In drawing the
threads of this week’s posts together, let me just restate briefly the premises
on which my argument is based:
1. Brexit was never about controlling
immigration – but it is now.
2. The real drivers for Brexit were
ideology and British exceptionalism.
3. There is no such thing as a ‘soft’
Brexit.
4. Welsh independence becomes less
attractive and less likely in a post Brexit scenario.
5. Democracy isn’t a once-and-for-ever
event.
Where does that
leave Welsh nationalists? To date, most
‘nationalist’ politicians have restricted themselves to agreeing with Welsh Labour
and demanding a non-existent ‘soft’ Brexit and an opportunity for the National
Assembly to ‘scrutinise’ (but not veto) the final terms of any deal. To me, this looks like playing the British/Brexit game, and arguing about the detail rather than the principle of a change which
kicks the core aim of nationalists into the far-distant future. And arguing for something which it has already been decided is not available is dishonest and misleading. Ultimately it’s an approach which supports
the core aim and narrative of the Brexiteers and assists them to achieve it.
There is no
possibility of evidence-based argument with those who are now driving
events. They are absolutely convinced of
the rightness of their cause, see only supporting evidence, and ignore any
evidence which in any way undermines their case. They're not really very far away from the Trump approach of presenting 'alternative facts'; they demand that people believe them, and brand them as traitors or worse if they don't. Mitigating or influencing what they are doing
is probably impossible, and even attempting to do so, rather than opposing them, concedes their core position, which is that Brexit is going to happen.
The alternative
is to express honestly to the people of Wales the opinion that the decision
which a narrow majority of those who voted made was a mistake. It’s a mistake which works against our best
interests in terms of short term economics and against our best interests in
terms of the long term prospects for Wales as a nation. But it’s not an irreversible mistake – yet.
Putting that
argument demands a context, and for any nationalist that context can only be a vision of Wales as
an independent member state of the EU, given the point from which we start.
It’s a vision which people have been afraid of expressing for too
long. Perhaps it’s already too late, but
anything else looks to me, at this point, to be a (possibly final) surrender of
our nationhood. Faced with a choice between making that nationhood central to our politics in Wales, and largely abandoning it, which are we going to choose?
Posts
5 comments:
Seems to me you want to run the referendum all over again just because we ended up with the wrong result. Not unlike Mrs Sturgeon who seems to want to have multiple goes at Scottish independence. Is it any wonder the voting public just don't trust modern-day politicians? Rock on Mr Trump!
If some REMAIN'er politicians failed to put the correct arguments forward then they should be hounded out of office. Each and every one of them. Wilful dereliction of duty!
As for the matter of independence, I think we can fairly say the Welsh voter has provided us too with the answer we didn't want to have.
A article thick on rhetoric but thin on facts to back up your claims.
"Welsh independence becomes less attractive and less likely in a post Brexit scenario."
For the first time in over 100 years, the Welsh defied the establishment (including Labour and Plaid Cymru, The UK government, President Obama, Big Business, BBC, ... the list could go on) and voted to reject the status quo. We have never been closer to having a Welsh electorate ready for radical change like independence.
Those are the facts. Where are yours to back your assertion?
"They [people who support leaving the EU] are absolutely convinced of the rightness of their cause, see only supporting evidence, and ignore any evidence which in any way undermines their case."
That seems to be precisely what you are doing. Calling the kettle black, as they say.
"the decision which a narrow majority of those who voted made was a mistake."
This is just your opinion unsupported by facts.
"Wales as an independent member state of the EU"
A state cannot, by definition, be independent in the EU. It is, by definition, dependent. Who is now " ignoring any evidence which in any way undermines their case."
You claim leaving the EU is a "surrender of our nationhood."
Do you really even believe your own rhetoric?
Leaving the EU is first and necessary step to leaving the UK and securing our nationhood. And you know that.
Is some paying you to write this Orwellian-like doublespeak?
Anon 15:29
"Seems to me you want to run the referendum all over again just because we ended up with the wrong result." Not the words I'd choose to express it, but in essence, yes, I do want to give people the oportunity to change their minds. And why not? It's been done on other issues - and it's why we hold elections avery few years rather than on a once-off basis. I'm not sure what your problem is with that.
Glasiad,
Three general points first:
1. This blog is written from a particular political standpoint expressing a particular opinion. I try and use facts and evidence to suport the opinions expressed, but ultimately it is, as you say, opinion. That's the whole point.
2. In the case of this particular post, the five starting statements are the conclusions of five previous articles; the supporting arguments are found there rather than repeated here.
3. No one pays me to write anything.
On some specifics:
"We have never been closer to having a Welsh electorate ready for radical change like independence." You describe that as a fact, compared to what I said which was just opinion unsupported by evideence. But where is the evidence to back such an assertion? Support for independence is no higher now than it was before the referendum according to the polls (which are the best hard evidence that we have).
You quote me as saying "the decision which a narrow majority of those who voted made was a mistake." and then say "This is just your opinion unsupported by facts." Well, yes, but read the whole context. You've quoted part of a sentence which actually read "The alternative is to express honestly to the people of Wales the opinion that the decision which a narrow majority of those who voted made was a mistake." See - the word 'opinion' is clearly there.
"A state cannot, by definition, be independent in the EU. It is, by definition, dependent." Actually, in terms of EU law "by definition", only "independent states" can be members of the EU. It has been a point discussed elsewhere on this blog in the past that the meaning of 'independence' changes over time. All the member states of the EU regard themselves as independent - you seem to want to tell them they're all wrong. Are they 'as independent' as they would be if they were not part of the EU? No, of course not - agreeing to share sovereignty in some areas constrains that sovereignty. Is any country which is a member of the UN 'as independent' as it would be if it hadn't bound itself to accept the terms of the EU charter? Again, no. I happen to believe that the concept of total sovereignty is now outdated - the question is how much we exercise individually as countries and how much we agree to share or pool. You obviously believe the EU goes too far in that direction, but do you really believe that there should be no sharing or pooling of sovereignty at all? (And, by the way, it's a trick of language to asume that the opposite of 'independent' is 'dependent'. It's a lot more subtle than that - there is, for instance, a huge difference between being robbed of sovereignty through military subjugation and voluntarily agreeing to pool it, and there's another huge difference between being ruled from another country and being dependent on that other country - but that's too complex a subject to debate at length here.)
"Leaving the EU is first and necessary step to leaving the UK and securing our nationhood. And you know that." Actually, no it isn't, and no I don't. Nationalists in Scotland and Catalunya (which I keep cioming back to as the most obvious exemplars) don't see it that way, why should we have to?
Glasiad,
Sorry, there was one point which I intended to cover but missed.
"You claim leaving the EU is a "surrender of our nationhood."" No, I do not, and I didn't say that at all. What I did say was that failing to use the opportunity now to put forward a positive vision for an independent Wales (which, to me, means full member status in the EU), and simply playing the Labour game of arguing for a non-existent soft Brexit is a surrender of our nationhood. That is very different.
We clearly disagree on some crucial points but I appreciate your willingness to engage and 'fight your corner'.
In my experience, the problem with many modern ideologies (whether pro EU, or immigration, etc.) is that they treat different opinions as personal attacks and get offended. There's no discussion after that.
Thankfully you are not one of them! :)
Post a Comment