Porter’s Pensées

I’m obviously not one of Nigel Farage’s ‘ordinary, decent people’, because I voted to Remain. I don’t mind not being ‘ordinary’ – I don’t think anybody is, and regard Farage’s use of the word as patronising – but I resent the implication that I’m not decent. To cap that, I’m unlikely to get into Michael Gove’s good books, regarding myself as I do as an ‘expert’. He notoriously despises ‘expertise’. (And he a former Minister of Education! No wonder the teachers hated him.) Again, more people are experts, at one thing or another, than Gove might think. Most of the Brexiteers, for example, and a good many of the Tory Remainers, are expert liars. My own expertise – in modern British history – might not seem very useful; but it has helped me to see through Gove’s own gross errors when it comes to the versions of history he pedals, often in order to back up his political prejudices. (See bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/16/michael-gove/.)

So you can see why I’m personally out of love with the Brexit leaders, and the mess they’ve dumped my country in; which is almost exactly what Gove’s ‘experts’, of course, predicted. Thank God that Boris certainly, and Gove probably, have reaped their nemeses (is that the plural? And can you ‘reap’ a nemesis?); though it would have been good – in a schadenfreude kind of way – to have watched them stay on and try to put Humpty back together again. And I fear Theresa May – who wants us to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights, no less – almost as much. (See https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/the-snoopers-charter/.)

Perhaps I need to get over the idiot Nigel; but it’s difficult when he keeps coming out with ever more idiocies, embarrassing my country, and therefore by association me, before the world. The icing on the cake was when he accused most MEPs of never having done a ‘proper job in their lives’, when it turned out that all those sitting nearest to him in the chamber as he said it had had far more worthwhile jobs than he. One was a heart surgeon. (See http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/30/the-story-behind-facepalm-man-at-farages-never-done-a-days-work-speech-5975734/.) Farage’s last job had been as a commodity broker.

I’ll be returning to the Continent again soon, acutely embarrassed by this man, who is universally scorned and vilified there, except among neo-Fascists, and who has done our national reputation, therefore, irreparable harm. Doesn’t he care about this, as a self-styled ‘patriot’? Or does he regard every criticism from a European as a mark of honour? ‘Nobody likes us and we don’t care’, as Millwall FC fans yell at football matches; the sign of the hooligan in every area of life.

I can see myself being continually quizzed by my Swedish friends on how ‘we’ could have let this happen, as I was on my last trip, even before the vote (they thought the debate was bad enough: see https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/14/the-stupidest-nation-on-earth/); and having therefore to put on a permanently humble and apologetic air. Actually they all know me better than to think I could have been an Outer, which means that their attitude to me will be one of pity, which is hard for a survivor of a once great Empire (if you know my books you’ll recognise the irony there) to stomach. I’m hoping that they’ll welcome my intention to apply for Swedish citizenship (below), thus establishing my credentials as an Inner, and not one of the 52%. But I’ll never be able to get over the national shame.

I’m sure that Farageists will dismiss this kind of criticism as simply confirming their view of Leftist intellectuals as being a race apart, out of touch with ‘real’ or ‘genuine’ working people, and even ‘smirking’ at them, as I was accused of doing in a comment on one of my posts here. (https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/25/fuck-what-have-we-done/#comments.) Of course I would never do that. I know how much we ‘ordinary’ people are being misled and exploited by our own ‘elites’. (You think Nigel is an ‘ordinary bloke’ because he likes a pint of beer?) Anti-intellectualism has been a powerful force on the Right of politics everywhere recently, in the USA especially – see Thomas Frank, What’s the matter with Kansas? (2004), and Trump, of course, today – but now increasingly in the UK. It is ultimately highly dangerous, if it prevents one from using critical reason to examine prejudice and myth. It can create a climate, as it has in America, where good arguments are dismissed because they’re rational, as though reason itself were the enemy. That way lies…. well, I won’t risk invoking ‘Godwin’s Law’ again (https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/the-hitler-card/); but you know what I mean.

