csmrussell-blog

[csmrussell-blog]

The dangers of the Protest-Vote

Written and originally published on 7th November 2016

On 24rd of June this year the world opinion and half of Britain was rocked by the results of the most damaging and divisive political event since the Thatcher era. The British exit from the European Union (henceforth referred to by it’s colloquialism ‘Brexit’) can be seen from hindsight as irretrievably bad for the British economy, society and relations with European powers. Not only did the pound sterling drop by over 10% overnight as the ‘leave’ campaign slowly gained ground, but it was revealed that almost double the swing vote regretted the result. A poll by Survation suggests that 1.1 million voters would change their vote with prior knowledge of the outcome, more than enough to close the 1.3 margin of the referendum. Possibly the most shocking aspect of this referendum was therefore that many sensible, voting members of the British public protest-voted, or felt they were bought in by fiction pedalled by Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Michael Gove (forerunners of the ‘Leave’ campaign). They have damned the British nation into economic hardship which it will take at least a decade to recover from. Politically, however, the fallout may be still more significant.

In spite of the flurry of popular outcry and change.org petitions-ranging from demanding Scotland and London (‘ScotLond’) to remain in the EU and potentially leave Britain, a second referendum, the overturning of the first referendum, and the removal of democratic rights of various citizens- the decision for Britain to leave the European Union is being firmly upheld by the British government. The British public have declared repeatedly that the vote was unlawful, that the government failed to fully disclose the consequences of a leave vote. Indeed, the various conversations I had in the run up to Brexit would all ultimately end in someone exclaiming “we simply don’t have all the facts”, which would be received by nods of agreement. The evidence, however, speaks to the contrary. A high point of the ‘leave’ campaign was Michael Gove, when faced with the statistical analysis of Brexit which would indicate it was a terrible decision for Britain to leave the European Union, emphatically declaring that the British people were “tired of experts”. This sparked national anti-expert sentiment, along with comments declaring that “experts built the Titanic” and that “the only expert who matters is you, the voter”. The suggestion that there was a systematic failure to publish predictions of what a Brexit vote would mean is completely inaccurate. There was no systematic failure on behalf of the government, merely a mass wave of misdirection and stupidity among the British public.

This referendum should therefore firmly be supported. I say this not because I believe in Brexit, I certainly do not. However, we are fortunate to live in a state where the views of the majority are able to dictate national policy, rather than that of a minority or single figure. In the wake of the Arab Spring in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, Morocco, Jordan and Syria, this could not be more important. In Syria, 400 000 lives have been lost over the past 5 years in a continuing struggle for democracy against a dictatorial regime. To quash a democratic referendum result would be nothing short of a slap in the face to the vast numbers of Syrian refugees who no longer have any country, auto or democratic, to return to.

Many Brexiteers woke up on the morning of the referendum with warm tea, cold feet and regret. Politics is not football, and we should not arbitrarily pick a side to support with little consequences for the outcome of the game. We have a duty as democratic citizens to assess the political consequences of each ballot paper we mark, which is why protest-voting is an insult to the system, the nation and everyone in it. Thusly, I turn to the Republican campaign of the 2016 US Presidential election.

Mr Donald Trump is a political philanderer. Much like those involved in the Brexit campaign, he has a number of significant publicity outlets (note the Brexit campaign bus promising to give £350 million to the NHS), and like the Brexit campaigners Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, he cannot have possibly hoped to get this far in national politics. In hindsight it has been widely accepted that both Johnson and Gove were using the campaign to further their own political aims rather than campaigning out of genuine belief in a Britain out of the European Union. Both candidates immediately took advantage of the referendum, Gove by standing as the next leader of the Conservative party (and therefore Prime Minister), and Johnson by scrabbling his way to foreign secretary. The mildly racist buffoon of an ex-London mayor who has accused the Turkish Prime Minister of having intercourse with a goat (in a limerick), compared a US Presidential candidate to staff in a psychiatric institution (“sadistic nurse in a mental hospital”) and accused Obama of disliking Britain because he is part-Kenyan, and harbours postcolonial resentment (a manner reminiscent of Donald Trump accusing US judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is of Mexican heritage, of being unable to be impartial because of Trump’s outspoken anti-Mexican comments), is now responsible for representing Britain on the international stage, and I can think of nobody less qualified for the job. Trump, like Johnson and Gove, leapt on a political bandwagon which rapidly spiralled out of control and has developed a new life of its own. In spite of Trump’s many public, personal and business failures (amongst his two divorces, four bankruptcies, the discontinuation of Trump steaks, sale of Trump Taj Mahal and the failure and scandal of Trump University, he has most recently been caught on record describing “grabbing (women) by the pussy” among thousands of other sexist allegations) he is still trusted by around 43% of the American public and 132 American constituencies (at the date of this draft) to lead their nation. This is as an alternative to Hillary Clinton, a highly experienced politician, previous Democratic candidate, Secretary of State, State Senator and First Lady.

