Well, with only two days left until the vote, I have left this post until pretty much the last moment, but that will hopefully result in a clearer assessment than if I had posted early on the in the debate.
In my previous post I listed three very broad criteria that are important to me:
1. The well-being of myself, family and friends
2. The nature of the society in which I live (ie social cohesion, individual freedom, well-being of the wider population)
3. Protection of nature and the environment (locally, nationally, and globally)
In this post I will examine the second. One thing that has become very clear to me is that social cohesion has suffered from this referendum before any votes have even been cast. The debate has been tribal, with people dividing themselves into opposing groups and engaging in a verbal jousting contest with seemingly little interest in, or respect, for evidence, logic, or thoughtful analysis. The political leaders in the contest and their referees in the media have ensured that the outcome of the referendum will have little to do with informed decision making, but will rest instead on a combination of vacuous or deliberately deceptive rhetoric, personality, and chance.
One of the key arguments of the Leave campaign is that in exiting the EU Britain will regain full democratic control. However, democracy depends on having an informed electorate. The appalling quality of the 'information' and 'misinformation' presented to British voters in this referendum, and indeed in recent general elections, have convinced me that giving greater power to the UK parliament offers little benefit at this time. It can only serve to divide society even more than it already is.
The divisions in this country are essentially due to economic inequality, which is caused not by immigration, but by a social and economic system that rewards disproportionately those who are lucky enough to have well paid employment or sizable assets. I fear that if Britain leaves the EU that divisive tendency is likely to strengthen. It is a tendency that is increasing globally, but finds its strongest support in the the US and the UK - especially amongst those involved in the Brexit campaign. Much of our media and most of the politicians on the Leave are extremely hostile to policies that could lead to a less unequal society, such as more progressive taxation, stronger safety nets and worker protections, and greater public investment. The only way I could envisage Brexit paving the way for such policies would be if the economic consequences of Brexit were so dire as to give victory to Corbyn's Labour party at the next general election. Freed from EU shackles which constrain policy movements both towards the right and the left, a Corbyn led government could, perhaps, turn Brexit into a force for social progress.
However, there is no guarantee that the left would be the beneficiary of major economic turmoil. A further lurch to the right is equally probable. As much as I would like to see a Corbyn government, voting to Leave so as to crash the economy in the hope that Corbyn, rather than Farage, will pick up the pieces is too much of a gamble. Sadly I don't trust British voters or the motives of the press and mainstream media.
Some say that it is immigration that causes divisions in society, both here in the UK and elsewhere, and that controlling immigration will ease tension. I don't believe it. Hostility towards immigrants is a symptom of our unbalanced economy and the inequality it creates. Immigrants are an obvious scapegoat when people feel neglected or insecure and they will remain the target of hostility as long as people fail to understand the underlying causes of their predicament. I'm not convinced that anti-immigrant feeling will diminish even if the inflow of migrants were to slow following a Brexit.
Greater public investment in housing and public services, as well as in education, jobs and infrastructure could solve many of the problems that immigration is perceived to be contributing towards. Brexit on its own is unlikely to do that. Indeed if the majority of economists are to be believed it can only make the problem worse by reducing jobs, creating greater unemployment, and reducing the tax revenues needed to make such investments.
Social cohesion more broadly across Europe and the World is also an important consideration in evaluating the relative merits of Leave and Remain. This is a much harder problem to wrestle with. It depends upon the wider economic and political impact of Brexit which is hard to assess. Brexit could conceivably create the impetus for much needed reform of the EU, and the Eurozone in particular, which might strengthen European economies, thereby reducing some of the social pressures associated with economic stagnation. On the other hand it could lead to the total break up the EU as populist politicians elsewhere take inspiration from the UK, thus paving the way for increasing numbers of right wing nationalist governments outside the EU. It is hard to predict where that might lead but it is not unreasonable to see worrying parallels with the 1930s and the eventual outbreak of World War II.
Is it possible for the EU to dissolve without creating such catastrophic outcomes? I don't know. It depends upon the economic effects. The greater the severity of the economic impact the less likely it is turn out well socially and politically. I suspect that most economists would expect the economic consequences of a relatively rapid break up of the EU to be severe at best, and most likely catastrophic, affecting not only the EU, but the whole world. Of course the EU may dissolve more slowly or it may not dissolve at all. Brexit's impact on the EU could even be benign, but again, I think the downside risks of a malign outcome are too great to justify voting to leave on that basis. My guess is that the EU is already in terminal decline. However, a gradual decline is surely less risky than a speedy one. Admittedly I don't know whether Brexit will speed up the process or slow it down, although I'm inclined towards the former.
In conclusion, there is not much in all of this that suggests leaving would be a good thing. The most salient risks lie in a Brexit, whilst the potential benefits would require me to make some fairly heroic assumptions about the quality of British democracy and the potentially benign repercussions of Britain's departure from the EU.
No comments:
Post a Comment