This really is a terrible tragedy, and all the more so because it seems it can’t be reversed. It was a crazy thing to do: for an unpopular government at a time of great social unrest to propose a 50:50 referendum on a single issue which very few people (including me) knew much about, but which would crucially affect the rest of their lives. That was compounded by the now acknowledged mendacity of the propaganda on both sides, but mainly the Brexiteers’. One good thing about the referendum and its aftermath is that it has taught us much more about the EU; but by now it’s too late. We’re British, and invented ‘team games’, one basic rule of which is that you can’t change the rules retrospectively if the ‘wrong’ side wins, or even if the winning team can be shown to have cheated. So we have to live with it. I can go and live in Sweden. My children have the right to Irish passports, through their mother. But most of the rest of Farage’s ‘ordinary’ people have no such option. They’ll just have to live with it.

Apparently Boris’s next literary effort is going to be a biography of Shakespeare – as if there weren’t enough of them, by real ‘experts’, already. His own political career would make a good plot for a typically Shakespearean tragedy: hubris leading to nemesis. Unfortunately he’s brought his whole nation down with him, just as King Lear did. I can imagine him in later life, musing with his own Cordelia, if he has one. (I know he has daughters; I just don’t know if either of them is as sweet and honest as Cordelia.)

I’ll kneel down,

And ask of thee forgiveness: so we’ll live,

And pray, and sing, and tell old tales, and laugh

At gilded butterflies, and hear poor rogues

Talk of court news; and we’ll talk with them too,

Who loses and who wins; who’s in, who’s out;

And take upon’s the mystery of things,

As if we were God’s spies: and we’ll wear out,

In a wall’d prison, packs and sects of great ones,

That ebb and flow by the moon.

It conjures up a pretty, if pathetic picture. ‘Who loses and who wins; who’s in, who’s out’: politics as a courtly game; which is maybe how it’s taught at Eton. But it will be no comfort to the rest of us.

I’m sure Shakespeare could make much of Gove and Farage too. Probably not as two of his Fools, though the name fits; Shakespeare’s Fools are generally too wise.

I’m seriously thinking of emigrating to an EU country. I might even claim to be a political refugee (from Tory oppression in England). There are plenty of continental countries which will apparently welcome us Remainers in, with guarantees of ‘pubs, marmite and social awkwardness’ to ease the cultural transition: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/01/europeans-invite-brits-to-relocate-promising-pubs-marmite-and-social-awkwardness. – I find that very touching. We hardly deserve it.

For me, of course, the obvious choice is Sweden, where I already have residency rights. Apparently I’m not alone here. Applications for Swedish citizenship from Brits have gone up 500% since Brexit: http://www.thelocal.se/20160628/citizenship-applications-up-500-for-brits-in-sweden. I’ve looked up the relevant official page on the internet, and the requirements don’t seem to be all that high:

“To become a Swedish citizen you must:

• be able to prove your identity
• have reached the age of 18
• have a permanent residence permit, a right of residence or residence card in Sweden
• have fulfilled the requirements for period of residence (lived in Sweden for a specified period)
• have conducted yourself well in Sweden.”

Well: those don’t seem to be too daunting. I think I’ve conducted myself pretty well in Sweden, haven’t I, Kajsa, apart from that time when I knocked my glass of beer over everyone in a pub near Kulturhuset? They don’t even demand that I learn Swedish. Or shoot an elk, or build a sommarhus with my own bare hands.

Easy-peasy. I think I’ll go for it. (Dual citizenship, of course, in case Sweden is taken over by those awful Sweden Democrats – the equivalent of our UKIP – and Britain comes to its senses one day. Two bolt-holes are better than one.)

Of course I haven’t read the small print. There may be other conditions listed there which would make it more difficult for me. I’m over 18, certainly, but quite a bit over, with various infirmities which might make me an increasing burden on the health system there. I can currently support myself from my UK pension, but with the pound plummeting that might not last very long. And they might have noticed a number of articles I’ve written – some on this website – criticizing their legal procedures (vis-a-vis Assange). On the other hand, politically I’m as Swedish as the Swedes, and much more so than most of my compatriots. And also a feminist. I know that’s important.

