Don't Trust Johnson

Any politician, in the UK or Europe, who trusts Boris Johnson and the Tories is too gullible to be in politics. Johnson, in particular, and the Tories, in general, have proved themselves totally untrustworthy, prepared to go back on their word without blinking, to flout the law, to enter into agreements duplicitously, and to break internationally binding treaties. 

Let's look at the various parties involved, and how Johnson and his government are stitching them up. 

The DUP 

As soon as Johnson withdrew the whip from the 21 Tory MP's, he undermined the power of the DUP over his government. It meant that, being in a minority of 45, the DUP's 10 votes no longer made any significant difference. No sooner had he achieved that, whilst continuing to keep the DUP close, he began selling them out. What Johnson's negotiations with the EU have done is to essentially restore the original deal that Theresa May had negotiated with the EU in 2017, which was for a Northern Ireland only backstop, with a a border down the Irish Sea. At that time, the DUP, said they could not possibly accept such a deal, because it de facto starts the process by which Northern Ireland is separated from the UK, and, first, kept in alignment with the Republic, on the road to an inevitable reunification of the island of Ireland. Its no wonder the DUP have repeated today that they cannot possibly accept this element of Johnson's deal. 

The truth is that Northern Ireland is an anachronism. It is a part of Ireland that has been annexed by Britain. The “idiot anti-imperialists”, who see the world still through the lens of pre-twentieth century colonialism, and centre-periphery economic relations, based upon unequal exchange and super exploitation, view Northern Ireland as a colony, that Britain must have established, and must maintain, in order to continue to enjoy these colonial advantages. In fact, it is, of course, absolute nonsense, in general, and, in Northern Ireland, in particular. Northern Ireland is not a colony. Its people elect MP's to the British parliament, as well as having their own devolved parliament, to which they freely elect representatives. Far from Northern Ireland being super-exploited, by relations of unequal exchange, the British state pours billions of pounds into Northern Ireland to keep its economy afloat. 

So, its not surprising that the British state, if anything, would prefer to relieve itself of the burden of Northern Ireland. It is political circumstance that has kept it annexed to Britain for so long. Moreover, a United Ireland is an inevitability in the not too distant future anyway. The nationalist population in Northern Ireland is growing faster than the Unionist population. The DUP, which is now by far the largest Unionist party, no longer represents a majority of the population. Northern Ireland voted nearly 2:1 in favour of remaining in the EU, and polls show a majority would vote for a United Ireland, already, if there were a No Deal Brexit. The fact is that any Brexit will hit Northern Ireland hard unless it remains essentially inside the EU. That is more or less what Johnson's deal provides for, from what we have been told. 

The Tory Party has become essentially a right-wing, English Nationalist Party. More than 60% of its members are happy to see the United Kingdom dismantled if that is what is required to achieve Brexit. If the Tories are prepared to lose Scotland, and its North Sea oil and gas, and its ownership of the majority of fishing rights for the UK, in order to “Get Brexit Done”, then they will be more than happy to lose the Northern Ireland albatross from around their necks. They will view it as only bringing forward the inevitability of a United Ireland, in order to achieve Brexit. Theresa May did a deal almost identical to that Johnson has done, in relation to Ireland, only to have to withdraw from it when the DUP said No. Johnson has allowed the DUP to say No, and then continued to do the deal with the EU despite it. 

Johnson's deal will see large amounts of revenue sent to Northern Ireland, as part of the deal, as it remains inside the EU Customs Union and Single Market. It is essentially a further sop to the DUP to, in the end, vote for his deal in parliament. He has also apparently offered them other deals in relation to the new law on abortion that is due to be introduced, which will, in effect continue to give the DUP a veto over it, even though the Stormont Assembly is not sitting. These are just bribes to get the DUP to vote in parliament for his deal, but the DUP must realise that his deal sells them down the river, in the medium to longer term. Johnson's deal aims to have the UK mainland diverge ever increasingly from EU rules and standards, which means that with Northern Ireland still in the Customs Union and Single Market, Northern Ireland itself will increasingly diverge from mainland Britain. The DUP will have no means of taking Northern Ireland out of those arrangements, and its clear that the pro-EU majority in Northern Ireland will never agree to withdraw from it. It means an inevitable and powerful dynamic for a United Ireland within the next decade, if not much sooner. As a proponent of a United Ireland, I have no objection to such a result, but Brexit is not a price that British workers should have to pay to achieve it. 

