Tag Archives: Brexit

France on my mind…

03 Wednesday May 2017

Posted by in France, French Election 2017, Terrorism

≈ 23 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

Eugène_Delacroix_-_Le_28_Juillet._La_Liberté_guidant_le_peuple

La Liberté guidant le peuple, Eugène Delacroix, 1830 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Above is Eugène Delacroix‘ Liberty leading the people. Eugène Delacroix is associated with Romanticism. He is, almost undoubtedly, the son of Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, a brilliant aristocrat who survived the French Revolution, was Napoléon’s second-in-command, orchestrated his defeat at Waterloo, and fared well under Louis XVIII, the King of France from 1815 until 1830. 

Sunday, April 23rd and in its last week of campaigning the contest is a toss-up. The race is coming down to four candidates – the far-right Marine Le Pen [Front National], the independent Emmanuel Macron, the centre-right François Fillon and the left-leaning Jean-Luc Mélenchon who has mounted a late-stage comeback to pull within striking distance of the other three.
Análises & Previsões – Blogs de Traders

Le Pen reinforced: Nicolas Dupont-Aignan

As you have just read, last Sunday, it seemed that independent Emmanuel Macron would be the next President of France. Matters have changed. On Friday, 28 April 2017, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, the President of far-right party Debout la France (Stand up France) reached an accord de gouvernement with Madame Le Pen. (See Le Monde.) Members of Madame Le Pen’s Front national could therefore be elected into office. My poor “douce France” (La Chanson de Roland)!

Members of Marine Le Pen’s Front national may have influenced the results of the Brexit referendum, held on 23 June 2016. The Brexit referendum did not indicate a clear willingness among Britons to sever their ties with the European Union. For all practical purposes, half of Britons voted in favour of leaving the EU, and the other half opposed a separation. The results were too close to be acceptable.

We, Canadians, are veterans in the murky territory of referendums. We’ve experienced a 49% versus 51% “victory.” We have therefore eliminated 50% referendums through the Clarity Act. Such 50% referendums show division and in the case of Brexit, a few voters feared the Migrants. That decision had to be “walked back.”

Since migrants began flooding Europe, nativists, i.e. the extreme right, have been given a voice. It is a repli sur soi. In other words, a number of Britons went into fetal position. And the United States elected Donald J. Trump. Britain is the former and foremost colonial power and the United States has welcomed several generations of immigrants from all over the world. It was a symbol of freedom.

At any rate, last Sunday, it seemed that independent Emmanuel Macron would be the next President of France. As you probably know, on Friday, 28 April 2017, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, the President of far-right party Debout la France (Stand up France) reached an accord de gouvernement with Madame Le Pen, the leader of the Front national. (See Le Monde.) This partnership could result in a victory for Marine Le Pen’s Front national, and we could expect a purge, the return of the death penalty, no tolerance of “otherness.” In short, the Age of Enlightenment would seem an error, or a movement, a mere movement. Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, etc. never envisaged 1793, the “populist” Reign of Terror.

Although Madame Le Pen has avoided using the word Frexit recently, Frexit is on her agenda. Brexit was harmful, but Frexit could deal a death-blow to the European Union. Together, European nations are a force. If Frexit occurs, the European Union may be irreversibly weakened and peace in the world threatened. A United Europe is one of the conditions of global peace.

It other words, we cannot allow ISIL to rule the world. A victory based on a fear of terrorism would not be a victory. On the contrary, it would empower extremists, and extremism is always a mistake. One chooses a middle path, Molière’s “modération.”

Marine Le Pen came to Quebec thinking she would have an audience. Not at all! The Québécois birthrate is so low that we need immigrants and they are Canadians as soon as they arrive. The Quebec shooter (29 January 2017) was an admirer of Madame Le Pen and Donald Trump, the newly inaugurated President of the United States. The cost of housing is very high in Canada, but, if Quebec builds affordable homes and I have anything to do with the process, these homes will be for everyone.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-shooting-what-we-know-so-far/article33826078/

At this point, Marine Le Pen has a chance of being elected to the presidency of France. She’s clever. People may believe she will protect them from terrorist attacks. No! Kindness, acceptance, humility and a smile go a very long way. I’ve inserted an Avaaz video. One has to click on Facebook if need be.