The only question of principle is whether it is really honourable to take flight. Shostakovitch and Prokofiev were faced with the same dilemma in Soviet Russia, with the latter being widely criticised for choosing to flee to the US. Shouldn’t I stay at home, helping to man the barricades against the insurgent Faragists, instead of enjoying a life of ease scoffing sill and grossly expensive beer in a metre of snow in Stockholm? Where’s my patriotism? Wouldn’t it be more loyal of me to suffer more years of English food and rain in the cause of my country? Rather than turning tail and copping out of my responsibilities, like Boris did yesterday.

But I would miss the steak and kidney puds. And proper fish and chips (battered, not breaded, greasy chips, and mushy peas). And the bread-and-butter puddings. And of course the cricket. And my family and friends – though they can always come over to stay: if Sweden doesn’t ban them in revenge for Brexit. And – yes – the rain.

I’ll let you know how it turns out.

We’re going down the plug-hole. This is the end of ‘Great Britain’, literally (the ‘Great’ of course refers to the union of the four kingdoms, one of which might leave soon to re-join the EU), and of the sort of tolerant England that I was always, despite my doubts and frustrations, fond of and loyal to. Our political parties are engaged in childish scrapping while huge existential dangers loom on the horizon: global neo-liberal tyranny, irrationalist religious terrorism, neo-fascism, and possibly (though I’m personally less afeared of this) the familiar ‘Russian bear’. The dogs of anarchy have been released. Yet all we in Britain have to stand against them is a rickety political system that simply can’t cope.

I’ve been pinning my hopes up to now on New-New Labour (Corbyn’s). But that seems to have come a cropper with the PLP and the sneering press. Folk are talking about the end of Labour as a party. If that’s so, we must look to the future. If Labour is finished that must leave room for a new left-leaning, pro-Europe, anti-austerity, anti-racist, pro-welfare, anti-big business, green, non-elite party  – New-New-New Labour? – that can make a convincing case that it’s outside the ‘Westminster bubble’. (That’s important.) Either that, or a coalition of smaller parties, each of which focuses on one or other of these causes. That should appeal to a wide constituency, including all Labour voters, Lib Dems, Greens, Scots, old-fashioned paternalistic Tories and even (I would say) at least half the Ukippers: the ones who scapegoat Europe because they haven’t had the chance to vote their real enemies out. Its greatest draw would be that it would express the kind of direct democracy that the EU referendum was supposed to appeal to, but without such disastrous results.

There are presently two main obstacles to this. The first is our electoral system, which militates against new parties gaining any effective leverage until they’ve become old parties, and so prevents public opinion’s being accurately reflected and expressed in all its changeable variety. (The present composition of the House of Commons is a blatant example.) The answer to that, of course, is some form of PR. The second is the lack of a charismatic leader to spearhead this new party or coalition, and inspire people to flock to it. Boris is charismatic but no leader. Jeremy (in my view) is a great, innovative leader, but apparently not charismatic enough. What we need is a left of centre Churchill. I can’t see where he or she is coming from: can you?

*

PS (later the same day). Breaking news. Boris has withdrawn from the contest for new PM. One consolation to be drawn from this whole mess has been that those who caused it would have to clear it up. But Boris just walks away. What a shit.

The referendum result has shown up huge and possibly fatal flaws in our political system and culture. This is not just a Remainer’s sour grapes; I’ve written about it before. (https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/02/29/first-past-the-post/; https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/19/the-demonization-of-politics/) The referendum is billed as uniquely democratic, and to be respected for that reason. So, no challenges or re-runs. But that’s to see it out of political and historical context.

What made the referendum uniquely democratic was that its result truly and proportionately reflected the will of the people (those who voted, anyway). But this was in a political system that doesn’t normally reflect the views of the populace; producing extraordinary results like the last general election’s, for example, where only 35% of the votes produced a government with an overall majority of seats in Parliament, but hated by most people. This of course gave rise to widespread discontent in the country, and a general alienation from politics, on the grounds that voting ‘makes no difference’.