Tragic as his track record is, Donald Trump’s demeanour and attitude are still more worrying. His promises to imprison Hillary Clinton over the minor scandal which is now dubbed ‘emailgate’, and also no doubt as a result of some wounded white man’s machismo. Trump’s alarming temperament, which appears to suggest he suffers from some kind of undiagnosed mood or anxiety disorder, would be alarming on the world stage, but this has all been said before.

Possibly the most disturbing thing about Trump’s presidential campaign, however, is its existence in the first place. While I can understand why many Americans are not attracted to Clinton as a candidate, and even more disillusioned by the lack of an alternative, this is not enough reason to elect a potentially delusional or lying megalomaniac (Trump either does not realise his multiple business ventures have been vastly unsuccessful, or he has no problem brandishing the lie of their success to the American public). I am shocked that vast numbers of the American public do not see Trump for what he is- a fool with a lot of money and a decent PR team. It could not be more fitting, therefore, to learn that Nigel Farage, the strongly pro-Brexit advocate and previous leader of the UKIP party (currently provisional leader), has been recruited to Trump’s campaign. This is no doubt in order to extoll more lies to the Western public- such as his promise to the British public that a Brexit vote would mean £350 million (roughly $500 million at the time) extra money annually for the National Health Service. Trump’s campaign is undoubtedly also riddled with such fabrications, which he is under no obligation to pursue if he is elected.

A democratic responsibility resided on the heads of the British public to research and make a decision which would affect significantly the foreign and diplomatic relations of the nation, along with its economic and social development. We failed in this responsibility- we made what can objectively be called the wrong choice. In the weeks and months leading up to Brexit the British public exclaimed repeatedly that we ‘didn’t have all the facts’ of what a vote to leave the European Union would mean. We did have the facts, and we ignored them. The American public have the same democratic responsibility. I would urge them not to repeat our mistakes.

[csmrussell-blog]

An Open Letter to Londoners

At roughly ten past ten on Saturday night, I left a pub on Southwark street which minutes later was stormed by panicked police. I was supposed to head down towards London Bridge and down Borough High Street with some friends. When we left the pub there were people running in the opposite direction. Strange things happen in this city. It’s unsurprising with so many people crammed in such a sprawling space – and had I been alone I would have ignored the running, the taxi driver yelling at people. I would have carried on towards the bridge, put myself in danger, and I might have died. But I wasn’t alone, and I did run, and we’re still alive.

There was a police cordon that ran from Borough underground station to Bank and Monument. Crossing Borough High street was perilous since it required dodging speeding police and ambulance. A police helicopter circled over the river while I phoned my parents, lied, and told them I was fine. I slept on my friend’s sofa because I didn’t feel safe enough to go home until it was light.

Refusing to be afraid is stupid. We want to defy terrorism by telling ourselves we’re not scared, but fear is normal. Not being afraid of a group of men who violently assaulted and killed seven people is completely irrational. We should be afraid, but fear does not mean we have given in. Fear will keep us alive when instinct fails, as it did for me on the 3rd of June. I understand the compulsion to refuse to be afraid, fear feels like we are giving violent individuals what they want. But refusing to be afraid does not bring back the people we have lost and it will not stop this kind of thing from happening again. Assailants who want to do us harm do not care whether or not we fear them or how resilient the city is. Islamic State, who have claimed responsibility for the attack, are merely the most recent in a long line of violent groups – Al Qaeda, the Provisional IRA, etc. who have attacked Western cities. Refusing to fear attacks will not stop them from happening because it is a pattern of behaviour outside of our control. 

I went out the next night to Holborn to meet a friend- I considered cancelling but I hadn’t seen him in ages and I didn’t know when we would have another opportunity for a proper catch up. A car alarm went off outside while I was sat in a pub in Holborn, and for a moment I pictured men armed with knives in balaclavas storming the spoons on Kingsway. 

Saturday was the most afraid I have been in my short life. Political campaigning for the election on Thursday has resumed and police are in the process of arresting individuals and investigating the attack. 

Life continues on as normal, regardless as to whether or not you were affected by the events on the bridge. We may be afraid, but that does not make us sit quietly at home. We continue, because the definition of courage is doing the things which frighten us. 

Be brave, London 

Yours Faithfully