Love to everyone ♥

If necessary, please click on Watch on Facebook ↓ to see the video.

800px-Le_Départ_des_Volontaires_(La_Marseillaise)_par_Rude,_Arc_de_Triomphe_Etoile_Paris

The Marseillais volunteers departing, sculpted on the Arc de Triomphe (Wikipedia)

Hector Berlioz‘ la Marseillaise (Rouget de Lisle)

800px-Pils_-_Rouget_de_Lisle_chantant_la_Marseillaise

Claude Joseph Rouget de Lille sings la Marseillaise for the first time by Isidore Pils (1813-1875) (Wikipedia)

© Micheline Walker
3 May  2017
WordPress

The US Election: its Aftermath

17 Thursday Nov 2016

Posted by in Election 2016, United States

≈ 10 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Obstructionism & Populism

President-elect Donald Trump has stated that American elections were rigged. Although there could be truth to this statement, it is a generalization.

Yet Mrs Hillary Clinton suspects that the investigation into her emails jeopardized her bid for the Presidency of the United States. I believe it did. I have read that she had been somewhat careless in handling classified material, but the FBI had not found criminal wrongdoing at the close of its first investigation. However, reopening the investigation suggested wrongdoing. Nothing more was needed to eliminate Mrs Clinton and open the way for a tragedy.

Therefore, one could say that there was obstructionism, but obstructionism of a kind that cannot be pinned down entirely on people at the top, such as FBI Director James Comey. The court of public opinion is ruthless. It undid Mrs Clinton. Unless there were errors in calculating the votes, which does not seem to be the case, Americans voted Donald Trump into office. And he was elected by a populist United States, not its élite, which is somewhat ironical. As a billionaire, Donald Trump is probably one of the wealthy Americans who hide their tax dollar, which tends to put him on the very same level as the establishment, or part of the establishment.

It could also be that Americans wanted a change. Mrs Clinton had been in Washington for many years, which was both an advantage and a disadvantage. She was the experienced nominee, but she had already spent two terms in office as the wife of former President Bill Clinton. In the eyes of ordinary and not-so ordinary people, a husband and wife are one and the same person.

Consequently, contrary to Pascal’s Wager, a large number of Americans chose “infinite” losses rather than “limited” losses. One may argue that four years is a finite period of time. Mathematically, four years are four years. However, there are other yardsticks. The events of these four years may be defining and irreversible. As President Obama pointed out, if a person loses self-control twittering, will it be safe to trust him with the nuclear code? The results would be limitless.

In short, taking a risk, i.e. voting for Mr Trump, was a perilous choice and, therefore, not a  choice. He is the laughing-stock of the world.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/u-s-becomes-laughingstock-of-world-for-something-other-than-gun-laws

800px-government-vedder-highsmith-detail-2

Detail of Elihu Vedder‘s mural Government (1896), in the Library of Congress. The title figure bears a tablet inscribed with Lincoln’s famous phrase. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

America’s Credibility

There will be consequences. On 8 November 2016, the credibility the United States had gained during Barack Obama’s presidency was shaken by an amnesia-stricken and reckless American electorate. During his term as President of the United States, Mr Trump is likely to be what he was before his election: sexist, racist, lewd, brash, narcissistic, xenophobic, an unbearable misogynist, etc.

As well, Donald Trump is a nativist and his natives are white Americans. We know that he is married to Melania who is not an American by birth but is somewhat trans-cultural given her former occupation as supermodel. She was one of the tall and very slender ladies flying from runway to runway. They “appear,” as does Donald Trump.

The fact remains that when and if Donald Trump attends summits, the American discourse will no longer have the logic and fluency it did under President Obama. But, as President, Mr Trump may not attend summits.