Then along came the referendum: a very rare occasion where it was felt that voting could make a difference. Hence the high turn-out. But hence also the fact that when people came to cast their votes, they used them to as an outlet for all the frustrations that had been built up in them for so long by the political system they had had to endure. This was the first time they could really ‘get at’ the government and the rest of the political ‘establishment’. I’m sure many of them voted on the European issue too, and not just as a scapegoat for their sufferings under ‘austerity’. But I’m equally sure that if we had had a fairer electoral system in the first place – and a fairer press, but that’s another question – people’s grievances generally wouldn’t have needed to be funnelled into this single issue, as I think they were. And nor would the campaign have been so nasty and racist, which is another symptom of the general frustration and anger pent up by our present political system and culture.

Maybe the result would have been the same. Sadly, we’ll never know. But in any case the underlying problem with our so-called ‘democracy’ will remain, to continue to poison our national life – now as an off-shore island – for decades to come. We’re seeing it in the leadership contests in both the Conservative and Labour parties today. Just imagine the situation if you had proportional representation, and the proliferation of viable parties that this allows. Dissidents in both parties could join or form other groups, which – unhampered by first-past-the-post – would have as fair a chance of being represented in the Commons as the parties they had quarrelled with. It’s a no-brainer. All governments would need to be coalitions, of course, but coalitions that truly reflected the popular voice. (The argument against this used to be that first-past-the-post produced more political stability. Oh yes? Look around.) And people would not need to channel their built-up frustration on many matters against just one of them, because that was the only one they were allowed to have their say on.

To get a decent political culture in Britain will need some fundamental reforms. The electoral system is one area; the press is another. (I see from today’s paper, incidentally, that Murdoch is backing Trump. Of course. Another immoral capitalist.) And the public schools, obviously. A model that reformers might look to is Sweden, whose electoral system is much fairer (I’d miss having my ‘own’ MP, but there are ways around that: see my previous post), and whose press – even the tabloids – is basically honest and restrained. They’re also a more equal, happier and more prosperous people than us. But I can’t see that happening in Britain. Our main political parties do so well out of the present system, and our press barons are too powerful. It will require a revolution. And we don’t ‘do’ revolutions, do we?

Alternatively… Can’t we ask the Vikings to come back? Last time it didn’t work out very well, for us at any rate; but I believe the Scandinavians have grown out of the raping and pillaging, and become quite civilised. Quite honestly, if they wanted to come and re-colonise us now, I wouldn’t object. Now we’re out of the EU (almost), we’re ripe for the picking. I’d welcome a flotilla of longships sailing up the Humber, their crews singing fierce Abba war songs, offering the natives meat-balls, and waving their self-assembly flat-pack swords. They could do an awful lot of good for us. I’m rather against imperialism in general; but in this case…

The British Empire had no definite beginning. It just sort of emerged out of the gloom. Nor did it have a definite end – until yesterday. Up until then, writing books about the history of the Empire (which is what I do), I had always found it difficult to know where to stop. There are several dates that can be picked for the beginning of the end, of course: either of the two world wars, Indian independence, Suez, the retrocession of Hong Kong, even, before any of these events, my own favourite: the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902). But still there remained traces of the Empire all over: far-flung British populations, the Falklands, island tax havens, the English language, deprecating views of ‘coloured’ peoples that may have been inherited from colonial times, and so on. But when could we say it was all finally over? That’s no clearer than its exact starting date. In cases like this all we can do is to pick a symbolic event; and England (pop. 53 million) 1, Iceland (pop. 330,000) 2, in Stade de Nice on Monday 27 June 2016, coming on top of ‘Brexit’ just three days earlier, seems to me as good a choice as any.

It’s a good symbol because, as everyone knows, it was the Brits who invented football, and then exported it to the world under the cover of their ‘informal’ empire: that is, the empire of their world-wide trade. It’s also apt because our defeat was at the hands of the Vikings (essentially), who have been a pain in our arses for over a thousand years: invading, raping, pillaging and colonising us in the 9^th-11^th centuries; conquering us (disguised as Frenchmen) in 1066; the great au pair invasion of the 1960s, undermining our morals; and making us struggle with their flat-pack furniture.

