Douglas Adams was a very funny man, and is still much missed for his wit and imagination. But his books, for all their silliness, also manage to convey the odd pearl of wisdom and provide something to think about. When Deep Thought, "the second greatest computer in the Universe of Time and Space", is asked to come up with the ultimate question Life, the Universe and Everything he goes off to think about it. For seven and half million years. So when, after all that time, he reveals his answer is "42" there's some disappointment amongst those present. To which DT responds "I think the problem, to be honest with you, is that you've never actually known what the question is."
Back in 2013, almost a year before the referendum was due to take place, the Scottish Government posted a 670 page document giving details of what an independent Scotland would look like, the institutions it would have, the way it could be made to work. It was far from perfect, and there were some glaring holes that the Better Together side would go on to exploit, but it was a clear statement of intent and an essential guide to what voters would be voting for if they put their cross against Yes.
So far, so unrelated. But I'll be back to that opening pair of paragraphs a bit later, because this is a post about brexshit, and with the Westminster Parliament having long ago followed the white rabbit down into the hole it's clear that anything and everything can suddenly become relevant. The Mad Hatter would feel completely at home on the green benches and talking playing cards feel like no more ridiculous a concept than being given 8 alternatives and rejecting all of them.
I've wanted to try and write this for some time, but kept hoping there would a moment of clarity that would enable me to hang the whole thing on a particular point in time. Instead it trundles on miserably, leaving everyone confused and angry. Since that has become the UK's default status I'll just have to run with it.
In recent weeks I've made a couple of attempts to engage with some of the more rabid Leavers on Twitter, to try and understand their thinking. Because so many of them continue to oppose the May Deal, if we can call it that for now without resorting to more colourful terms, despite it being their best chance to get what they voted for in 2016. But they don't see it that way. This isn't The Brexit that THEY voted for so it's not good enough.
So what did they actually vote for? Sometimes they seem to be better at defining what they didn't vote for. I've seen one full-on brexshiteer "journalist" (who appears to be in receipt of some rather shady funding to post continuous misleading propaganda on Facebook) say that "having a deal wasn't on the ballot paper so why should we accept it?". Well a "no deal" wasn't on there either, so that's another thing you didn't vote for. Two can play at that (stupid) game. If it comes down to what common definition people had before them before the referendum. Part of that is the wording of the ballot paper itself, to which I'll return later. The other would be some widely available document that defines what a future UK, outwith the EU, would look like, how it would work, what the problems to overcome would be.
Which brings me back to IndyRef and my second paragraph. Where was the leave equivalent of that 760 pages? I wasn't aware of any such thing, just an unending litany of often contradictory soundbites that made lots of promises, but with no substance behind them. had I missed something?
I finally found a Leaver willing to engage, when most go off in a huff when confronted with inconvenient things like "facts" and "evidence", and usually end up blocking me. I'm proud of the list of right wing nutters who've been so rattled they've taken that step, but that wasn't what I needed here. So we engaged in a dialogue and I asked him to provide me with some equivalent of the ScotGov document, something that would mean that leave voters all voted for the same thing. After much prevarication, and some desperate attempts to change the subject, he came up with this.
Feel free to follow the link - but you might not learn a lot if you do. It's a blog. By Richard North.
Yes, THAT Richard North!
No, I've never heard of him either....
He's an author and blogger whose past includes a bit of work for the European parliament group that included ukip, so he has fascist connections. But, as far as I know he had zero connections with the official Leave campaign, and his name, and work, was not widely known by the public. So after about two hours of tweeting the best my correspondent, desperate to make his case, could come up with was an obscure blog by someone no-one but fanatical anti-EUers will have heard of. Really? That's the best they can do?
Which leaves us with the question on the ballot paper :
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"
Read it carefully. All it asks is whether the UK remains a member or not. It is, quite clearly, only about membership and nothing else. The rest was a blank canvas that individuals could choose to paint in any way they wanted to. Unlike IndyRef. So when Leavers say "I know what I voted for" they aren't really lying. They know what they thought they voted for, they just don't know if they voted for the same thing as the next person - because it was never defined. No wonder we ended up with the verbal and linguistic masterpiece that was "brexit means brexit"!
(I can't resist an aside on the vile frog-faced creature that goes by the name of Niggle Fuhrage. He recently claimed he had spent a quarter of a century fighting to leave the EU. It's a pity that not one of those 25 years was spent on coming up with any plans for doing so. Or details of what would be involved. Or thought. Or intellect....)
The ONLY thing they can say they all voted for was that wording on the ballot paper. They voted for the UK not to be an EU member. Which is exactly what the May Deal delivers. So why do they continue to object? Because it doesn't deliver on the fantasy brexits they've built in their heads. It isn't the dream, there are no unicorns. And if I, back in the days when I was a project manager, had suggested going ahead with something like triggering Article 50 without any plan or end goals I'd have been crucified.
So if you hear a leaver saying it's Remainers (or maybe judges, the BBC, the 'liberal elite', celebrities, Jon Snow, Anna Soubry, Scotland, Ireland, EU "intransigence", civil servants, Moslems,people who sneeze, leaves on the line...) who are stopping what he voted for coming into being you can point out it's the brexshiteers themselves. The ERG (if they ever had done any actual 'research' maybe we wouldn't be in this mess?) and their ilk have killed off the brexit you could have had. And nobody is voting down the one you wanted - because it never did and never can exist.
Which, finally, brings me back to my opening paragraph. Obvious all along, wasn't it?
