Grated Britain – The Divided Kingdom

Grated Britain – The Divided Kingdom 

The reactionary nationalists, particularly those that are part of, or financed by, the international organisation of Strasserite National Bolshevists, thought that Brexit would be the first stage of breaking apart the EU. That view was expressed openly by Trump, as well as by Putin. It has been actively promoted by those like Bannon that stand behind Trump, and provide the link, via people such as Farage, and assorted European right-wing nationalists and fascists with Putin. Reactionary Nationalists like the Ulster Unionist Kate Hoey, have several times argued that the impact of Brexit on Ireland would lead to a campaign to take Ireland also out of the EU. Orban in Hungary has openly argued that his objective is to spread the “illiberal democracy” he has introduced, across the EU, which would lead to its disintegration. Instead, the EU has been strengthened, latest polls show support for the project at all time highs, as France and Germany create, today, the Treaty of Aachen, strengthening the ties between them as the hub of the European project. Instead, it is Britain that is falling apart, as a result of the Brexit process. 

Before the EU referendum, I warned that the issue of the Irish border would be an intractable one, as the then Northern Ireland Minister, Theresa Villiers, blithely dismissed any suggestion that it was in any way a matter of concern. Indeed, its obvious that without some legally enforceable arrangements, any borders between the UK, and its territories, with the EU would present a problem. Northern Ireland presents a specific problem because of the Good Friday Agreement, which is a legally enforceable international treaty, part of whose basis if the fact that both the UK and Ireland are members of the Single Market, and thereby abide by the same rules, standards and regulations in relation to the production and distribution of goods and services. But, similar problems are inevitable in relation to Gibraltar's border with Spain, and with UK bases in Cyprus. 

If Britain pulls out of the Single Market, taking Northern Ireland with it, and without any replacement arrangements to deal with that situation, then Britain will be in breach of a legally enforceable international treaty, i.e. the Good Friday Agreement. That is why the EU is continuing to maintain that it will not erect a hard border in Ireland. Britain has created the problem for itself, via the Brexit vote, and it is up to Britain, not the EU, to resolve the dilemma it has created by it. It will be Britain that will be in breach of the treaty, not the EU. In practice, of course, if Britain crashes out of the EU, on March 29th, or goes for some form of “managed no deal Brexit”, probably following a General Election that May will hope to win, such a breach of that Treaty is inevitable, and following that breach, the EU will inevitably have to erect a hard border in Ireland. It will be manned by the EU's Border Agency, and backed, if necessary, by the EU Army. 

Such a development would inevitably be accompanied by further measures. The EU would make sure that Ireland was provided with whatever support it required during such a period. Much as the British economy, as a whole, would go into a severe crisis following a No Deal Brexit, so the Northern Ireland economy would go into an even more catastrophic crisis, as a hard border effectively cut it off from trade with the South. A significant majority in Northern Ireland voted to Remain in the EU. The DUP, which supports Brexit and the Tory government, is a minority of a minority. Polls indicate that, in the event of a No Deal Brexit, a majority in Northern Ireland would back forming a United Ireland, following a border poll. With Britain suffering a self-inflicted Brexit catastrophe, and Northern Ireland facing an even bigger catastrophe, as it is cut off from trade with the Republic, a generous EU offer to support the formation of a United Ireland, would be likely to win a majority in such a border poll. That will be one of the first stages by which Brexit, rather than fragmenting the EU, leads to the break-up of an increasingly divided kingdom. 

Scotland, which suffers from its own nationalist problem, in the shape of the SNP, voted against independence in 2014, in some measure, at least, based upon the argument that if Scots wanted to remain in the EU, they had to remain part of Britain. It is a cruel irony, reminiscent of the promises given by perfidious Albion, during World War I, to the Arabs, in order to obtain their support during that conflict, that it is now Britain that is dragging Scotland, kicking and screaming, out of the EU, against its wishes. It's no wonder that the SNP, are now feeling that they can again raise the demand for a second independence referendum of their own, so that they can remain in the EU, which at that point would see them remain attached to the EU along with perhaps the whole of Ireland, as Brexit became a purely English phenomenon, and as these other parts of the divided kingdom, watched on as an increasingly grated Britain was shredded, as it attempted to deal with the competition it would then face from its much larger and more powerful European neighbour. For, the latest polls also show that even in Wales, which voted Leave in 2016, a majority now backs Remain, as does a majority in every region of Britain. 

What Brexit has exposed is a series of cross-cutting cleavages in British society, of the type that elsewhere inevitably lead to social conflict, and the emergence of a strong state to impose order on a fractious society. A poll today identifies that more British people now identify themselves as being either a Leaver or a Remainer than they do as being Labour or Tory. But, as I set out recently, this cleavage is more apparent than real. The large majority of Remainers, are young Labour voters, and similarly the large majority of Leave voters are elderly Tory voters. The elderly Tory voters, far from being part of some group of people who have been “left behind”, are that group that have benefited in the last 50-60 years from leaving school at a time of plentiful employment and rising real wages; they benefited from being able to buy cheap, plentiful houses, including from Thatcher's Right to Buy giveaway of council houses; they benefited from the astronomical rise in the prices of those houses, from the 1980's onwards; they benefited from thereby having disposable income that could be put into various financial assets that also rose astronomically in price; some of them even used their saving to become buy to let landlords. It is not the “left behind” that voted for Leave. The left-behind are those in the age groups under 55, who missed out on all of these benefits obtained by the elderly Tories. The left-behind, the ones in the under 55 age groups, are the ones that back Remain, and identify most closely with Remain. 