Brexit, however, is a more substantial terminal point. Of course we haven’t had a (significant) empire for ages; but we’ve still been ‘Great Britain’. The ‘Great’, of course, isn’t any kind of boast, but simply indicates that Britain is more than just England: for my Swedish friends, stor rather than stark. It consists of four separate nations. With Scotland about to hive off to rejoin Europe, and similar noises coming from Wales and Northern Ireland, we in England may not be able to claim that title any more. That must mark the end. From imperial Britain to Little England. Iceland 2, England 1.

I’ve replaced Saturday’s ‘Fuck, What have we done?’ post with a longer and better one. There’s also a shorter version, with a more polite heading, on the LRB Blog (http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2016/06/27/bernard-porter/historic-failure/).

The other thing I feared (https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/corbyns-fault/) is now happening. Corbyn is being blamed for not getting out the Labour vote. With his shadow cabinet resigning in shoals, it really doesn’t look as though he can last long. I’m deeply saddened by this. Corbyn is the only Labour leader for years that I’ve felt I could identify with. It may be partly that he looks a bit like me – old, grey-bearded, sloppily dressed – but it’s mainly because of his political principles, most of which (not all) I share, and his transparent honesty, which may not be as rare as we think among politicians but probably is among those who reach the top. I’ve also admired his ‘performances’ at Prime Minister’s Question Time in the Commons. I like his ‘new style’ of political leadership: less of the Führerprinzip that Thatcher brought in. And I thought his many speeches on behalf of the ‘Remain’ campaign were excellent: more measured, rational, honest and therefore persuasive than most Tory Brexiters’ and Remainers’; though it was difficult sometimes to find them, with the media largely ignoring him. This was a great part of his problem. People got the impression he wasn’t pulling his weight, but only because the BBC, ITV and even the ‘quality’ press hardly gave him any coverage. When they did, it was only to sneer – even the Guardian. Corbyn represents ‘rational man’; who was nowhere near as newsworthy as Boris the clown and Nigel the idiot, and as the soap opera melodramatics on the ‘Blue’ side of politics. As Tony Blair learned to his political advantage, but to our existential peril, it’s the press barons that run this country. Jeremy didn’t stand a chance.

I shall always bear a grudge against the media for this, and against those Labour MPs who are presently seeking to bring him down. For the moment, however, we need to deal with realities, one of which is this media bias, until we achieve power, and can do something about it. For my part, I wasn’t at all impressed with any of the other candidates in the last Labour leadership election, but have been since then with Hilary Benn. It’s his sacking by Corbyn, of course, following his telling the latter that he no longer had confidence in him, that has triggered today’s shadow cabinet revolt. I disagree with him on some issues, including that one; but on the other hand his speeches are both rational and impressive oratorically, he has ministerial experience, and he must have some of his father’s DNA still lurking there. (That doesn’t always follow. Look at the deplorable Kinnock fils.) He would go down well on all parts of the Labour benches, and hopefully among ordinary Labour members too. I understand that he has expressed no interest in leading the party, but if so I hope he can be persuaded otherwise. He’s the only one that would stay the hand holding my letter of resignation from the party, when Jeremy is sacrificed to the Gods of (what used to be) Fleet Street and Broadcasting House.

PS. Or Yvette Cooper.

I’ve not noticed much rejoicing on the winning side of the EU debate, such as you might expect on an ‘Independence Day’. Are they having second thoughts? Waking up thinking, ‘Fuck, what have we done?’ as the pound plummets, Cameron falls on his sword, a clown is set to take over, Corbyn (the only one who put a rational case for the EU, if only the press had bothered reporting it) is stabbed by the Brutuses in his own party, the UK breaks up, region turns against region and generation against generation (I’m embarrassed meeting young people now; I must get a badge: ‘I may be an old fart, but I voted Remain’), Trump and Putin start rubbing their hands in glee, other foreigners laugh at us (see the cover of the current New Yorker: http://nyer.cm/OSpSXcg), racists and neo-fascists are encouraged all over Europe, and the rest of the EU looks about to disintegrate? (That’s why it won’t give an ‘independent’ UK an easy ride in trade talks with it – pour décourager les autres.) Brexit leaders are now back-pedalling on their most persuasive arguments during the referendum campaign: no, immigration won’t fall, we’ll just be able to (theoretically) ‘control’ it; no, the money we save won’t go to the NHS – we never said it would. (Oh yes they did; it was on the side of their battle bus.) None of the leading Brexiters had the least idea what they wanted to succeed Britain-in-Europe, apart from some woolly abstractions – ‘control’, ‘freedom’, ‘greatness’, ‘the good old days’ – and some totally inappropriate models elsewhere – Canada, Norway, Switzerland. Apparently no thought at all had been put into this. As you would have expected there to have been if they’d really believed they could win.