Had Mr Trump not been elected, he might have appointed himself President of the United States and would have been a usurper. Mrs Clinton was not a perfect candidate. It appears she had some baggage, but she was more experienced which made her a safer choice. She was not likely to deprive Americans of social programmes. These programmes are not charity. Americans pay for them through their tax dollar.

Consider that, theoretically, it is now “open season” on Mexicans, Muslims, people of colour, persons of a different sexual orientation or women, and various dissenters. Mr Trump’s presidency promises to be authoritarian.

He is in favour of the death-penalty and he will penalize women whose life was threatened by a pregnancy that had to be terminated. I hope he will seek the advice of doctors in this respect. Doctors cannot let a woman die because she is pregnant. Doctors performing abortions will also be penalized. It is as though Mr Trump did not know that abortions and birth-control are different issues. When abortions were decriminalized in Canada, doctors could, at long last, intervene if the health and life of their patient was at risk. Their only option had been a hysterectomy. Is a woman’s life so unimportant that she should be left to suffer and die if a pregnancy threatens her health and her life ?

The United States should be as Abraham Lincoln defined it in the Gettysburg Address: a democracy. Mr Trump, whose bid for the presidency was endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan, militant racists, is a clear and present danger. He may also allow the bearing of guns in mid-town Manhattan.

He also had the support of the National Rifle Association.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/politics/nra-donald-trump-television/

800px-government-vedder-highsmith-detail-2

The Bigger Picture

Let us look at the bigger picture. The European Union has been weakened because of Brexit and with Donald Trump steering the USA, the leader of France’s Front National, nativist  Marine Le Pen, feels emboldened. Under President-elect Donald J. Trump, I believe Russia stands to become a greater power, perhaps the main power. By electing Mr Trump to the presidency of the United States, Americans may have elevated Russian President Vladimir Putin to a more commanding position. Americans may, in fact, have changed the balance of power.

France
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/15/politics/marine-le-pen-interview-donald-trump/index.html
http://www.azfamily.com/story/33696717/french-far-right-leader-le-pen-trump-win-boosts-her-chances
Russia
http://www.nola.com/articles/19671900/putin_trump_discussed_ways_to.amp
Canada ♥
https://static01.nyt.com/video/players/offsite/index.html?videoId=100000004759858

800px-government-vedder-highsmith-detail-2

Conclusion

Mr Trump is the President-elect and this is his honeymoon period. Moreover, hope springs eternal… We have to think that all will be well. It is a matter of survival, but the campaign tends to indicate that all is not and will not be well. I fear the aftermath of Mr Trump’s election to the presidency. It may lead to purges in the United States and a degree of erosion in Canada’s social programmes, if he slashes into Obamacare.

I opposed Mr Trump’s election for reasons which I believe were very good reasons. I will continue to oppose him if I see danger and abuse. But he may surprise us. He’s no longer a nominee and he is not a usurper. He is the President-elect of the United States. We’ll have to wait and see.

Love to everyone ♥

“Beautiful Dreamer”
Stephen Foster
Jonathan Guyot Smith & Stephen Sasloe

13obama-jp1-master768

© Micheline Walker
17 November 2016
WordPress

 

Theresa May, Britain’s Prime Minister

12 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Brexit, Britain, EU Referendum

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

Theresa_May_UK_Home_Office_(cropped)

Theresa May (Photo credit: EN Wikipedia)

In my last post, dated 6 July 2016, I expressed alarm because, with the exception of Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party, British Leaders were resigning when in fact the country was in dire need of leaders who could deal with the result of the Brexit vote. It seems Jeremy Corbyn’s fate is being decided as I write by members of the Labour Party.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/jul/12/labour-nec-jeremy-corbyn-leadership-from-labour-leadership-ballot-would-be-sordid-fix-politics-live

In other words, Brexit is not over, but Parliament is nearly functional, which is how it should be. Prime Minister-designate Theresa May (née Brasier; born 1 October 1956) will be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, beginning Wednesday evening, 13 July 2016. Theresa May was Home Secretary.

