Julian Barnes, in an article on 20 April 2017 asks what vision Brexiteers have for the future of Britain. “It seems”, he writes, “a mixture of Merrie England, Toytown and Singapore. Outward-looking in the sense of “open for business”, which tends to to mean “up for sale’; inward looking in other senses. Morally depleted by cutting ourselves off from Europe and sheltering beneath Trump’s fragrant armpit. What might we end up as? Perhaps a kind of Bigger Belgium, with quasi-American values and torn into separate nations again. Do we seriously think that those who voted for Brexit are going to be better off under this state-shrinking government? (I can’t recall the phrase ‘Poorer but Happier’ being used) That the NHS will be properly funded? That the increasing numbers on zero-hours contracts will not be exploited further? That the old winners will be the new, even bigger winners? Do we seriously believe that Mrs May, when she wins her election, will construct a ‘country that works for everyone’?”
“The Australian, Simon Leys, wrote about Australia: ‘Culture is born out of exchanges and thrives on differences. In this sense ‘national culture’ is a self-contradiction, and multiculturalism a pleonasm*. The death of culture lies in self-centredness and isolation”. The first concern should not be to create an Australian culture but a cultured Australia’.”
Julian Barnes continues by saying what I also half-feel in my conflicted heart. I love the country of my birth and owe it a huge debt. At the same time the aggressiveness and arrogance of the Brexiteers, who claim fallaciously that ‘The People have Spoken’ cannot help making one half hope that Europe will make the UK pay up all it owes, and keep it waiting for a deal; that Trump will ignore the Brits or make a humiliating offer; that those who wanted the departure of the East Europeans will find that it is now they who have to dig the potatoes and care for the old and dying; that the same people will find that they are worse off financially not better off at all; that the EU handouts will not be replaced by the British government; and that the safeguards and human rights brought them by the EU are dismantled and they are exploited with year-only contracts as never before; and that, as in America, the whole, but secret, idea was to enhance and fortify the power of the rich and the corporations.
But I also hope (against hope) that Britain will come out of the EU without too much collateral damage and that Epicurean moderation will win the day. If the above horrors occur they will affect my sons, my grandchildren and our friends. A mix of right-wing buffoons in charge and the Daily Mail braying in the background is not a good start, and many are convinced that foreigners will hate the Brits again. Let us pray not.
* Pleonasm: The use of more words than are necessary to convey meaning. The problem is very common in a country where people are paid by the number of words, not the depth of thought.
My hope for the upcoming general election, and all but inevitable subsequent Conservative landslide, is that Theresa May will pursue a softer Brexit, freed from the clutches of her Eurosceptic backbenchers and the buffoons you mention, who control so much of the press. With a larger majority, May would have a mandate to go for any kind of Brexit she wants, and given that she voted Remain, perhaps we may end up closer to Europe than initially seemed likely.
But that hope reeks of desperation. What is more likely, is that the Conservative supermajority in the Commons will be used to push through Conservative policies unrelated to Brexit, but nevertheless contentious. These include (but are not necessarily limited to): the reintroduction of grammar schools across the country, tax increases, a reduction in welfare and pensions spending, budget cuts and reforms to the education system, constituency boundary changes and further privatisation of the NHS. The fact is, considering that most MPs voted Remain, Parliament has been remarkably compliant to May regarding Brexit- voting overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50, giving her free reign during the negotiation process. Parliament has proved more of an obstacle on those controversial policies just mentioned. A vote for the Conservative Party is not just a reaffirmation of the desirability of Brexit, but a vote for May’s specific brand of conservatism- a rejection of the relative liberalism and internationalism that defined the Cameron era, in favour of a more traditional and paternalistic form of governance.