The gist of this story
yesterday seems to be that if the UK Prime Minister continues to pursue the
only realistic option for Brexit rather than attempt the impossible sort which
the Brexiteers actually promised, then Plaid might have to start talking about
independence for Wales. The implicit
corollary is that if she caves in and asks for the impossible instead, then
Plaid will continue not talking about the question of independence. Mrs May must be quaking in her (probably very
expensive) boots. Or perhaps not.
But what really
interested me was the claim by an anonymous spokesperson for the Conservatives
in Wales that independence would be “a
break from the most successful economic union in the history of the world”. Even in the sphere of political hyperbole, “the most successful … in the history of the
world” is quite some claim to be making.
I bet that the individual who came up with that one is quite proud of
the phrase, and never gave a moment’s thought to its veracity or provability.
The first
question is what they mean by ‘economic union’.
Perhaps they are defining it so narrowly that there are no suitable
comparators. In that case, the statement
would be ‘true’, naturally; but it would also mean that the converse would be true, because in a field of one, the most successful would also be the least
successful. But let’s assume that they’re
not depending on that type of sophistry, then with whom exactly are they
drawing the comparison?
Well, there’s
the EU itself, of course. Many would see
that as a pretty successful economic union, but the Tories obviously don’t, or
they wouldn’t be so gleefully taking us out of it. Then, of course, most European states were
formed by ‘union’ between smaller entities.
Some unions were the result of agreements, others by judicious
marriages, but mostly – just like the UK – the result of military conquest of some
parts by others. So Germany, France,
Italy – from any objective perspective (difficult for Tories, of course, for
whom exceptionalism is the norm) these are all economic unions in the same way
as the UK. Or how about the USA – that looks
like an economic union to me as well. Is
the UK really more successful than all of those?
But hold on –
their jingoism isn’t time-delimited; the comparison wasn’t just with current
states, it was with the whole of human history.
So – more successful than the Roman Empire or Imperial China as
well. To say it’s a ‘sweeping’ claim is
more than mere understatement. Although
I should put a caveat here – it is entirely possible that for the Tories, ‘history’
only started with the British Empire.
Next up, we
have to ask what we mean by ‘successful’.
Normally, when people like the Tories start talking about the ‘success’
of the UK, they have at least half an eye to the fighting and winning of wars;
it’s an essential part of their view of what makes the UK what it is. But since they were referring on this
occasion to ‘economic union’, I suppose we should restrict ourselves to
considering economic success. If we
measure economic success through GDP per head (a reasonable measure), then the
UK sits somewhere between 13th and 16th in the ranking
tables (depending on which measure is used). And not all of those countries ahead of it in
the tables could be described as ‘unions’, although several can. So, I suppose that had they said ‘one of the
most successful in recent history’, they might have been closer to a truth of
some sort, although it doesn’t have the same ring to it. (And it does give them another problem as
well in using this argument against independence for Wales - insofar as logic
is of any concern to them, of course. There
may be few ‘unions’ above the UK in the table, but there are quite a few small
independent states...)
And finally, we
have to ask ourselves another, slightly more subtle, question – success for
whom? Even were they not facing the
problems outlined above in justifying their statement, there is still the major
problem that success for the whole is not at all the same thing as success for
all the parts. For all the ‘success’
that they claim for the ‘economic union’ which constitutes the UK, that success
has not been equally shared. It has accrued
overwhelmingly to one part of the union, whilst other parts, and especially Wales in
this context, have been left behind.
Confusing ‘average’ with ‘all’ is a regular problem for
mathematically-challenged politicians, but in this case, as so often, the
difference is a key part of the argument.
Taking the
Tories’ claim at face value, the big question that they have completely failed
to answer is this – if the UK is such a successful economic union, why does it
appear such a failure from a Welsh perspective?
And the fact that they are unable or unwilling either to answer the
question or to do anything about it underlines why taking control of our own
affairs ought to be on the table (regardless of the nature of Brexit).
1 comment:
Im sure the Tories actually believe it, after all the Scottish Better Together campaign shamelessly called the UK the most successful union in the history of the world in 2014.
And its says everything about the weakness of welsh nationalism that even Plaid Cymru's leader saying independence might be on the agenda in event of a Hard UKIP/Tory Brexit that'll destroy our manufacturing base and farming sector is met with laughter and hyperbole by the unionist parties.
I've often heard Plaid Cymru being called cultural regionalist party by its opponents and i think they're pretty accurate.
Post a Comment