Holding The Wrong Opinion

I've been a bit lackluster on my posting recently, partly as a result of holding various offline debates (and therefore satisfying my need to opine) and partly due to 40k and CK2 soaking up much of my spare time (watch this space for a historical recount of the triumphs and tragedies of House ua Briain on its journey from Earls of Thomond to Emperors of Britannia), however, I couldn't really let the euro-elections pass without some form of comment.

**

More so then previous European elections, this particular round of vote-casting has attracted an unusual level of both media, and general, attention. Political debates and comments have appeared across both online and offline platforms, voting became a sufficiently trendy activity to attract facebook and twitter posts.

The reason for this level of interest is, to me at least, purely a function of the UKIP phenomena. Regardless of whether you support UKIP (or Ukip as it now seems to be), the potential for a new political party to make a mark on a system which has been dominated by the three established parties for my entire lifetime has been enough to attract attention. This is not, however, going to be a column specifically about Ukip, or indeed any particular party's policies, its not even going to be about Europe in general. Instead, this is about something far more sinister, and to me, far more concerning - the relentless vilification of political dissent, both in the media, and by the general population.

I once believed that Britain (and the British in general) honored the idea of free of speech, and freedom of political beliefs. We may disagree with certain political views (generally extremism of either direction), but on the whole Britain's liberal traditions stood strong. Having watched the recent elections unfold, I now believe this is no longer the case. While on a mass-media level I am not surprised by the effort expending on smearing Farage and the Ukippers (none of the main media outlets would benefit from the established political paradigm shifting), what I was surprised at was the vitriol with which people I had previously considered "reasonable" attacked Ukip candidates, Ukip voters, and Ukip electoral victories.

There are plenty of avenues for a reasoned attack on Ukip's position - positive arguments in favor of EU integration and multiculturalism would be one.  Objective, unbiased research showing how the indigenous British population has benefited by sustained EU immigration would be another. Likewise demonstrable examples of EU regulation producing better outcomes than an independent Britain could have achieved would at least provide a coherent explanation of why the costs of extra regulation should be borne. On a more basic level, an honest acknowledgement that membership of the EU means loss of sovereignty, but that this loss came with more important benefits would give meaningful context to the In / Out debate.

I, personally, haven't seen any of the above. Economically I think there are (strong) arguments for membership of the EEA (the European free trade zone), but not why this requires extensive political integration. Again I've seen solid, reasoned arguments about why attracting immigrants with high or much-need skill sets adds value to an economy (Australia's policy often being sited as a practical example), but not for an open-door policy to countries with a significantly lower standard of living (and the economic tension that breeds).

What I have seen, is; condescension, derision and outright hostility to people expressing a pro-Ukip position. Whether its labeling people fascists, racists, illiterate or mocking "little Englanders" this is a sustained attack not on the logic of people's opinions, or a rebuttal of the evidence they are basing that opinion on, but personal attacks against people for expressing their political opinions. That is something which anyone who places some value in the liberal enlightenment tradition should find repulsive. I may not agree with you, I may actively try to convince you to change your opinion by pointing out the flaws in your reason or showing the benefits of an alternative position. I may in the end simply throw my hands up in the air and accept your position is one rooted firmly in emotion and passion not logic and reason and thus further debate is futile. But ultimately, I will still support your right to an opinion, your right to vote, and the premise that everyone's vote counts equally. I will not call you a bigoted racist, by extension you voted "wrong".

Our democratic process is based on the idea that each area will be represented by the largest group within that area; it does not allow for pre-selection of parties and candidates based on some infallible moral code that weeds out "wrong" opinions, it does not allow for someone people to have more voting power than others because they hold the "right" opinions, power is given the people to make up their own minds, and we all tacitly agree to abide by the outcome (a duty that is lost on most people).

By way of being fair, I should note that this is hardly a one-way street. While anti-kippers are busy labeling people fruitcakes and loonies, the Kippers themselves are quick to label anyone not part of their movement as slaves to the establishment, traitors, white-apologists and so on. This is just as much a problem, and is one of the reasons (in my opinion) Ukip will never be in a position to form a government. While anger and passion will speak to parts of electorate that up until now have largely been ignored, government is (or should be) about strategy, planning and boring fundamentals. Farage does not look like a Prime Minister in waiting, and Ukip does not have the stability and endurance of a governing party. Blair and New Labour had it when they delivered three election victories, and the Tories, in their better moments, have the most genuine claim to being the party of government.

...

On a more reflective and pensive note, I believe we are living through the death throes of the nation-state in Europe. Some may cheer this, and claim we are moving into an enlightened age. But to me, it is a sad passing of an ideal that has carried mankind through thousands of years of history. When the European Union has successfully eroded away the powers of national governments we will be left in a world of micro-regions, supra-national governments and group-think. I will no longer be able to call myself British, I will be European, with nothing to distinguish me from 500 million others, or I will be a member of some arbitrary micro-region (South East English? Wessexian?), its history largely meaningless to me, since my regional identity will be transient at best; Hampshirarian today, Londonisn tomorrow, Castilian in my retirement.

Democracy will have long since been extinguished, rule will be by Commission, Committee and Court, the European Parliament little more than a token remembrance. The tides of humanity will wash back and forth between the Atlantic and the Baltic as regional councils succeed in poaching bigger budgets from Federal departments and are therefore able to offer more generous welfare states or more subsidized living. And I hope that if, or when, this grey dystopian world of pan-culturalism, political correctness and over regulation comes to pass, those who mocked and insulted the believers in national pride and sovereignty look around and say "This is paradise".

/Z