British Prime Minister David Cameron would not take into consideration a petition signed by 4,000,000 Britons. It could be that Mr Cameron had to respect the letter of the law or be perceived as inconsistent. But 1,000 lawyers are now saying that the Brexit result “is not legally binding.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

Britain as a colonial power

The Brexit decision was surprising. Britain was a formidable colonial power, but would Amerindians return the descendants of Pilgrim Fathers and Puritans to their ancestors’ native land, England? No. They wouldn’t and couldn’t. Yet, European colonial powers made themselves at home on territory they had merely discovered. In the Americas, they nearly wiped out American “Indians,” north and south. Many were displaced and many starved. A large number died because they had no immunity to the diseases of Europeans, such as smallpox. Several were otherwise eliminated.

“Current estimates are that the epidemic killed up to 90 percent of the Native population in the Massachusetts Bay area. When the Pilgrims arrived in 1620, they saw evidence of massive depopulation and attributed it to the “good hand of God . . . that he might make room for us there.” Another epidemic—this time smallpox—hit in 1633–1634.” [1]

As practised by Europeans, both genocide and settler colonialism have typically employed the organizing grammar of race.” [2]

Not that anyone should feel guilty and atone. These events belong to the past. But times have changed and one should respect all members of the human race and particularly the citizens of countries one colonized.

Countries have the right to limit immigration, but the “Yes! we won! Now send them back” is rather ugly. If British political leaders used the EU referendum as a platform to lure voters into thinking that voting to leave the EU would justify their getting rid of “them,” they acted irresponsibly. Just who is “them?”

Moreover, thinking and stating that Britons would be “better off on their own” may not be the case in a global economy and so many years after entering into a partnership with the EU.

Theresa May speaks to reporters after being confirmed as the leader of the Conservative Party and Britain's next Prime Minister outside the Houses of Parliament in Westminster, central London, July 11, 2016. REUTERS/Neil Hall

Theresa May speaks to reporters after being confirmed as the leader of the Conservative Party and Britain’s next Prime Minister outside the Houses of Parliament in Westminster, central London, 11 July 2016. (REUTERS/Neil Hall)

Conclusion

Britons need not put themselves through the agony of another referendum. They have shown that they were divided in nearly equal halves, which probably suffices. But the matter of a second referendum is under discussion.

I didn’t intend to write another post on Brexit, but Britain has a new leader in Theresa May.

Love to everyone ♥

P. S. Jeremy Corbyn will be on the Labour leadership ballot, NEC rules.

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Resources

See United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016, Wikipedia

____________________

[1] See Jeffrey Ostler, “New England and the Pequot War,” in Genocide and American Indian History (Oxford Research Encyclopedia).

[2] Patrick Wolfe, Settler colonization and the elimination of the native, Kooriweb.org

UK_location_in_the_EU_2016_svg

The EU (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

© Micheline Walker
12 July 2016
Revised: 12 July 2016
WordPress

More Thoughts on Brexit

06 Wednesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Britain, EU Referendum, Terrorism

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

imagesCB877O39

Total number of voters: 33,577,342
In favour of leaving: 17,410,742
In favour of staying: 16,141,241
Bregrets: 1,200,000

A Teacher’s Reading of the Brexit Vote

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36692990

Most teachers consider a mark of 51.89% on a quiz or test a very low grade. It usually indicates that the student is likely to fail the course. Moreover, in certain Canadian universities, teachers are asked not to give a final mark between 45% and 50% to a student who is graduating or finishing his or her degree. Marks between 45% and 50% are lowered or raised, depending on the student’s overall performance and, occasionally, on his or her circumstances.

Therefore, according to classroom standards, if 51.89% (17,410,742) of Britons agreed to leave the European Union, and 48.11% (16,141,241) voted to stay, breaking away from the European Union is not warranted. It is too literal a reading. The spirit of the law negates its letter. (See United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016, Wikipedia.)