Perhaps they never really wanted to win. Is that the answer? Like utopian socialists and fundamentalist Christians they never expected to prevail, and rather liked this position, for the freedom it gave them to criticise others on socialist or fundamentalist grounds. Europhobia in particular was a terrific cause, so long as it remained just that: a one-size-fits-all scapegoat for everything that went wrong, a way to bond people together, giving them a warm feeling of collective injustice, and a means of getting at the toffs and ‘experts’, at the top – without any danger that their wild alternative might be tested. For Boris it gave him the opportunity to win over the Right of his party to his succession to Cameron – but not yet, for God’s sake! And think of all the fun conspiracy theories its defeat might have spawned – indeed, was already starting to: MI5 doctoring the polling returns (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/eu-referendum-brexit-how-to-vote-own-pens-polling-station-polls-live-latest-mi5-conspiracy-fears-a7097011.html), murdering a young Remain woman MP to get sympathy (http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2016/06/conspiracy-corner-killing-of-jo-cox.html.), and running the ridiculous Nigel Farage in order to discredit his side. (Actually that last one’s mine. But I’m sure they would have thought of it.) Now the cause is about to be tested. And within twenty-four hours it has come to look far more complicated and difficult than they had assumed – or had fooled their followers that it would be.

And really, no-one anticipated it. Who would have thought that such a very little stone flung into the water by a saloon-bar bore like Nigel Farage could cause such ripples – a tsunami, almost? The reason, of course, is that the water, however smooth it had seemed on the surface, was seething underneath. British society was a reactionary, deeply undemocratic, divisive mess. It had been that for some time, but recent ‘Tory cuts’ hugely exacerbated the problem. The scale of distrust of and hostility to the ‘establishment’ was – is – unprecedented since the time of the Chartists. Of course the smooth, superficial Cameron, privileged, sheltered, and trained in deception (‘public relations’), couldn’t see that. Hence his richly-deserved nemesis: one of the great historic ‘failures’ among British prime ministers (following Chamberlain and Eden). And hence also the appalling, scary mess we’re in now: Britain certainly, Europe probably, and possibly the wider world. As Michael Gove’s derided ‘experts’ had predicted all along. Even for the winners, this is hardly a time to rejoice.

I’ve never before heard of a popular referendum, especially one as close and as confused as this, deciding the fate of a country and a continent without some further consideration. (Scotland, perhaps.) Doesn’t the ultimate power to withdraw from the EU rest with Parliament? Couldn’t the elected government override the ‘will of the people’ – at least until another referendum could be held, once Farage’s ‘decent people’ have been faced – as they are now – with the reality of an ‘out’ vote? It’s been all too willing to disregard the popular will in the case of ‘austerity’. I suppose Cameron doesn’t want to appear a ‘bad loser’. You can be sure that the Brexiters would have had no such qualms, if the vote had gone the other way. Perhaps the Queen could step in. (Wait a bit: she’s an even older fart than me.)

OK, the upside.

