So Nigel Farage stands up in the European Parliament to defend the right of Catalonians to self-rule and self-determination. In doing so he tries to portray himself as a defender of people’s rights; he is nothing of the sort. On social media I see many people believing in his rhetoric: the great White Knight of Christendom come to rid us of of the Evil (?Arab, etc.) invaders.
His devotees easily ignore the fact that, as leader of the United Kingdon Independence Party (UKIP), he never stood up for the rights of the people of Scotland, Ireland or Wales in their struggle for self-rule and self-determination. His ‘victory’ was their defeat. He never won an election. He is only famous for recruiting a large fascist malitia (from BNP, NF, EDL, etc.) to put down the insurrection of the UK’s break-away states in exactly the same way that he now accuses the Spanish state of doing.
There is no logic or justification to Farage’s actions from a moral or legal point of view; his only logic is the blind fervour of ‘the Patriot’. This, he feels, entitles him to do anything that serves his own interests; he shares the same narcissistic trait as Hitler, he broadly interprets his interests as the interests of ‘the country’, or ‘the (?real) European people’, etc.
In the end, the only interest Nigel Farage has in the internal politics of Spain (apart from a small increase in arms sales) is to create instability in the region, and thereby promote the UK’s claim to the sovereignty of Gibraltar. This is a key negotiating point. He will, of course, be covertly supported in this endeavour by the UK Conservatives, through the exercise of the traditional triumvirate of their military, financial and petroleum assets.
No doubt Boris Johnson is busy briefing his officials in Whitehall on this subject; one assumes that we MUST protect our trade routes to the old British Empire via. the Mediterranean Sea; we MUST never let something like the Suez Crisis happen again; therefore, we MUST sell more arms to Syrian, Egyptian and Kurdish rebels to stem the ISIS infidels; we MUST never let the Freinds of Israel down; and we MAY ALWAYS recite ‘the Road to Manadaly’ without fear of retribution when we visit Buddhist Temples in Burma.
At the same time the Brexit negotiations conducted by the FCO have ground down to their inevitable ‘bureaucratic impasse’; NO DEAL is beginning to look like THE ONLY DEAL we were ever likely to reach with the EU. I can’t think anyone but Nigel Farage is happy about this. The Conservatives have suffered some huge casualties to get this stage of crippling nihilistic inertia; it seems like the trench warfare of the Somme all over again, with Christmas fast approaching.
It is now the time we should be asking ourselves, is this what we voted for in the referendum? Because, however we voted, I think we were voting for a solution to our problems, not more problems. Hopefully we can all now see that there are no solutions lying in the direction that Nigel Farage wants to take us. If we want solutions, rather than creating more intractable problems for each other, we must think again.
Here is a suggestion:
1) the problems we had with the EU were the same problems that all the member states had with the EU;
2) the solutions that we seek are the same solutions that all member states were seeking
3) therefore, the solution is not exiting the EU but reforming the EU using the Brexit negotiations as a tool
4) the main problem with the EU as it was, was the lack of control member states had over taxing the imports of other member states (including the taxing of 'the free-movement' of labour)
5) independent taxation and trading tariffs within the internal market is necessay to balance the different economies of the various member states, based on their political-geography, population needs and ownership of the means of production
6) as an example, look at the USA as a model of a succesful trading block; it has individual member States that share a currency but are still able to set their own trade tariffs (i.e. taxes) on the products of other member states within an internal market
7) this system creates an internal gearing mechanism that enables the internal market to find its own levels between demand and supply chains, in much the same way that having different currencies does, without the hassle and potential conflicts (?over Sovereignty) caused by having different currencies
8) during the financial crisis currency itself became a comodity; the printing of money during 'quantitative easing' effectively reduced its value through increasing the supply of money to meet the demands of those private stakeholders the country was in debt to.
9) This effectively reduced our debt burden but it would have reduced the value of our economic products too, leading to an escalating spiral of inflation, if other currencies had not also been going through the same devaluation, keeping the prices of our products relatively stable.
10) the problems the Euro-zone faced during that time was that it couldn’t find a rate of exchange with external currencies that was suitable for all areas of its internal economy and conflicting political-geographic agendas
11) Therefore, ‘Brexit’ is a direct result of, and political metaphor for, the problems the UK and EU faced during the financial crisis: the relative strength of the GBP within the same internal market as the Euro created a tension that had to be resolved, at some point in the future.
12) the restructuring of the UK economy as a result of Brexit seems to be heading in the direction of a lower-wage, larger manufacturing sector (relative to service sector). It will have less reliance on the financial services sector which will mean a huge loss of taxation revenue. This will necessitate a smaller government with less military power. In addition to calls for Scottish independence within the EU, North Sea oil is running out.
13) Therefore, the UK’s old right-wing triumvirate, that grew through the industrial revolution, created a British Empire that stretched around the globe, and essentially won the Cold-War, will finally be dead. A Russian/German alliance will likely see the rise of a subsequent Euro-centric empire (something like the Austro-Hungarian Empire without its religious hang-ups); but this will inevitably create problems for the other EU member states.
14) The only way the UK can avoid its own demise is to remain in the EU but only if the EU agrees to reform as was suggested above; this would require an EU wide referendum that the UK would also be signatories
16) That's what everyone said before the referendum but it hasn't happened yet? The rebalancing of the UK economy has already begun. Manufacturers are able to export more to the EU given the weakness in the GBP. However, the rising cost of importing the raw materials has squeezed margins. Thus, incomes have remained at their pre-Brexit levels while prices of imported goods (i.e. food) has steadily risen. Consequently, things like property has become more expensive to UK residents, whilst it has become cheaper for international investors. Over a period of time; these disparities are only going to increase.
The above a proposal would clearly require some political maneouvering by all parties involved. It is unlikely to be a final product. However, it is a proposal for an 'End Game' that is notably lacking at the moment. Games that have no-end tend to be parked by politicians in deadlock. The trenches of the first world war were a solution to a similar sort of problem. Thus, although some may consider No Deal is better than Any Deal, I urge all the others to disagree.
15) What would happen if it was rejected by the electorate? In theory, financial services and other large businesses, such as the energy and armaments industries, will relocate to the EU in order to maintain their place within the single market. The UK will be forced to cut taxation even further in order to attract what busineses they can. The UK will get weaker militarily, financially and technologically relative to the EU. Eventually the UK would have to reintegrate with the EU.
16) That's what everyone said before the referendum but it hasn't happened yet? The rebalancing of the UK economy has already begun. Manufacturers are able to export more to the EU given the weakness in the GBP. However, the rising cost of importing the raw materials has squeezed margins. Thus, incomes have remained at their pre-Brexit levels while prices of imported goods (i.e. food) has steadily risen. Consequently, things like property has become more expensive to UK residents, whilst it has become cheaper for international investors. Over a period of time; these disparities are only going to increase.
The above a proposal would clearly require some political maneouvering by all parties involved. It is unlikely to be a final product. However, it is a proposal for an 'End Game' that is notably lacking at the moment. Games that have no-end tend to be parked by politicians in deadlock. The trenches of the first world war were a solution to a similar sort of problem. Thus, although some may consider No Deal is better than Any Deal, I urge all the others to disagree.