The Right-wing Nationalist Labour MP's 

There are around 30 or so right-wing, nationalist Labour MP's who say that they want to vote for a Brexit deal. These MP's are prepared to blame immigrants, and foreigners in general, for the ills of British capitalism, and the specific problems caused by the austerity programmes of the Tories and Liberals, as well as the problems caused by the policies of previous Tory and Labour governments that caused massive asset price inflation. They appease the bigoted views of sections of the electorate in their constituencies via their attacks on foreigners, and support for the ending of free movement and so on. Of course, even in that, they are being incredibly shortsighted, as well as unprincipled. Even in those constituencies that voted heavily in favour of Leave, only a minority of Labour voters did so. Around 60% of Labour voters in these constituencies, in 2017, voted Remain, as against around 75% nationally. By backing Brexit, these Labour MP's are actually cutting their own throats, because they will not win over Tory and Brexit Party Leave voters in their constituencies, but, they will lose around 4 of their Remain supporting voters to the Liberals, for every Leave supporting voter they retain. It means that in many, if not most, of these seats they will simply split the Remain vote, allowing the Tories to win seats they would not have a chance of winning otherwise! 

These right-wing nationalist MP's defend their behaviour by claiming they are representing the will and the interests of their constituents as a whole. That is not the job of a Labour MP. The job of a Labour MP is to represent the interests of workers, and to provide a lead in doing so. Labour MP's should not be simply barometers of public opinion, tailing whatever voters might say at any particular moment in time. We could have trained monkeys to perform that function. The job of a Labour MP is to promote at least progressive social-democratic if not socialist policies, and to be an advocate of those policies, attempting to win the battle of democracy, as Marx put it, by winning a sizeable and sustainable majority for the ideas of socialism. No form of Brexit achieves that, because Brexit is reactionary. 

As a further fig-leaf to cover their betrayal of basic principles, they claim that they will only support a deal if it protects basic workers' rights, protections for the environment and so on. But, the only guarantee of protecting such rights is the working-class itself, and its ability to ensure that those rights and protections are enforced. Dividing British workers from other workers in the EU has the direct opposite effect, because it weakens the solidarity of all workers across Europe, it inevitably puts British workers in competition with EU workers, because it puts British capital in competition with EU capital, and leads to a race to the bottom for wages, conditions and workers rights. 

There is of course, no guarantee that a Johnson government, or some future, even more right-wing, Tory government would abide by any of the assurances that Johnson might give, today, simply in order to get the votes of these gullible and despicable Labour MP's, so as to get his deal through parliament. A look at Johnson's behaviour over the last few weeks, of saying he would not prorogue parliament, and then doing so, should be evidence enough of that. But, this is the same Boris Johnson who wanted to ban London transport workers, and other public sector workers from being able to strike; and who wanted to toughen anti-union laws further, so that strike ballots had to achieve more than 50% of the members, rather than 50% of those voting, etc. It is the same hard right Tories, now in his government, who have wanted Brexit so as to have a bonfire of regulations and workers rights, so as to turn Britain into an equivalent of 1950's Cuba under Batista, so as to compete with the EU. In fact, in the deal itself, Johnson has won the backing of the hard right ERG, and so called Spartans, by saying that, unlike Theresa May, and Labour, that their prospectus was for Britain to stay in close regulatory alignment with the EU, his intention is to quickly bring about regulatory divergence with the EU. If those right-wing nationalist Labour MP's could not vote for May's Deal, there is even less cove for them to vote for Johnson's deal. 

But, even if Johnson were not saying that. Even if he tries to win over those Labour MP's by claiming that his Tory government will be the workers' friend, who, other than the most gullible, or the most duplicitous themselves, could believe such promises? After all, it would simply amount to Johnson following the strategy of his Vote Leave comrade Michael Gove, who all along supported Theresa May's Deal in order to get Brexit done, knowing that, once officially outside the EU, they would be free to simply rip up all of the promises they had given, in order to achieve it. And, that should be a lesson to the EU itself. 

The EU Council of Ministers 

The EU Council of Ministers are blood of the blood of Boris Johnson, and so their preparedness to feign belief in his promises, in order to obtain a deal, should not be underestimated. But, each of these Ministers also has to protect the interests of their own state, and they realise that the best way of doing that is to protect the EU itself, its institutions, and its Single Market and Customs Union. Latest reports are that a deal has been struck that will be put to the Council of Ministers, which, if it approves it, will then be put back to the UK parliament, and if it approves it, will then be considered by the EU parliament, which is being pressured to complete its deliberations in a week, whereas they would normally require around six weeks. 

