I was quite surprised when someone questioned on Facebook the fact that I have Brexiteer friends. I couldn't be friends with someone who is a neo-Fascist, racist, homophobic or a misogynist, but in general I wouldn't let politics stand in the way of friendship. One can agree to disagree on such matters, just as one can on religion. I am even friendly with someone who supports Crystal Palace!
I respect that people legitimately hold different views from mine. If we lose that from our society and politics, we are losing something essential to the maintenance of the social fabric and a democratic political system.
In some ways I find the views of hard core remainers more challenging than those of leavers. Some (not all) of them border on the arrogant in the certainty that they are right. Their case often claims to be more evidence based, while for many leavers it is more emotional which is one way of making a political judgment.
Having studied the EU for over forty years, and seen it from the inside as a leader of a EU research project and a UK representative on an EU committee, my problem with its decision-making is not that is a bureaucratic dictatorship, as some claim, but that decision-making is too cumbersome, slow and complex. Perhaps that is unavoidable when one is dealing with 27 member states and three major institutions, not to mention many minor ones. There is still a technocratic flavour to the whole project, despite the often underrated influence of the European Parliament in the trilogue.
Given the time that it has taken to make some reforms to the Common Agricultural Policy which still absorbs far too much of the budget and is dysfunctional from an environmental point of view, I am rather sceptical of 'reform from within' narratives. Big business has far too much influence on outcomes. However, I do think that a more fragmented Europe would be less successful at counter balancing Russia and exerting influence in the world generally.
No comments:
Post a Comment