1. David Cameron is gone (nearly), rightly hoist by his own petard  – to coin a cliché. Osborne must surely follow shortly.
2. The ‘Establishment’ is discredited.
3. The public school system is discredited. Utterly.
4. Real, direct democracy has prevailed, albeit perversely. There’s something exciting about mob rule.
5. From now on no-one will be able to use the EU as a scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in Britain. Blame can be directed where it belongs  – currently Tory austerity.
6. We may be forced at last to re-examine our political system, critically. And our press. Perhaps.
7. We might learn to moderate the tone of our political discourse. That’s come under a lot of fire recently. Similarly, all the lies, on both sides. The Tory ones obviously weren’t believed. Everyone knew  they were whoppers.
8. Jeremy Corbyn could strengthen his hold over the Labour party, and his wider appeal, after being the only one in the game to argue a rational and measured pro-EU case, without recourse to untruths. But that will depend on (a) the press giving him some coverage; and (b) his bitter Blairite enemies in the party laying off him. (If not I’ll resign.)
9. The whole car-crash could well shake up the rest of Europe, where there is quite a lot of Euroscepticism about, and persuade it to undertake some much-needed reforms. (Brexit is the EU’s fault, too.) In particular, to loosen its neo-liberal structures (especially with regard to ‘free movement’), and to put a stop to its imperial expansion. (See https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/05/27/eumperialism/).
10. A Brexit government is bound to fuck things up; so bringing us closer to revolution. (I wish.)
11. With the young overwhelmingly voting for ‘Remain’ – and they after all are the ones that will have live with today’s decision longest – there’s hope for the future. Or the present, if they can make a case for disenfranchising us oldies. Or euthanising us. God, what a generation we are. (Not me; I voted Remain.)
12. We’re now spared all the conspiracy theories that were beginning to be prepared in case ‘Remain’ won. (MI5 altering ballot papers; Jo Cox’s murder a ‘false flag’ op., etc. See below.)
13. The Scots will almost certainly break away soon, to rejoin the EU. So we’ll be shot of them. And remember they invented free market economics. So, good riddance.
14. And finally: well, at least we’ve had some fun, haven’t we? All those clowns on the Brexit side. Politics is no longer dull. It can be as entertaining as Eastenders any day.

No, this doesn’t cheer me up much, either. Especially with the prospect of the clowns taking the asylum over. Just imagine: Boris PM; Gove Chancellor; Nigel – what? Master of the Revels? Kajsa, make up that room for me in Stockholm. (If I can still get free healthcare there.)

Eye op went OK, thanks; though I’m only seeing through a bloodshot haze. That seems apt.

11.30 p.m. – Here we are then. The polls open in a few hours. No more time for Farage to mouth his obscenities, Johnson to crack his tasteless jokes, Gove to bring up the Nazis again, Cameron to wriggle, slug-like, out of the traps he’s set himself (‘no ifs, no buts’), or Corbyn to argue his reasonable case unreported. Just a few moments for people to recall their frustration and anger with politicians, especially the posh boys at the head of the Tory Party, and to blame it all on ‘Europe’: the only target offered them to attack just now.

Whichever way it goes, this has been the most divisive, duplicitous and bruising debate in British politics since circa 1910 (Ireland, industrial anarchy, protectionism, the House of Lords, suffragism). It has done immense damage to the Tory party – one hopes – but also to Britain’s reputation abroad. There have been many markers along the road of Britain’s post-imperial decline and fall since 1945 – I’ve written about them; this is the latest. My country still has, I believe, some good sides, typified for example by the reaction of the majority of its people to Jo Cox’s murder last week. (Apart from the East Yorkshire Tory councillor who tweeted yesterday that his contribution to the appeal launched in her name would be ‘the steam off my own piss’.) But in this controversy it’s our worst sides that have risen, like scum, or the steam off Councillor Peacock’s piss, to the surface: small-mindedness, narrow nationalism, reaction, racism, straight stupidity, personal ambitions, perfidiousness, lies. Which is not to say that there aren’t some perfectly good, moral, socialist, even internationalist arguments for leaving the EU; most of which, however, have been drowned out by the dirtier water that has been dredged up.

