Some of us thought this day would
never come. Others prayed it never would. The long awaited referendum
on Britain’s EU membership will take place tomorrow. The results
will be out by Friday morning. Project Fear is still going strong.
But it looks unlikely to settle one of the biggest divisions in UK
politics.
How
did it come to this? The reasons are political in the worst sense.
David Cameron gave an ‘iron-clad
pledge’ for a referendum on
the Lisbon Treaty. He did
so to throw some red meat to the hard-right. Yet this did not have
the desired effect. UKIP continued to grow, feeding off of the
resentment of lower middle-class Tory voters in particular. The
Conservative base was under threat from an ultra-rightist outlier.
By
2014, the British press had bestowed ‘fourth
party’ status on UKIP. The Conservatives lost two seats after
Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless defected. It looked like Nigel
Farage would take Thanet South. But this was not to be. UKIP rapidly
lost momentum despite winning 3.8 million votes in 2015. Farage was
thwarted in South Thanet,
Reckless lost his seat and Carswell clung on.
Yet
the chasm
over the EU in the Conservative Party has
not narrowed. David
Cameron could not ignore the votes lost to UKIP. He sought to placate
Tory rebels and maintain the party’s support. This is why the
referendum was called. There
was no
grand national interest in holding this vote. It wasn’t about
democracy or security. It was about the Cameron legacy.
This has meant that the whole
debate has been dominated by rival factions within the Conservative
Party. Naturally David Cameron and George Osborne have led the Tory
Remain campaign, while Boris Johnson and Michael Gove have positioned
themselves as ‘renegade’ Eurosceptics. In other words, the
national debate has been a bun-fight between the entitled sons of
gentlemen.
Towards
the fatherlands
The
so-called
‘debate’ has been
unbearably parochial.
It’s either anti-migrant populism, or complacent liberal arguments
for the status quo. Neither
the Remain or Leave campaign offers a serious account of the EU.
Nationalism is taking on the role of the opposition in European
politics, as
Slavoj Žižek
argued
years ago, while the establishment takes on the guise of liberal
capitalism. This
is what politics has become.
We’ve
seen far-right parties make major gains from Austria,
Switzerland and Hungary to Germany, France and Poland. Even
Scandinavia has not been immune to this resurgent nationalism, we
have only to look at the True
Finns and the Swedish Democrats. The
neo-fascists see Europe as a cultural theme-park lacking the vitality
of nationalism. So they propose a rupture with the Whitehall
consensus.
Meanwhile
the mainstream looks increasingly decrepit. Conservative parties have
become market liberal, while social democratic parties have turned
from their traditional Keynesian
policies and now stare death in the face. PASOK
in Greece died on its feet, but its fate should send a message to
every European centre-left party. SYRIZA filled the vacuum in its
wake. But the defeat of the Greek radical Left poses a new crisis.
It’s
unclear where the Greek people will turn. The Eurozone
has become the means by which the EU core states (e.g. Germany and
France) impose austerity on the periphery (Portugal, Italy, Ireland,
Greece and Spain). The EU now resembles a neoliberal machine, much
more so than the social Europe envisioned by Labour activists. There
is a real danger that the opposition will rally to calls for a
‘Europe
of fatherlands’.
However, the referendum will not
dispel the threat of a fascist resurgence in Europe, nor will it
abolish the intolerable economic conditions perpetuated by
governments. Whether we stay or withdraw, the real battles will be
fought after the vote. This is why the stakes are so high. And this
is why the outcome will not settle the European question.
As
Edward
Luce points out in the Financial Times, Washington
fears Brexit would be a catalytic moment for the EU, after which all
smaller countries could leave. This could threaten the transatlantic
alliance. A gap could
emerge between NATO and
European political economy. No
wonder Obama came running to tell us to stay.
Though Brexit
would not sever the alliance on its own, it could be the catalyst for
a break-up.
This would be a dream come true
for Putin. The separation of Europe from NATO would mean Russia could
maintain its own sphere of influence. Not that this would equal
anything like the Eastern bloc of Soviet client-states. Russia cannot
even exercise anything like the kind of influence it could in 1980.
Nevertheless, Putin casts a long shadow in the minds of American and
European policy-makers.
The
Left and Brexit
Although there has been
speculation that Brexit could throw the UK economy into disarray, it
is debatable. For starters, growth in the UK has been lacklustre for
years. It’s likely much of the country would not notice the
difference between Osborne’s “economic miracle” and a
recession. In short, working-class voters have little to lose. After
four decades of Thatcherism, it’s understandable why working-class
people are willing to take the risk of a Brexit vote.
The
so-called ‘Lexit’
argument – for a left exit, as it were – has a great deal of
appeal. The European Union is not democratic, nor is it open to any
pressure short of an international mass movement. It is a thoroughly
right-wing project and may
not be open to reform.
This is why Tony
Benn, Dennis
Skinner and Jeremy Corbyn were all of the left Eurosceptic
tradition. But this isn’t
the 1970s.
Today the contemporary Left is
split. Typically, you have the liberal crowd who are reflexively
pro-EU, but you also have Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell arguing
for staying and fighting for a different kind of union.
Unsurprisingly, Momentum and a host of activists in the party base
support this manoeuvre. Indeed, the Labour Party is, by a clear
majority, for Britain remaining an EU member. Corbyn could never win
that fight.
So the mainstream Left has no
real presence on this issue. Instead, the radical leave campaign has
been relegated to activist circles. This has contained the central
division to the Tory Party. In one sense, this means the balance of
forces are conservative whether the UK leaves or stays. But the vote
could spell civil war for the Conservatives. The best case scenario
may be a close call, where Cameron is ousted and policy is left
paralysed.
Notice that even this
hypothetical scenario limits the question to Britain. What Europe
needs is an international movement capable of challenging its
institutions. The problem is that the Left is still reconstructing
itself at the national level. If the Left cannot do so, then Europe
may be doomed to continue on the same track.
This article was originally published at Souciant.
No comments:
Post a Comment