Ain’t it the truth?! Another brilliant article from a Times commentator
Brexit doublethink is blinding us to the facts
August 19 2019, 12:01am,
Alex Massie
The challenge in British and American politics now is to steer through a tide of disinformation and land at the truth
‘To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.” So said George Orwell, patron saint of the commentator classes. Preach, comrade. If this has always been true it has rarely more certainly been the case than now. Absurdity and mendacity are the reserve currencies of the moment.
Consider the prime minister, a man who simultaneously reassures us that a no-deal Brexit is a “million-to-one” outsider about which there is no need to be concerned and then, in the very next breath, suggests that it’s no big deal because, if you look at matters from the correct perspective, no deal might be a spiffing result anyway.
This is a form of Brexit doublethink entirely consistent with Boris Johnson’s view that cake is for having and eating. Cakeism is all the rage these days.
Thus one cabinet minister told The Sun last week that “the EU will give us a better deal because if they don’t, Ireland is f***ed. No-deal will destroy it.” This is worth pondering. The UK will, on the whole, be OK with no deal and, indeed, might even thrive in such circumstances, but Ireland will be ruined. Sometimes, you know, you wonder if they’ve quite thought this through.
Meanwhile, in the real world every available indicator suggests that the EU is determined to stick to its position. The Irish government has long been concerned that, at the last moment, it might be abandoned by its European allies but, for the time being, the line that the Irish backstop is non-negotiable still holds.
Germany, meanwhile, appears more convinced than ever that no deal is, if you will, better than a bad deal for the EU. This may be a matter for regret; it remains the way it is. But then from the EU’s perspective there is a deal and it’s the British who are welching on it without bringing any attractive alternative proposals to the fabled Brexit table.
Not that delusions are restricted to the pro-Brexit half of British politics. In recent days there has been a flurry of wishful thinking about a so-called government of national unity — almost all of which has ignored the reality that no such thing is possible. Even if it could be cobbled together it would no more be a government of national unity than Mr Johnson’s ministry for the simple reason that any available government must either be in favour of Brexit or against it. As soon as a position has been taken on that matter the government forfeits all claims to be one of “national unity”.
Half of the country, roughly speaking, is in favour of Brexit and half of the country is less enthused by it and there’s nothing that can be done to change that. Unity is not on the agenda.
Spare us, too, the sanctimony of remainer MPs who would do anything to avoid a no-deal Brexit except vote for the withdrawal agreement negotiated by Theresa May that would, yes, have avoided a no-deal Brexit.
Jeremy Corbyn’s chiselling mendacity on this question is only to be expected but other MPs should know better and be held to a higher standard. A no-deal Brexit is on them almost as much as it is on the most committed Brexiteers.
Then there is the grisly question of Donald Trump. Brexiteers are all in with the Donald, not least because he’s one of the few world leaders who thinks Brexit is a capital notion. This owes less to the merits of the case for Brexit itself than to Mr Trump’s belief — his not entirely unwarranted belief — that the EU is a competitor more than it is a friend to the United States.
In Mr Trump’s mind every game is a zero-sum one and thus anything that weakens the EU is worthwhile. This is not a case of him being pro-British, rather one of him being anti-EU.
Even so the enthusiasm for Mr Trump evident in the keenest Brexit circles is revealing. It protests just a little too much for its own good and, by doing so, seems more likely to be a sign of weakness and neediness than strength. Mr Trump, however, will play along for as long as doing so allows someone else to be the mug.
Hence all this blathering about a fast-track trade deal with the UK. If this cannot be achieved — and it almost certainly will not be — there will instead be “sector by sector” mini deals that will, in sum, amount to much the same thing.
Pull the other one. Saying something does not make it so. Nothing in Mr Trump’s record suggests he understands the concept of comparative advantage. On the contrary, if you’re happy he assumes he’s being screwed. And Mr Trump would rather do the screwing himself. It takes some mammoth quantity of wishful thinking to look at Mr Trump’s trade war with China — so easy to win, apparently, yet in reality so self-defeating — and think he’s a man with whom Brexit Britain can do business. Even if he were, freer trade with the United States means stickier trade with the EU given the disparity in standards between the two trading powers.
Cosying up to this American president, besides being a grubby matter, is a risky proposition in any case. Mr Trump may not be president by Christmas next year and even if you think he might be more likely to be re-elected than not, there must be at least a 40 per cent chance he will not be re-endorsed by the American people. Do you really wish to go all-in on that?
Yesterday The Sunday Times revealed the contents of Operation Yellowhammer, the government’s contingency planning for a no-deal Brexit. They do not make for cheerful reading. Medical supplies will be “vulnerable to severe extended delays”, food supplies risk being compromised, disruption at ports will last for months before the situation “improves” so traffic flows are 50-70 per cent of the normal present rate.
So be it, you may think. Such are the consequences of a referendum that, on this one issue, makes MPs delegates not representatives. Brexit must happen because the people have insisted upon it but Brexit happening imposes no requirement to abandon the truth or to deny the obvious reality of truths that are hiding in plain sight.
But then, as Orwell said, doublethink permits you “to forget any fact that has become inconvenient” — even as you believe wholeheartedly in mutually exclusive realities.
