Skip to main content

Leaving Europe is so stupid it amounts to fatal self harm

Listening to the BBC one might think that, intellectually, the debate about British membership of the European Union was a finely balanced argument.

It isn't.

As Kate Hoey admitted to Andrew Neill, there is not one single independent study that suggests that leaving the EU would benefit the UK economy. The Leave campaign could have put up a "sock puppet" study up to suggest they were right, but they could not even do that- so damning is the factual evidence.

The press is suggesting that they are reporting the debate evenly- but the reality is that there is no factually based support for any of the statements put out by the Leave campaign- it is not supported by any sustainable facts at all.

I have made comments about the rise of stupidity in politics before, but quite frankly the utter failure of the media to recognize that one side is intellectually bankrupt implies either stupidity or bias. In the case of the Daily Mail, it probably implies both.

OK, it is fair to say that Boris Johnson, George Galloway or Nigel Farage are more interested in questions of political power than questions of political accuracy, but surely their cynicism is precisely the thing that the media should challenge.

But no: who David Furnish may or may not be sleeping with, in the context of his open relationship with Elton John, or whether or not Hugh Bonneville might have slept with a woman not his wife- that is what the press will go to the stake for. It is not a question of principle, it is a question of profit. 

It is a total disgrace.

The fact is that leaving the European Union would be so damaging, that is not even sure that the UK would survive. Building a new border across Ireland, infuriating the fractious Scottish body politic and creating enormous economic harm- apparently all of this is less important that the sex lives of celebrities.   

If British citizens do not care about their own future, the media will certainly not do it for them.

When every single friend of the UK- allies, trade partners and our own daughter states- says that leaving would weaken the UK, and every enemy of our country, Marine Le Pen, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin wants us to leave, then the balance of probabilities is really crystal clear.

The media should report not merely opinions, but the biases that inform those opinions. That they fail to do so is one reason why the mainstream media in the UK is increasingly ignored.

It is essential that each citizen brings critical faculties to our consideration of the argument. It is not acceptable to leave your critical brain at home when you consider the future or our country.

It is not an accident that two thirds of those who hold degrees support Remain. It is not a co-incidence that all our foreign or off-shore owned media supports Leave.

Draw your own conclusions.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...