Thursday, 28 April 2016


I have been following the “Brexit” debate in the UK with a sense of awe and confusion.

The arguments revolve around an extraordinary spider’s web of macro-economics, geo-politics, and advanced (and pretty nasty) nationalism. It strikes me that the interaction of all the strands and tensile academic arguments pull and push, mesh and entangle in an extraordinary fashion, Tweek one of the parameters and the matrix shudders in a myriad of directions. This is surely a case of domestic/regional politics that has GOT to be informed by advanced socio/political/economic thinking and not idiotic and ill-informed polemics.

To place the decision as to whether the UK should stay or leave the EU in the hands of the voting public is beyond stupid.

Who - beyond academics and qualified researchers and commentators are qualified in any way to make an informed and value judgement on this issue?

Certainly not the general public who are fundamentally ill-equipped, and God knows why should they be expected to be? After all surely this is what politicians are elected for – to make these sorts of decisions. But there again have any of the vocal (or comatose) politicians actually demonstrated anything other than a partisan stance on this issue. Few of them have demonstrated any real and deep understanding of the underlying fundamentals and have relied upon vague statistics and appeals to regional compatriotism or deep seated and frankly childish “island” mentality.

Surely the answer is to have some form of collegiate system of political appointment which would allow for qualified persons the room and responsibility to take complicated and arcane decisions for the general public. Just like the American collegiate system of selecting a President . . . . which . . . will . . . ensure . . . on present showing . . . (Oh my God) . . . doom.

So there you have it. One political system that has devolved an impossible decision on the electorate, and another that is in danger of imposing an impossible decision-maker on the electorate. Surely someone else in our rapidly contracting and dangerous world has a better idea? Because unless they have, all that thunderous, dystopian literature of the mid to late 20th Century will surely come to pass.


  1. You are questioning the fundamentals of democracy over brexit issue. The will of people is supreme in democracy. You are undermining the collective judgement of crowd over few learned individuals.

    1. And when the collective judgement of the crowd is based upon such levels of misinformation that the arguments do not stack up? This is not democracy, this is the poor cousin called populism - which is not a rationale alternative . . .


If you would like to comment - and I would welcome that - please do identify yourself as someone other than "anonymous"!