising that we are not all alike and do not wish to be so. We do therefore want to have a relationship with Europe based on mutual trust, the ability to trade and to move between our countries whioch does, however, respect our differences and lets all make decisions that reflect the fact that those differences are real, but must not be used as a means to oppress others. It's really not hard. It's really what most people want. It reflects the great realisation of most troops in most wars throughout history, which is that the other side is much more like them than it is different. It is about community, hope and respect. It is about us, and not the stories told to us by those seeking to manipulate opinions for gain.
But is that a story that can be told between now and November, when an election is likely? I wish I thought that possible.
I am not sure I do.
I still fear the abyss built on the lies of many of which Johnson has become the exemplar.
There are better stories to tell. My concern is that they will not be heard.
Changing that is a task to come. Its day will come. Truth does always out. But right now it's very clear it is not.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Was Femi Oluwole campaigning for the EEA option or Norway option? Based on the content you quoted it is glaringly obvious that he should.
The advantages of EU membership such as being part of a centralised system of farmland owner subsidies and a centralised fishing policy didn’t appear to get mentioned. And no-one said that the EP and EC are great institutions. Moreover being able to shape the laws of 27 other countries in return for them having a slightly higher ability to shape yours has got to be over-rated.
The story that needs to be told is the truth – that the UK if aggregated wants to be half in and half out and the best of the extant versions of that should be the opening page of the book.
Those who want to Remain in the EU don’t even want to talk about a new book for the UK even existing. They want the same story they’ve already read, not a new one.
My problem is I really do not have much idea what you are saying here.
What is it?
Richard,
I believe Perky Travis is suggesting that remainers such as yourself are too wedded to the past and yet to make peace with the fact we all need to move on together into a different future.
He’s saying if half of us want to be in the EU and half want to be out then we need a compromise.
I think that compromise can come after a no-deal brexit. I think leaving the. eU doesn’t mean completely and permanently giving our closest neighbours the cold shoulder.
Like Perky Travis I think it means we have a fresh start, negotiate a new relationship and see what happens from there on out.
You’re a good man Richard and I like and respect you (as I like and respect the remainers among my friends and family (which is lucky because that’s almost everyone I know!)).
However, I think you’re so passionate about brexit that it slightly clouds your perspective. For instance here and previously you seem to accept BoE governor’s predictions even though in almost any case other than brexit you’d criticise him heavily as the neoliberal, mainstream-macro stooge he is.
I honestly believe the truth is brexit or no brexit our biggest issues lie elsewhere and there’s no point getting so worked up on account of the EU and our membership of it.
That’s my narrative and it’s built on a broad and non-partisan intake of information. I’m not stupid, I’m not a Tory, and I pretty much agree with you on most other things.
My narrative going forward would be let’s just take a deep breath and start to repair broken bridges at home so we can present a united front in our future negotiations with the EU and the rest of the world. It’s not so bad is it?
I have to fundamentally disagree with you
But that’s fine
I have friends I fundamentally disagree with on this issue and still go to the pub with
Fundamentally there are, as I understand it, two broad ways of looking at history.
Firstly there’s the “great man”, pivotal moment, critical decisions, sudden dramatic change type viewpoint.
Secondly there’s the demographic, macroeconomic, technological, ecological, gradualist type viewpoint.
Personally I used to, as a younger man, mostly adhere to the former but as I get older I tend to veer ever closer to the latter.
When I felt the first view was closer to the truth I was much more concerned about events. That’s because I felt events could be pivotal and I thought individuals taking the right actions at the right moment really made all the difference.
Now I feel that mostly individual events and individual people don’t matter very much in the grand scheme of things.
So with that in mind I look at the Brexit situation as simultaneously the culmination of large socioeconomic trends over many years and a one off event. To me the underlying causal trends are important because they’re systemic, socially deep and broad rooted and they have a lot of other impacts across our society besides Brexit.
To me brexit the event itself is likely to be insignificant in the long run.
So to me remainers focussed on undoing brexit are expending far too much energy on an endeavour that’s probably bound to fail because it’s going against the larger flow of history at this point.
What’s worse is that the remainer resistance is, in my view, having the effect of increasing the very polarisation already being caused by and causing the underlying trends that have lead us to brexit in the first place.
So yes, we do fundamentally disagree but the grounds we disagree on are the very foundations from which an analysis of current events should be carried out in the first place rather than the detail of current events and their meaning.
You’re convinced that Brexit is of pivotal importance and therefore it is metaphorically a hill worth dying on for the progressive side of UK politics.
I’m convinced of the exact opposite. I think we have to concede the tide of history is strongly against us at this point so we need to go with the flow and focus our energies on the things that will hasten and add power to the next wave of history coming after this.
To use a different metaphor – it’s like martial arts or the art of war: sometimes it’s best not to meet force with force when your opponent is very strong. You’re often best to move out of the way or try to use their momentum against them.
For example: right now the progressive left could be taking what Johnson and Trump are doing in terms of fiscal stimulus and the power of the nation state. Progressives should be amplifying and expand on it to help undo the neoliberal idealogical transformation of the past 4 decades. It’s an opportunity to move the baseline understanding of economics so it’s hard to move it back.
Instead we have the Guardian and others taking Johnson to task over his spending pledges as part of their remainer assault on brexit. Same in America with Trump and his tax cuts and the pressure he’s putting on the fed.
The mainstream progressive left is so focussed on winning this (probably unwinnable) battle that they’re missing out on numerous opportunities to build strong positions from which to win the war in the future.