“Intentionally following the letter of the law but not the spirit may be accomplished through exploiting technicalities, loopholes, and ambiguous language.” (See Letter and spirit of the law, Wikipedia.)

If we delete Bregrets (1,2 million) from the “leave” voters, the gap is even narrower. Bregrets may feel they did not know precisely what they were voting for or against. They may also feel they were not sufficiently informed regarding the consequences of their vote.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-second-eu-referendum-leave-voters-regret-bregret-choice-in-millions-a7113336.html

Using numbers instead of a percentage, 17,410,742 million Britons (51.89%) voted to leave the EU and 16,141,241 million (48.11 %) voted to stay. If Britain leaves the European Union, it would be by too small a majority. Although Bregrets voters (1,2 million) cannot be counted officially, they cannot be ignored. Nor can one ignore the demonstrators in Trafalgar Square or elsewhere in Britain. I dare not subtract 1,200,000 from 17,410,742, and add 1,200,000 to 16,141,241.

Misrepresentation

  • sovereignty
  • immigration

The plot thickens. According to professor Michael Dougan, there was misrepresentation on the part of Brexit advocates.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-michael-dougan-leave-campaign-latest-a7115316.html

One issue was sovereignty. Some voters believed, or were made to believe, that the UK would regain its independence if it left the European Union. Such a view is puzzling. Britain was one of the foremost colonial powers in history, if not the foremost. It is independent.

images

Propaganda (Photo credit: Google images)

Another issue is immigration.  Some “leave” voters thought they were voting to exclude certain immigrants from entering England or to send them back.

Countries do regulate the number of immigrants they accept, but we cannot assume that migrants who are risking their lives to enter Europe are terrorists. Migrants flooding Europe are fleeing terrorism, war, and repressive autocracies. They are the victims of Isil or Daesch, the Syrian Civil War, and autocrats who violate human rights. Some countries cannot accommodate immigrants at this point because they are still recovering from the breakdown of the Soviet Union.

Corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn has repeatedly refused to step down. (Photograph: Jack Taylor/Getty Images)

For instance, Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Labour Party, now regrets using the words Hamas and Hezbollah. However, is anyone suggesting Mr Corbyn is an anti-Semite? If Mr Corbyn is an anti-Semite, so is Noam Chomsky. YouTube has several videos featuring Noam Chomsky discussing various subjects, including Israel and Palestine.

There is sympathy for Palestinians, and many countries recognize the State of Palestine. Nearly 50 years after the Six-Day War, Israel still occupies Palestinian territory and it is building a wall part of which is located in the occupied territories.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/04/jeremy-corbyn-grilled-by-mps-on-labours-anti-semitism-problem/

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/labour-resignations-continue-as-mps-try-to-force-out-jeremy-corbyn

The problem at this point would be Islamophobia.

Conclusion

  • clarity
  • leadership

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/05/len-mccluskey-plays-peacemaker-between-corbyn-and-watson

http://uk.businessinsider.com/deutsche-bank-second-referendum-brexit-eu-europe-2016-7

I will conclude borrowing several words from my last post. I then wrote that it may be in the best interest of Britons not to break from the European Union at this point. My opinion has not changed. John Kerry, the United States Secretary of State, has suggested Britain could walk back its decision, which may be a good idea. Should Britain leave the EU if its population does not express itself clearly? There is no consensus at the moment.

In my opinion, the EU referendum failed to give British Prime Minister David Cameron a clear mandate to either leave or remain within the EU. One must also consider that although a decision made on so tiny a majority would be legally acceptable, it may be too literal, in which case it may not “sit well” with Britons, a factor that cannot be dismissed.

Moreover, can Britain leave the EU if there was misrepresentation? If voters believed, or were led to believe, that once it was “independent,” Britain could close its door on Muslims or certain other immigrants, or send them back, there may have been unsavoury political manoeuvering. However, I will not go further regarding this matter for lack of information. What we know is that there was no planning.

