Yesterday, one
Tory MP was criticised
by many for describing the EU as “the enemy”.
It may simply have been a military metaphor overstating the case, as he claimed (MPs
overstating their case is hardly an unusual or noteworthy phenomenon). I’m not sure, though, that it’s really that
far away from the thinking of many Brexiteers.
It’s a very short step from seeing “the EU” as a foreign power
controlling our laws to seeing it as an enemy which needs to be fought. And they’d find it hard to distance
themselves from the accusation that they consider it a foreign power
controlling our laws, given everything that they’ve said.
Whilst some of
the Brexiteers do still seem to have enough of a grasp on reality to realise
that the UK is going to have to negotiate with the 27 as a bloc, and that
demonising an organisation which those 27 still see as a key part of their
future may not be the brightest or most constructive approach, I do wonder
whether even they, deep down, share that same antipathy to the very existence
of the organisation. Others are more
honest – how many times have we heard people greeting events in Europe with
phrases such as “we’re leaving a burning
building”, or “it’s going to collapse
anyway”? It’s even possible that
they may turn out to be right rather then merely doing a bit of wishful
thinking - only time will tell; but at the moment, such attitudes are more
likely to strengthen the resolve of the 27 than weaken it.
And, if they
really do believe that the EU is some sort of tyranny from which we’re doing
well to escape, one has to wonder why they would ever be happy to allow so many
other countries to continue living under that same tyranny – the logic of their
position is surely that they don’t just want to leave the building – they really
do want to destroy it as well. Why
wouldn’t they want everyone to be ‘free’?
Isn’t ‘supporting freedom everywhere’ part of their mantra?
This question
of the EU as some sort of tyranny deserves a little more examination
though. Who do they really believe are
the tyrants? In any organisation where
decisions are taken through negotiation between 28 members over an extended
period, there will inevitably be circumstances when the wishes of one or more
of those members will be over-ridden. I
don’t see that as tyranny; I see it more as ‘win some, lose some’ – a process
of give and take where one has to judge whether the overall package is a net
positive or a net negative. Only a
spoilt child would demand that he or she has the right to win every time.
But there is
another possible interpretation of what they mean by tyranny, and that is that
there is, in their view, one country in particular which drives the EU forward. That would, of course, be Germany. Some of the tabloids have put it very bluntly
over the years, claiming that the EU is akin to Germany’s third attempt to
dominate the continent and bend it to her will.
I find it a laughable suggestion, but I have no doubt that it plays well
to some. But is it really possible that,
at some level, albeit not fully articulated, the Brexiteers (who seem
determined to live in the past in plenty of other ways) see leaving the EU as a
continuation by proxy of the last two world wars? Is that, perhaps, what they really mean when
they talk about “the enemy”?
No comments:
Post a Comment