I woke up
this morning (25 June 2016) to a disunited states of Europe or disunited
Kingdom. The news in Straits Times went awry and viral with the great divorce.
Is this then the perfect storm of things to come where the waves of economic,
social and political uncertainties would lead many into uncharted territories
or dangerous waters?
The internal
and external repercussions cannot be denied. The pound has fallen to its lowest
in three decades (S$1.80 to the pound). The stock markets all over are licking
its wound, stumped and groping. Scotland and Northern Ireland are at a complete
loss since they are forced to go with the anti-EU flow. Nothing short of a
second referendum would extricate them from this invidious mess. And David
Cameron told millions yesterday that he intends to resign. His self-assured
gamble had cost him his job.
While some
are calling it a knee-jerk reaction, with one comment saying that “a lot of
people are doing it out of defiance (and) it is based on feelings, not logic,”
and another lamenting that “I’m very disappointed…I think the older voters
have, rather selfishly, voted to get a “quick fix” to their problems without
thinking of the long term implications leaving the EU will have, particularly
for the younger generation,” it can’t be denied that a win is a win, and in
democratic lingo, the people have indeed spoken. But why the shocking win? -
you may ask. (And I am quite sure this is not some kind of
Trump-logic-defying-hysteria traipsing across the Atlantic).
One European
correspondent, Jonathan Eyal, offers his two-cents worth here: “Those who voted
against the EU were largely white working-class voters, people for whom the
European Union is regarded, not as an opportunity, but as a threat; workers who
saw their jobs taken away by the hundred of thousands of migrants from Central
and Eastern Europe who poured into Britain over the past few years.”
Mr Eyal
continued with this: “The referendum was also a revolution against Britain’s
established parties, none of which proved able to address the growing sense of
resentment in rural communities or decaying post-industrial towns. The vote was
also a rebellion against globalization, a reminder that while the forces of
global markets have created winners, they have also created many losers.”
That’s not
all.
Here is
another incisive observation by James Crabtree, a visiting senior research
fellow at LKY School of Public Policy:-
“At its most
visceral, this rejection (of EU) focuses on migration, one of globalisation’s
defining attributes…Behind this lay a mélange of worries about an influx of
Polish workers, Syrian refugees and Muslim terrorists – fears that are
strikingly similar to those Mr Trump exploits in the US. In Britain, the Remain
camp never did find a convincing reply. If the EU itself is to survive, it too
must find better answers to the misgivings of its citizens over unfettered
movements of people.”
This next
part resonates with me somewhat:-
“Yet Brexit
is also a forceful repudiation of a second set of views favoured instinctively
by liberal metropolitan types, namely, that the present era of open
globalisation could produce prosperity for all citizens. It is by now widely
accepted that the last two decades have seen a highly uneven distribution of
the gains from global integration, most of which have been enjoyed by those
who, in Britain’s case, likely voted to remain in the EU. But so far, even
Europe’s redistributive welfare states have failed to redress this.”
Lesson? One,
and let me be clear, I am for EU (at least the ideals behind it), but it is her
application under opportunistic, mercenary-like hands that is the unwieldy
leviathan that needs to be addressed here. So, below is my musing of what had
gone wrong, a reflection of sorts...
Is this the
death of EU for UK? Or is it the death of idealism? UK has got more than six
decades to get it right and the scorecard on Thursday has shown that she has
got it mostly wrong.
The victory
of Brexit could very well be headlined as the “the grave miscalculation of
David Cameron” and this has cost him his job. The captain of the ship is going
to gentlemanly alight at the next stop because he had steered his way into the
Scylla and Charybdis of political self-destruction.
Arthur
Miller once said that “an era can be said to end when its basic illusions are
exhausted.” Have Mr Cameron’s party and ideology exhausted theirs? Have the
ideals of a united states of Europe reached the morning hangover of its
overnight bingeing party, and it is now reeling from its head-splitting effect?
Here, I
wonder, if the Holy Roman Emperors, the Hapsburgs, Napoleon and Hitler united
Europe by force (against the will of the people), haven’t the founders of the
EU united the people of one continent by sheer popular will out of the ashes of
the second world war? I mean, is not the idea of a united Europe the collective
effort of a group of visionaries, and not a group of empire-builders,
war-hungry megalomaniacs or deviant mercenaries? (Or has it become that way
overtime - like all idealism that went full throttle and warped?)
I guess, when
the honeymoon is over, what remains is the mundane duty of taking out the trash
and changing the diapers, and the Brexit has shown that you can’t save a union
with blind faith, detached idealism and disguised opportunism. Hypocrisy does
idealism no favors.
Alas, the
road to hell is indeed paved with good intention in this case, and however
bedazzling and noble the concept of the EU is, it is an outright political
suicide to pretend that if a tree falls in the middle of the forest and no one
is there to hear it, it doesn’t make a sound.
It is more likely the
case that a sound was made (a thunderous one in fact as Thursday has shown),
but those high up there are either too busy lapping up the exclusive benefits
of EU for themselves to hear it or hoping that it would all just go away if
they ignore it for long enough. Cheerz.
No comments:
Post a Comment