We also know that Britain is experiencing a leadership crisis. Prime Minister David Cameron plans to resign in October and Mr Corbyn has been asked to resign but has resisted such requests. A nation cannot be without leaders. Whether or not Britain wants to leave is not clear; yet its leaders are being asked to resign.

This is my last post on the of Brexit “incident.”

The Canadian experience may be worth looking at. The 1995 Quebec Referendum nearly broke Canada (49.42% voted in favour of separation and 50.58% voted against), which led to the passing of the Clarity Act. If a province, Quebec or another province, wishes to leave Confederation, the decision will not be based on a 50 – 50 vote, i.e. 49.42% (leave) versus 50.59% (stay). Such a result showed division.

Love to everyone. ♥

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Resources

imagesCB877O39

© Micheline Walker
6 July 2016
WordPress

 

Brexit. The Day after the Vote

30 Thursday Jun 2016

Posted by in Brexit, Britain, Sharing

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

David Cameron

British Prime Minister David Cameron as he speaks in the House of Commons on June 29, 2016 (Home Office / Parliamentary Recording Unit via Agence France Presse Photo)

The day after the vote…

I remember the Quebec Referendums, the 1995 referendum in particular. There was so much fear.

  • Would older Quebec citizens get their pension cheques?
  • How would Quebecers purchase groceries?
  • Could they still use Canadian currency?
  • Would the Canadian armed forces still protect them?
  • Would Desjardins be the only bank?
  • Just how would they pay the rent or make their mortgage payments?
  • Would they need a passport to visit friends and family in Ottawa, Toronto and provinces west of Ontario or east of Quebec?
  • What would happen to Acadians and other French communities living outside Quebec?
  • Would Canada cease to be a bilingual country?
  • Could Quebec count on its immigrants to remain in Quebec?
  • Would there be yet another exodus of its more affluent population? (This is what happened when the Parti québécois was first voted into office (1976).
  • Would Quebecers leaving Quebec sell their home in American currency? Some still do.
    etc.

These may seem picayune details, but they are not, which is why the Clarity Act was passed. Canada had to made sure no province could walk away from Confederation in a precipitous manner thus creating considerable anxiety, disorder and years of instability.

Britain

As it turns out, those who advocated leaving did not have a plan. What would happen the day after the vote?

Countries that have not joined the EU

https://www.quora.com/What-European-countries-are-not-in-the-EU

Not all European countries have joined the European Union. But the countries that did not join knew that the next day would not differ from the day before. Their decision not to join was not made overnight and could not plunge millions of citizens into years of detrimental uncertainty. As for other countries denied membership, they simply remained as they had been.

There is nothing wrong with not belonging to the EU, but the decision to leave must reflect the will of the people.

main-qimg-fe80efe6f6037d279682792861074c30

Countries belonging to the European Union. This map still shows Britain as a member. (Photo credit: Google)

A Consensus

It would seem imprudent for countries to leave the EU overnight and do so after a mere referendum. Important decisions, such as leaving the European Union require more than a referendum. There has to be a consensus. Too many citizens are opposed to leaving the European Union. The referendum showed that nearly half of Britons opposed leaving the European Union. Therefore, there is no consensus.

A “Dangerous Mindset”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/after-orlando-president-obama-denounces-donald-trump-on-policy-towards-muslims-where-does-it-stop-a7082446.html

After Donald Trump attacked President Obama for not blaming Muslims for the Orlando massacre, President Obama stated that Mr Trump, the Republican presidential presumptive, had a “dangerous mindset.”  I believe the gentleman shown in the photograph below also has a “dangerous mindset.”

britain-eu-intolerance

Yes! We won! Now send them back. (Diamond Geezer via Associated Press)

John Kerry’s Suggestion

John Kerry, the United States Secretary of State, has suggested that Britain could “walk back” its decision. The British Government held a referendum, but there is dissent and a “dangerous mindset.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/29/john-kerry-brexit-could-be-walked-back-david-cameron