The EU negotiators, and Council of Ministers may be playing a dangerous game. The announcement that a deal had been reached came after the DUP said it could not support Johnson's deal. The EU has been here before, with Theresa May, in December 2017. The EU has wanted to ensure that it was not seen to be responsible for ending negotiations, or for Britain leaving on a No Deal basis. They may, having seen the DUP withhold its support, and knowing that Johnson is in a minority of 45, even with the DUP, have calculated that they could give support to a deal, in the expectation that Johnson, like May, will not get the deal through parliament, thereby throwing responsibility for the collapse on to Johnson and the British parliament. They may rely on parliament meeting on Saturday, and voting down Johnson's Deal, so that the Benn Act comes into play. Like the British opposition parties, they may calculate that, if Johnson has to ask for an extension, that will undermine his position. 

However, they may miscalculate. The DUP may vote for Johnson's deal, even though they are currently saying they cannot support it, thinking they may have no better chance to exert influence than they have now. If the DUP vote for it, Johnson is likely to get the votes of the majority of the ERG. The 21 Tory rebels that Johnson expelled, have shown themselves to be spineless throughout. They have supported Johnson, even after being expelled by saying they would not vote for a no confidence motion, and would not vote for Corbyn as caretaker Prime Minister, so as to push for an extension or revocation of Article 50. Many, with an election now in the offing, and with Johnson likely to win a thumping majority, if he does get a deal, will be hoping to get the whip restored, so as to hang on to their seats. The right-wing Labour nationalists are a despicable bunch that no one can trust on anything, and who may well back Johnson, covering their betrayal with a variety of fig leaves. 

If Johnson gets his deal through parliament on Saturday, then the EU Council of Ministers, if it has already effectively signed off on that deal, will have burned its bridges. It would have to find some other means of preventing Johnson's deal continuing. They may hope that parliament will amend Johnson's deal so as to require another referendum, before it can go forward, but its clear that even if that happened, Johnson could prevent that referendum from happening by simply denying funding via a Money Bill. 

And, the EU Ministers should know that they cannot trust Johnson. Whatever he may say today about Northern Ireland, and about relations between Britain and the EU cannot be believed. From day one, the Brexiteers saw Northern Ireland as a bargaining chip, but also as a Trojan horse. It is only Northern Ireland that has a land border with the EU. The Brexiteers from the start sold the fallacy that they could have access to the EU Single Market and Customs Union on current terms, whilst being outside it, and having their own regulations, customs and trade deals with other countries, most notably with the US. They saw Northern Ireland as the means of achieving that, because they knew that the EU would want to do everything possible to prevent a border in Ireland, so as to uphold the Good Friday Agreement. The EU actually played into the Brexiteers hands in that respect, because they should, from the start, have said that Brexit would mean that a border would have to be created in Ireland, and the EU would enforce it, using its own Border Force. They should have emphasised that the logic of that reality was to establish a United Ireland, and that with the UK out of the EU, they would do everything in their power to bring about a United Ireland, just as they should say that they will do everything in their power to reunite Gibraltar with Spain. 

If Johnson's deal goes through, he will again attempt to get the EU to negotiate a Free Trade Deal on this basis, giving the UK unfettered access to the EU Single Market and Customs Union, whilst having committed itself to rapid, and increasing divergence from EU regulations and standards. It would mean a serious undermining of the EU Single Market and Customs Union. 

The ERG 

It should be noted that Johnson and the majority of the ERG do not share the same politics. Divining Johnson's politics is difficult, because he is a populist demagogue, whose position changes from week to week. Johnson has many similarities with Trump, in that regard, but with this difference: Trump has the appearance of a buffoon, because he really is a buffoon and a moron, whereas Johnson is actually highly intelligent. He is like Prince Hal, in Henry IV, Part I, who spends his time in drunken debauchery with John Falstaff, until such time as he needs to have a change of persona, as he approaches the crown. The ERG, as epitomised by Rees-Mogg are reactionaries, who want to turn the clock back to a less mature form of capitalism based upon rampant free market capitalism, and the predominance of small private capitals. In other words, essentially the Utopian model of capitalism as promoted by Hayek and Mises. To push through such a political revolution, undoubtedly will require a political regime dominated by some reactionary Bonapartist figure. Johnson could perform such a role, but I am not convinced that it is consistent with his politics. 

The reality is that a reactionary counter-revolution could only be implemented by a Bonaparte, because there are no adequate social forces capable of bringing it about, in opposition to the social forces pushing in the opposite direction. Moreover, the whole dynamic of social evolution is pushing forward, not backwards. Even if Johnson assumed the role of a reactionary Bonaparte, he would quickly find himself driven by social and economic reality, into assuming the role of a conservative Bonaparte, preventing any such backward movement, whilst also holding back any progressive development. He would find himself, as his economic policies already suggest, having to reverse austerity, to utilise the state to engage in widespread infrastructure investment. It means that borrowing would increase and interest rates rise, particularly in the context of Brexit. That means that asset prices would fall, but this infrastructure spending would provide aggregate demand for the output of particularly large companies. The increased demand for labour at a time when employment levels are already high, would push up wages. As Marx demonstrated, a rise in the general wage level causes the average rate of profit to fall, and this leads to an increased concentration and centralisation of capital, which weakens the small private capitals. This is the opposite of the policies that the ERG seek. The ERG would be left having to try to remove Johnson, and put in place a Bonaparte of their own, such as Duncan Smith, but its more likely that Johnson would be able to outmanoeuvre and crush the ERG, relying on the traditional forces of conservative social democracy. 

