To Stay or not to Stay, a Vexing Question

by Glenn N. Holliman

To Stay or Not to Stay?

Since posting Part 1 of Terry Field's essay on Brexit, a number of you have commented favorably on my spring garden and Steph's autumn visitors to her paradise in Australia. Thank you!

Our scholar, David, in the Midlands of England, in addition to remarking on the garden, has sent along a nuanced statement (see below). Terry's verbal sparring partner and very good friend, David Lott, a founder of UKIP,  has responded also, again, with thought and reason to this vexing issue. - GNH

From David in the Midlands

Love your garden in Spring.

Forget the history; forget the economics; forget the rational arguments - I, for one shall vote from the heart (or gut, if you prefer), with my mind closed. For all its faults, I believe in Winston Churchill's vision of a United Europe, and although, we probably won't ever get there, in the face of British (or at any rate, English) Nationalism, the European Union is the nearest approach to it.

Go it alone? What next? An independent Northumberland? An independent Cornwall? Don't be silly.

We've heard expressed a great deal of resentment at President Obama's being in favour of Britain remaining in the EU, usually accusing him of hypocrisy, because, 'they' say, he would never dream of America's sharing 'sovereignty' with other nations. This is to miss the point, because a more accurate analogy would be not the USA's joining with other nations, but for one of its states to vote to leave the USA. 

Hawaii often holds a referendum like our current one, but I can't believe that there will ever be a realistic chance of 'Hawexit'. Hawaiians would not be so naive as to believe that they could 'go it alone'. I wish I could be so confident about the outcome of our referendum.

Before our next opinion, enjoy Steph's Australian sunflowers! 

From David in Normandy, France  

Dear Glenn, 

 Many thanks for sending me the ongoing discussion upon the Brexit question. What follows is my view upon the situation which is not really a response to Terry's latest effort other than a reflection upon how he has changed his view in the past.

In the run up to the UK General election last year Terry Field and I did a great deal of sparring over the question of, for whom he would vote. Terry had voted Conservative over recent years and I tried to persuade him that his party was no longer conservative but more a social democratic party. 

His problem was not that he was enthusiastic about any party but the Conservatives were the least bad option and voting for anyone else would let in the socialists. I deployed the argument that none of the mainstream parties would change anything to any great degree to which he agreed as all successive governments do is fiddle at the edge and, always with an eye on the next election not daring to embark on fundamental reform.

At last he agreed that it could only be by voting for a non mainstream party with radical policies, that included leaving the EU, could real change be achieved. He voted for the UK Independence Party in the event. He seems now to have reverted to his original stance.

We are now a couple of weeks into the campaign and the big guns have been out and firing what may turn out to be blanks as many of these guns are foreign made and the British do not take that well. We have Christine Legarde of the IMF giving dire warning that a Brexit will have a profound negative effect upon the economies of the whole world! Perhaps at last little isolationist Britain would be influential again. 

Many commentators opposing our bid for independence do argue that leaving will be a disaster of the greatest magnitude whilst also saying that the EU will exact vengeance upon us, in terms of trade, for having the temerity to reject our membership. In other words it would be their actions that might cause a disaster and not that of the newly independent UK.

Barak Obama has today entered the fray, even travelling to the UK for the maximum impact. He cites how we must remain in order that we use our influence from within but by doing so betrays a naivety that is breathtaking in its ignorance. Did he not see how Mr Cameron toured the EU begging for significant changes only to come back with a few pathetic scraps? 

He cites the US WW1 and WW2 dead as a reason for the UK to remain in the EU in order to ensure peace, prosperity and security within this construct. We have already failed to do that from within the EU. The streets of EU cities are becoming less safe, particularly for women, in the wake of the tide of mass migration as a result of US/NATO/EU interference in the Middle East and the Ukraine, with Macedonia next on the menu. 

While Chancellor Merkel does her own thing but manages to add an EU label to her actions. Italy is now cracking under the strain just as has Greece. Prosperity, Mr President? Just ask the youth of Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy whether they are prosperous? 

No Sir, we cannot influence this undemocratic entity from within so we must instead look after ourselves and put our own citizens first. To do that we must leave the EU.

If we remain in the EU we do not face continuing with the status quo. Things are moving fast. The organisation is frantically gaining new powers to ensure the creation of a single state. Yesterday we heard of Holland and Germany combining their forces into a single entity, the start of an EU army. This is the same Holland that 10 days ago voted in a referendum to prevent the go ahead to allow all Ukrainians free access to the EU! Is anyone listening to the people? The answer in Brussels is an emphatic NO.

Within the Commonwealth and the US our laws are based upon the same precept but with corpus juris we are gradually having the Napoleonic law imposed upon us. We are soon to have EU wide taxes (they already take a proportion of Sales taxes) imposed upon us. Then there is the whole question of Turkey becoming a member with visa free travel for 75 million Turks in two months time.

The EU certainly is not standing still but increasing its powers at an  alarming rate.

We shall not solve everything by leaving the EU for the safety, security and prosperity of our people. By leaving, our debts will remain, but security will be a little easier when we can control our borders properly. Prosperity will be up to us taking advantage of new found freedoms to trade and why should we fear reprisals as it is not in the interests of exporters on the continent to cut off their noses to spite their faces. 

The one huge advantage that we shall gain is that our politicians will be fully exposed and their decisions theirs and theirs alone. No longer will they be able to hide behind the unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels. They will be directly answerable to us the people who can over time hold the government of the day's nose to the grindstone and if they do not perform will be replaced by a new type of politician. 

Then, just perhaps, we can drive forward into the decades ahead towards a truly prosperous, safe and secure future. 

First though we have to recover our sovereignty and with it our confidence on June 23rd 2016. How appropriate in our Sovereign's 90th year. 

And yes Mr President of the free and sovereign USA that will be our Independence Day.

Cheers

David.     

My thanks to all, and in next posting, will resume Terry's argument that the U.K. must stay in the E.U. 

No doubt our readers are gaining a balanced and reflective view of a major decision facing the United Kingdom

Comments welcome and enjoy flowers from Down Under.

A Comment Received -