Brexit.30

Protesters gather against the EU referendum result in Trafalgar Square on June 28, 2016 in London, England. There is still the possibility that the British government will disregard the referendum result. (Jeff J Mitchell / Getty Images)

Britain could still ignore Brexit referendum result. It wouldn’t be the first time in EU’s ‘sorry history’

—ooo—

In short, it may be in the best interest of Britons not to break from the European Union at this point. Not if there isn’t a consensus. Not if the motivation was even remotely racist. And not if there wasn’t a plan.


Love to everyone ♥

1431753688353-242737

Beatrix Potter (The National Trust)

© Micheline Walker
30 June 2016
WordPress

 

Musing on Brexit

28 Tuesday Jun 2016

Posted by in Britain, Middle East

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Brexit-R-U-400x262

Brexit

One is surprised and one isn’t. During difficult periods of history, folding back has occurred, and we are at a difficult moment in history.

However, given that the results of the Brexit vote were very close and that the “leave” vote was followed by a wave of racist comments directed at Muslims and at members of the Polish population of Britain, I wonder whether or not Britons want to leave the European Union.

The reaction of many Britons brings to mind Donald Trump’s hasty determination that ISIL terrorists were the perpetrators of the Orlando Massacre. It appears the LBGT were targeted even though the suspected killer was an American citizen of Afghan origin.

britain-eu-intolerance

A man wearing an anti immigration T-shirt walks during Armed Forces Day Parade in Romford, England, on Saturday. (Diamond Geezer via Associated Press)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/brexit-parliament-cameron-merkel-corbyn-1.3655607

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-racial-racism-abuse-hate-crime-reported-latest-leave-immigration-a7104191.html

Canada: The Clarity Act

Quebec has held referendums regarding a possible separation from the rest of Canada. For all practical purposes, the answer to the last referendum was both a “yes”  (49.42%) and a “no” (50.58%). (See Quebec Referendum, 1995, Wikipedia.) As a result, the Clarity Act was passed by the House on 15 March 2000, and by the Senate, in its final version, on 29 June 2000. (See Clarity Act, Wikipedia.)

During the political campaign that led to the election of Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister of Canada, Mr Mulcair, the leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, asked the current Prime Minister of Canada what his number was regarding the Clarity Act, or Bill C-20. Mr Trudeau waited a little and then answered that his number was 9. “Nine Supreme Court justices said one vote is not enough to break up this country.”

http://policyoptions.irpp.org/2015/08/12/trudeau-mulcair-clarity-act/

Back to Britain

I realize that British prime minister David Cameron is opposed to another referendum, but it would be my opinion that the results of the British referendum are inconclusive. Nearly half of Britons voted against leaving the European Union and it turns out that among those who voted in favour of leaving, several misinterpreted the question. (See United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016, Wikipedia.)

The Brexit question was not whether or not Britain should exclude Muslims and Poles from entering their country. If “leave” supporters misread or misunderstood the question, democracy may not have been duly served.

The refugee crisis is a destabilizing factor in Europe, particularly in those countries that have yet to recover from the breakdown of the Soviet Union. Moreover, there have been dreadful terrorist attacks. One lives in fear of another. But Muslim refugees are the victims of terrorists and autocrats.

In short, if Britain leaves the European Union, Britons would be making a numerically democratic choice, but if nearly half of Britons voted not to leave and if the “leave” vote reflects a perceptible degree of racism, it could be that the results of the referendum are both too close and too tainted for Britain to act.

I am not suggesting that the United Kingdom pass a “clarity act,” but if it is ascertained that racism played a significant role in the “leave” vote, it could well be that the tail is wagging the dog.

Love to everyone ♥

http://www.independent.co.uk/topic/brexit

358288

Lucy Madox Brown by Ford Madox Brown, courtesy The National Trust

© Micheline Walker
28 June 2016
WordPress