A Vision for “Remain” (cont)

  1. Openness

What is our view about change? Do we regard it as an exciting opportunity, or an unfortunate necessity? Do we embrace it or shrink from it? Do we think that the future is a blank sheet under our collective and individual control which we can mould to the greater good, or do we believe that “things were always better in my day”?

How do we treat visitors (temporary or permanent)?

Do we welcome them, treat them with respect and assume the best? Or do we regard them as a threat – they’re after our jobs; here for the benefits; on the scrounge?

How do we describe our identity? Am I a “Londoner”, a Sussex man, English, British, European ….. or Sapiens? How would I rank these, if asked to?

I am proud to be British (not specifically English) …… but also proud to be European. Of my four grandparents, one hails from Ireland and one from Switzerland. I am thankful that these two were welcomed into the late 19th/early 20th century “English” community. I hope that we and our children will have an equally welcoming attitude into the future.

Above all, of course, I consider myself a member of the human family Sapiens; I’m pleased to consider all fellow members my brothers and sisters.

Brexit? No thanks

 

  1. Co-operation

Let’s acknowledge from the start that competition is generally a good thing. However, surely this is even more true in the context of an overall co-operative framework.

Some questions:

  • When seeking access to increasingly limited resources (whether in trade, natural resources, services or whatever), is not working together in partnership better than aggressively fighting for “our little bit”.
  • Are we really still wedded to the notion of Might is Right? Do we care about those with whom we compete? Or about the weak, who will inevitably lose out?
  • Many would acknowledge that working together in science, medicine and technological research is self-evidently a good thing; why not in education, trade, industry, defence and security?
  • Our lives are increasingly dominated by networking (social and professional); why do we shy away from the national equivalent?
  • We increasingly live in a world in which all the important issues are global; if the issues are global, should we not move towards co-ordinated, global responses?
  • In any event, does it make sense to fragment back to a national (or indeed, sub-national) mindset?

Has the concept of the nation state, fundamentally a 19th century construct, had its day?

To be continued

Advertisements

A Vision for “Remain”

In writing this political blog I am breaking a long-standing promise; to blog only once a year on my annual folding-bike adventure. Why am I departing from this? Because it’s something about which I feel very strongly. I’m sure that I am not alone in finding the possibility of  “Brexit” to be intensely depressing.

Am I the only visceral “remainer” to find the interminable pro-EU arguments lacklustre, negative and lacking vision? I don’t believe the campaign should focus on nitty-gritty: the economy; migration; borders; centralisation or de-centralisation; whether we will be a few pounds better or worse off etc. “Experts” will argue these factors with equal conviction, on both sides, till the cows come home. What we need is a vision for the future.

In the absence of this from the great and good, I will try to present my own in ten stages.

A vision for the future

 I believe we should be building a family/society/country (choose whichever collective noun you wish) which moves forward into the 21st Century on the basis of:

  • Trust
  • Openness
  • Co-operation
  • A quest for equality
  • Mutual support, including through difficult times
  • Pursuit of happiness
  • A belief in the need to protect the weak
  • A willingness to sacrifice some aspects of control for the “greater good”
  • A belief in, and commitment to, international law
  • A commitment to protecting the environment

Over the next ten days I will endeavour to elaborate on each of these ten factors in turn.

  1. Trust

A traveller came upon a wise old farmer hoeing in his field beside the road. Eager to rest his feet, the wanderer hailed the countryman, who seemed happy enough to straighten his back and talk for a moment. “What sort of people live in the next town?” asked the stranger. “What were the people like where you’ve come from?” replied the farmer, answering the question with another question. “They were a bad lot. Troublemakers all, and lazy too; the most selfish people in the world, and not a one of them to be trusted. I’m happy to be leaving the scoundrels.” “Is that so?” replied the old farmer. “Well, I’m afraid that you’ll find the same sort in the next town. Disappointed, the traveller trudged on his way, and the farmer returned to his work.

Some time later another stranger, coming from the same direction, hailed the farmer, and they stopped to talk. “What sort of people live in the next town?” he asked. “What were the people like where you’ve come from?” replied the farmer once again. “They were the best people in the world; hard working, honest, and friendly. I’m sorry to be leaving them.”

“Fear not,” said the farmer. “You’ll find the same sort in the next town.”

One of the saddest aspects of the modern world is the lack of trust: stranger danger; distrust of “foreigners”; always assuming the worst, every situation a “Health and Safety” risk; suspicion and danger around every corner.

In reality, isn’t the truth is that most people are good; most people can be trusted; most people are just like you and me; risk is there to be managed, not eliminated? Surely it is better to lead our lives in this belief, than to shrink into isolation through distrust of our neighbour, or constant fear of lurking danger. We may occasionally be let down – ok, live with this, manage the risk and move on.

The relevance of this for the Brexit argument is, I think self-evident.

To be continued