What will happen now is anyone’s guess. If Remain wins, as I still expect it to do, though I’m not at all confident, it certainly won’t be over. Brexit will be back, claiming ‘we wos robbed’. If Brexit wins tomorrow, the waters are entirely uncharted. We can start speculating on that later, if and when it happens. But in any event, and quite apart from the eventual result, it is widely acknowledged that the ‘political discourse’ has been dreadfully coarsened by the ‘tone’ of the debate itself, from which it’s difficult to see any easy road back. As I’ve written more than once, it’s not Europe per se that has provoked this, but the shocking failings of our political system: a fundamentally flawed electoral system, a perverted press, bought governments, anti-democracy. (https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/16/is-it-really-about-the-eu/.) The failings of our system, note; not of democracy itself, though this may well be the lesson drawn by many of those on the Right of politics, as it was on the Continent in the 1930s, and seems to be in the USA today. That’s the real danger: the monster which Cameron, by his inane decision to call this referendum, has released from its cage. Either that, or socialism. But I can’t see that happening, can you?

Off to bed now, to vote tomorrow, and then to follow the count through the night on TV. The following morning I’m having an eye operation. With any luck that will be a distraction. And if both the referendum and the op go badly, I’ll have the consolation of never having to see the self-satisfied grin on that awful Gove’s fishy face. In any case, I’m unlikely to be able to blog again for a few days.

If ‘Remain’ wins, what will really bug me is that David Cameron will take the credit for it. He will have been the saviour of Europe, a fitting successor to the great Ted Heath. Labour will get no credit, of course. The soil has already been prepared for that, with the constant accusations from Remainers that Corbyn has been half-hearted in his advocacy, and almost invisible during the campaign. (See https://bernardjporter.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/corbyns-fault/.) That’s a lie. He has given dozens of speeches supporting Britain’s membership of the EU, culminating in a fine one in Manchester today. But they haven’t been reported in the tabloid press or on television, which are virtually the only means of achieving public visibility today. I was surprised to find Corbyn’s Manchester speech broadcast live this morning on both the main TV News channels: but only to be interrupted, at length, just before his peroration, by a piece of ‘breaking news’, which was of the conviction of a child-murderer. Good; but that could have waited. It remains to be seen whether the print press cover the speech tomorrow.* In general the mainstream media are ignoring him in this contest, either because they think him to be a hopeless case, as they have from the very beginning (the Guardian especially); or because he isn’t such good copy or television entertainment as the other combatants.

I’d go along with that. Corbyn has been making a measured, reasonable, truthful and balanced but still highly persuasive argument for Remain, which is very different from Cameron’s and Osborne’s: emphasizing as it does what the EU has done and can do for working people, through the Social Chapter, and so on, which is what both Tory Remainers and Tory Brexiters specifically object to; and so hopefully reaching the parts – Labour voters – that the Tories can’t reach. But this Left-wing case for the EU is a subtle and nuanced one, as well as being anathema to the right-wing press, which is probably the main reason why it’s ignored. Subtlety and nuance, especially from the Left, are not nearly so newsworthy as the clownish soap-opera like rows that are splitting apart the Conservative party over this; and visions of economic Armageddon in the future (Cameron), or of regiments of bashi-bazouks descending on Europe over the Bosphorus in their millions (Farage). So these are what makes the news. The BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, especially, seems to be blind to subtlety. After the Manchester speech she was still asking Corbyn why he was so ‘lack-lustre’ in his advocacy. Good God.

In fact he’s been doing a good job – or at least trying to – with his constituency. This is the point. It’s important to get both constituencies on board if Remain is to win. Cameron can deliver the bankers; Corbyn the plebs.

And then of course there’s always MI5. According to a report on today’s Guardian website,

almost half of those planning to vote Leave believe that the referendum will be rigged against them, according to YouGov poll findings reported by politics.co.uk. This won’t surprise the Economist’s Jeremy Cliffe. In … this week’s edition he says that “at a recent Leave event your columnist witnessed Tories and Kippers urge their supporters to take pens into the polling booth on June 23rd to prevent the intelligence services from doctoring their votes”.

So, if anything looks like going wrong, the Remainers will still have the spooks there as a long-stop. Yet another conspiracy theory for the Brexiters to fall back on if they lose, to go with the ‘false flag’ one I mentioned a day or so ago. Either way, it surely won’t all be settled on the 24^th; for Britain, Europe, or the Tory Party. Hardly a saviour, then, eh, Dave?

*Wednesday. Not the Guardian – unless they’ve hidden it away.