Johnson's strategy, all along, was for Britain to simply negotiate further concessions from the EU, as a result of the Brexit campaign and referendum. He never thought that Leave would win. His role in leading the Leave campaign was part of his own tactical manoeuvring to win the leadership of the Tory Party against his old rival Cameron. Rather like the question of a United Ireland, where demographic changes mean that it is inevitable sooner or later, demographic changes in Britain, along with the general forward movement of history, means that the Brexit vote itself is something of an anachronism. There is already a clear majority for remaining in the EU, and, as each year passes, demographic changes alone increases that majority. Even if Britain does leave the EU, the negotiations with it will continue for the next decade. Every year, and with every General Election, the demand to rejoin the EU will simply increase until they become irresistible. The Tories may be able to coral their core vote in future years, by adopting an increasingly hard line nationalist position, but no anti-Tory party will be able to win elections without adopting a clear pro-EU position. The idea that Brexit will be the end of the matter is facile. 

A Johnson Bonapartist regime may simply be the means by which both the DUP and the ERG are crushed, whilst, in the long process of negotiations, in the transition period and after, it is the means by which the UK is increasingly reabsorbed into the EU. The fact is that Socialism In One Country is a reactionary fantasy, but Anarcho-Capitalism in One Country, is an even greater reactionary fantasy. Simple reality, as the UK comes to negotiate a free trade deal with the EU, will mean that, whatever Johnson says now about the UK increasingly diverging from EU rules and regulations, will be shown to be impossible, in practice, because, in order to enter any such agreement, the UK would have to sign up to EU rules and regulations for goods and services. The UK is not Canada, thousands of miles away from the EU, but an economy sitting on the EU's border, and so its clear that the EU cannot treat the UK in the same way. As some EU officials said last week, they would have to see the UK as a significant competitor on its border, and treat it accordingly, in a way they do not have to do with say Norway or Switzerland. 

The EU Parliament 

If Johnson gets a deal through parliament on Saturday, the EU has a fall back. To go forward, the deal has to be agreed not just by the UK Parliament, but also by the EU Parliament. Although the Faragists bluster about the Brexit Party having won a plurality of seats in the EU elections, the reality is that it was anti-Brexit parties, in total, that won most seats, in Britain, with large gains for the Liberals and Greens. Indeed, across Europe, it was not nationalist forces that gained most, but pro-EU, internationalist parties. Whatever, the UK parliament may decide, we can expect that Labour, Liberal, SNP and Plaid MEP's will be organising opposition to it. These parties are part of EU wide groupings, which, in total, form a majority of MEP's. It is quite possible, therefore, that the democracy of the European Parliament could stop Johnson's Brexit deal. And MEP's should do so. 

There is no current majority for Brexit, in Britain, and any deal struck between Johnson and the Council of Ministers will be one done over the heads of British voters, who have elected MP's a majority of whom oppose Brexit. Before any such Brexit deal is agreed, it should be put back to the British electorate. The way to do that is via a General Election. Johnson's government is in a minority of 45, even with the support of the DUP. It has no mandate to agree any such deal. We need a General Election fought out on this issue. Let Johnson and the Tories stand on their programme of Brexit, and let the opposition parties stand in opposition to them. Preferably, Labour would stand on a position of revoking Article 50, and taking Britain back into the EU if Johnson takes us out. But, in any such election, voters would be able to vote for whichever party best represented their opposition to Brexit. The European parliament should insist that British voters get that opportunity before any such Brexit deal can go forward. 

But, already we see both British MP's, and the European Parliament being stitched up. To suggest that the UK Parliament can properly scrutinise Johnson's Brexit Deal in just one day, on Saturday, is ridiculous. Parliament needs to be given at least ten days of discussion to go through all of the fine print, and to draw out the ramifications of it. Meanwhile, the EU parliament, which would normally require six weeks for such deliberations, is being told to do it in just one week, next week. MEP's should resist such pressure and demand the adequate time to discuss the deal. 

Now is the time to mobilise maximum pressure to Stop Brexit. If politicians in Westminster, Brussels and Strasbourg are gullible enough to believe Johnson and the Tories, that is no reason for us to be so gullible.