So, in Grated Britain, it is not just that the Divided Kingdom is fractured along national lines, with Scotland, and Northern Ireland clearly backing Remain, whilst England – at least at the time of the referendum – backed Leave, but also that Britain is fractured along age lines, with even the working and middle class divided into the elderly groups of Tories that have benefited from rising asset prices, and the younger cohorts that have been excluded by that very same process. The argument that Remain is a project of the “Metropolitan Elite” is true only if you ridiculously define that elite as comprising young, working-class people living in Britain's cities! 

And, in fact, this is another aspect of Grated Britain, because not only is it true that the majority of young – below 55 – working-class people voted Remain everywhere, and also everywhere voted predominantly for Labour in 2017, but in Britain's cities, including most of those in England, the majority of the population as a whole also voted Remain, partly reflecting the fact that these cities are the places that attract young people. This is an indication of a society that is being shredded along numerous cleavages, creating an increasingly atomised, mass society, of the kind theorised by Kornhauser and others, which creates the kinds of conditions in which populist parties and demagogues thrive, and which opens the door to Bonapartism and authoritarianism. 

The Tories have pushed through the legislation to establish Metropolitan Mayors, sometimes against the wishes of local populations. They may come to regret it. Thatcher had to demolish the GLC when it acted as an alternative power base. In the US, Trump has pulled out of the Paris Climate Treaty, but Mayors in US cities, along with Governors in US states, have essentially ignored Trump. They continue to work with businesses in their areas to promote green energy systems and so on. Similarly, across the US, in response to Trump's racist immigration policies, a string of cities have become “Sanctuary Cities” where migrants can go, and where the city authorities refuse to cooperate with federal agencies in identifying them, or assisting in their deportation. In Britain, with a clear majority in the major cities backing Remain, then, as England begins to fall apart, as a result of this shredding of its polity, with first, its nations separating from it, to remain in the EU, a British government will find the mayors of these large metropolitan areas coming together to bypass the Westminster government, and to do deals collectively with the EU. 

Brexit, rather than leading to reactionary nationalism spreading like a virus across the EU, will instead lead to the disintegration of the British state. The break up of nation states, in general, and their replacement by more regional, or metropolitan administrative regions, within the overall context of a United States of Europe, may indeed be the natural progression for the development of European politics. The EU, as it integrates further, and evolves to tackle all of the issues that face it, will need to bolster its democratic mandate. More power will necessarily pass to the EU state, but that will have to be matched by the extension of European democracy. The European Parliament should be the leading body, and it should elect the European Executive, which should be accountable to it. 

But, as the EU state takes on this necessary central power, it will be necessary to ensure that democracy is also strengthened at a local level. That means that local regional, and metropolitan governments must have extensive devolved powers, so that in relation to these day to day matters that affect the lives of citizens, those citizens feel that they have some real democratic involvement, and control over their lives. In fact, contrary to the nonsense involved in the “Take Back Control” slogan used by the Brexiteers, it is only in the context of a continent wide state, that such devolved government can exercise control under the auspices of that state. Any state smaller than a continental scale state will be too small to exert any real control in the modern world. In fact, the Brexit negotiations have shown precisely that. However much the Brextremists have claimed that the EU depends on Britain, and that they would be forced to give Britain a good deal, the opposite has been the case, and will necessarily continue to be the case. 

That reality seems also to have been sinking in across Europe. Just as Trump's victory in the US galvanised opposition to him, amongst the youth, and has put life into the rank and file organisations of the Democrats, so too Brexit, and the rise of right-wing populism in Europe has begun to galvanise a similar response. Against all of the predictions, the right-wing extremists failed to win the elections in Europe over the last year. Where they have won power, such as in Hungary, the working-class is mobilising to oppose them, as it becomes increasingly apparent that the populists have no answers, and that they inevitably fall back on attacks on workers. 

In Italy, the right-wing populists of Five Star and The League, have dropped their policy of withdrawal from the Eurozone; Le Pen has also dropped talk of the FN taking France out of the Eurozone and EU, as such a policy had no traction amongst French voters; in Germany, the AfD have garnered support with their anti-immigrant rhetoric, but they are far from being even close to a majority, and they too, do not now call for Germany to pull out of the EU. The EU is suffering currently from the twin economic nationalisms of Trump's global trade war, and his imposition of tariffs on the EU, as well as from Brexit, which has frozen all thoughts of investment, until such time as there is clarity on the future. That undermines the response to right-wing populism, but these impediments are temporary. 

A No Deal Brexit, would have some impact on the EU, though it has prepared for it far more seriously than has Britain. Whilst it would crucify the British economy, it would be little more than an inconvenience to the EU. Its impact even in the short term, besides putting an end to any Eurosceptics in the rest of Europe, would be to see many UK businesses relocating to the EU, and thereby giving a boost to the EU economy. Once that initial shock was over, the clarity would open the door for EU business to invest, and for the EU itself to engage in programmes of infrastructure investment etc. that would see the EU economy begin to expand rapidly. That in itself will act to consolidate the integration of the EU. 

History is on the side of the EU, and its further integration and development. Brexit, if it goes ahead, will simply cast Britain into the side channels of history, as it becomes increasingly sidelined, marginalised and ripped apart by much larger and more powerful forces.