We’re conditioned to be so adversarial and cliquey (in part by identity politics but also by modern news reporting techniques and the rise of social media) that we all play directly into the hands of those who would divide and rule. To me that’s the fundamental progressive battleground of our time – to undo the fragmentation of populations that leaves them such easy prey to manipulation by bad-actors. By bad-actors I don’t mean just (or even most importantly) Boris Johnson and Trump – I mean all the powerful special interests who gave bullied, conned as cajoled us all into taking our society and economy to the brink of causing civilizational collapse.
@Adam, you are correct in saying that the problems lay elsewhere and ‘Brexit’ as such is not the issue. However, there are two things to point out:
Our relationship with the EU affects all our daily lives from cans of beans through to fresh fruit, standards and healthcare. So any abrupt break will be a calamity. We cannot just walk away and then remake the relationships over any natural period as we will have ports blocked from exit day + 1!
Secondly, the chance to vote on something gave the disgruntled and ignored population and chance to make a protest vote. It was in general not connected to the EU, hardly anyone was concerned about it before June 2016. It is ironic that the party that gave the far off regions austerity voted in protest against that austerity and in doing so supported that party further.
Do you not feel concerned that the vote was won on a small margin after overspending, illegal activity and impossible to deliver promises? I personally don’t see why I should submit to an outcome based on outrageous lies when for example parliament requires a two-thirds majority to call an election. Union ballots also require something more than 50% by law. Let alone the referendum was ‘advisory’.
I am sure you know the arguments but I can’t understand how people can just resign themselves to a drastic change in their everyday life for the sake of getting it over with?
@Adam Sawyer
“What’s worse is that the remainer resistance is, in my view, having the effect of increasing the very polarisation already being caused by and causing the underlying trends that have lead us to brexit in the first place.”
So the ‘remainers’ who see the current No Deal proposals as sheer madness should be quiet and hope the problem will go away ?
That is frankly a silly suggestion, if that is indeed what you mean to imply. I must be misunderstanding your point. (?)
Points of Order Please:
There are plenty of other stories, OK? You’ve written at least two – TJoTax and TCState.
Others including Monbiot have also written and loads of others I have read over the years.
So it is not for lack of alternative narratives. That is bollocks – with respect.
The problem lies in:
1) Getting the popular platforms from which to launch the alternatives and keep them there.
2) Agreeing – those putting forward those better narratives working together in a coherent, siege-like way to create that vision of a new order and sell it continuously to the public.
My inclination is to get people who know about marketing involved too at a serious level. And we need to match I’m afraid the Cummings and Cambridge Analytica’s of this world given that no one in parliament seems to want to do anything about the new digital wild west.
The heterodox movement could also do with a sugar daddy. That will not happen until the principal heterodox movers have a plan and an agreed story.
I honestly believe that I am absolutely correct in what I say. TINA.
PSR out.
PSR
You are right
Those with new narratives need to not only cooperate but stop being so bloody boring
I read a new Green New Deal report. It was meant to communicate urgency and a need for action. I gave it to a son to read. he described it as ‘turgid’ and thought he was being polite, presuming it was written by me. It wasn’t.
Our big problem is that even when we have stories to tell most of us are lousy storytellers – and dress it up in quite literally turgid prose
The stories have to be told in ways people might want to listen to.
Re ‘How is it that the Tories still have an opinion poll lead ‘. I wonder how reliable the polls are. UK statistician David Spiegelhalter doesn’t seem to have a lot of faith in them. Would be interesting to get his views.
Cheers, Gillian
“And so they suspend their judgement. In the hierarchical society that the UK still, regrettably, is these are the people who are followed, over trench tops a century or so ago, and into the economic abyss now.”
What you describe here Richard, is the timeless formation of cults by people who have nice voices, manners, nice clothes, and as you say, authority coming from their hierarchical position. Charisma too. Charisma especially.
I know you are a religious man yourself, and I absolutely don’t mean any disrespect. And I have to declare my own position as an atheist Humanist. But suspension of disbelief is what creates stories people believe in, willingly, because it suits their needs, whether those needs are conscious or not, because the story is attractively and emotionally told. Emotion is more powerful than reason.
Cults are impossible to get rid of. They’ve always existed and always will. But many are totally innocuous, they even seem to help those who belong to them, so long as no aggressive propaganda is used and no political take-over is planned.
This Brexit cult is very dangerous however. It’ll destroy an economy, but much worse, it’ll destroy lives if allowed to go ahead in its extreme No Deal form.
And even beyond that, it’ll destroy a parliamentary system which, though imperfect as they all are, has served fairly well for centuries.
There is simply no way it should be allowed to take hold.
But as I said, cultists will never be convinced by rational arguments. They believe. And that’s that. So we need to concentrate on what can be done through the Law and through institutions to at least limit the influence of cultists.
I spent some time with our MP yesterday, while attending an event unrelated to Brexit (they do exist!). But soon enough, a couple of women around us started to mention the B word…and there we go: ” just get it done, deal or no deal, let’s get it over with”, the usual Daily Mail rubbish came out.
Losing patience is not an option, so both he and I tried to explain that no, it won’t just be “over with” at the switch of a button.
But belief is strong, they don’t want to hear, so bit by bit, we chip at it, with humour and a few jokes…and recipes (I get easily distracted at lunchtime)…and they start to have a flicker of rationality appearing in their eyes…understanding? Not sure it stayed there after they left.
It was interesting to watch and to carry on with this chipping though. That’s all we can do at our level. But for people with large audiences, like you and others, don’t give up, you’ll sometimes chip enough for that flicker to open a great big gap of enlightenment.
Meanwhile, the Courts, the ballot box, Parliament, Bercow…all the really powerful means we have must be supported by a united Opposition.
But yesterday, our MP let slip the news there might be a proposal involving a Northern Ireland Backstop. And that started to worry me again.
There really is no “get it done” quickly is there.
You are right: the slowest outcome by far is No Deal
Bizarre, when you think about what is claimed