I have been meaning to write this for quite some time however, as is the case for many people, there never seems to be enough hours in the day. However, so many thoughts and ideas have been flying around in my head over the last few months that I thought it was about time I put them, as well as various Facebook and Twitter rants, into a more coherent and logical structure.
Please note that the following piece is not about Brexit per se - that is merely an example of the much wider picture, in my mind. That being said, whilst I try to be as balanced as possible, in the first paragraph I make my feelings on Brexit very clear. For those people reading this who voted Leave, you may not like this first paragraph. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions, as am I.
It is no secret that I was absolutely devastated by the EU Referendum result on 23 June 2016, and continue to be utterly depressed as the farce that is Brexit continues to develop. The recent High Court ruling that Article 50 cannot actually be triggered without a Parliamentary vote is a small glimmer of hope, but will undoubtedly be contested. Whilst very serious, I am relatively less upset about the financial and economic ramifications, which are already starting to be felt as the pound continues to weaken; these range from serious impacts to each individual (e.g. rising petrol prices) to the less serious impacts to each individual (e.g. not being able to buy Marmite a few weeks ago). I am more upset on a moral level. As I said on Facebook the day after the result, I blame 3 separate bodies: i) the Rt Hon David Cameron and the Tories, for putting their own greed, political aspirations and careers in front of the country’s well-being; ii) the media and in particular the tabloids, for deceiving people and spreading xenophobia and racism throughout the country in a bid for higher readership; and, importantly, iii) the British people, for showing the world that, as a whole, we are a society of inward-looking, self-serving individuals, far more interested in what we can take rather than what we can give. In a world full of global problems such as climate change, mass migration and terrorism, we have collectively decided that going it alone is better than coming together.
Throughout history, that way of thinking has always led to disaster.
Obviously we are not all like that, and I would never dream of saying (although sadly some have) that everyone who voted Leave is racist - people voted that way for a number of reasons, including (but not limited to): making a protest vote against the government, never thinking they would actually win; harking back to historical ‘better’ times when Europe was weak and Britain was strong; naïvely believing the lies of the Leave campaign and tabloid newspapers; being overly centred on their own community and not seeing the bigger picture (either through ignorance or on purpose); and, sadly, a large number of people who ARE indeed very xenophobic. However, whatever our motivations, the image that the world (and especially Europe) now has of us is the one painted above.
In many ways, there are a large number of similarities between the way Brexit developed and was reported in the media and the way climate change is developing and is reported in the media. In both cases, our side (i.e. the Remain camp and those who know climate change is real and dangerous) is predominantly presented by the broadsheets, and argued by the younger generations, the educated (and often middle) classes, the academics and experts, and the majority of politicians who lean to the Left. The trouble with these groups is that they are in a minority and are often not trusted by the majority. I, and my colleagues, will never forget the statement by the Rt. Hon. Michael Gove: “people in this country have had enough of experts” - for an expert like myself, albeit not in politics or economics, this is a deeply troubling attitude. Worryingly, though, it is probably true for a large number of people. Another major problem with our side is that we are often not very vocal, instead citing facts and figures and being conservative (with a small c), balanced and cautious in our claims for fear of getting the science/facts wrong. The Remain camp, in my opinion, lost because we focused on all the negative impacts of leaving the EU, rather than the positive impacts of staying in it - allowing the Leave campaign to shout ‘Project Fear’ after every announcement. Likewise, those of us warning about climate change are focusing on the numerous negative impacts and, to prevent or at least mitigate these impacts, we are advising actions which will be painful at both the individual level (e.g. cutting down on car use) and the governmental level (e.g. reducing carbon emissions). I’m not saying we should focus on the positive side of climate change - there are a small number of positives for certain countries, but these are greatly outweighed by the negatives - but that perhaps we need to be more vocal and work harder to get our message across better.
In contrast, in both cases the other side (i.e. the Leave camp and climate change sceptics/deniers) is predominantly presented by the tabloids, and argued by the older generations, the less educated classes, and the majority of politicians who lean to the Right. This side, and in particular the tabloids, are very very vocal, and are also often in greater numbers. When it came to Brexit, the Leave campaign and the tabloids spun numerous lies (many of which they have now openly admitted were lies) but with a positive and loud spin. As a result, whether through ignorance, naivete or on purpose, a large number of people believed them. When it comes to denying climate change, the tabloids are again citing unproven research, ‘experts’ that are either unrecognised or discredited by the rest of the scientific community, and theories that have been categorically disproven - however, and this is the point, they do it loudly and often it sounds very plausible. Even as an expert in climate change, I sometimes have to think hard about a certain claim - so what chance does someone have who is not an expert?
Moving away from climate change and back to politics… as I said at the beginning, in my opinion Brexit is merely an example of the much bigger picture. We are seeing similar attitudes across the world, be it the rise in right-wing parties in France and Germany, or the very real risk that Mr Donald Trump becomes the next US President tomorrow. All of this, in my opinion (and I’m sure I’m not the first person to think this), is underpinned by the same thing. We have a sickness. This sickness has always been present, becoming very evident at certain times throughout history, and now it is being brought out by the likes of Mr Trump and the right-wing parties. It is a sickness that each and every one of us has on an innate human level, but that many of us successfully manage to suppress, ignore and rise above.
It is simply a fear and distrust of those who are not like ourselves.
This is not confined and targeted towards any one minority group - since the EU Referendum in the UK we have seen an increase in hate crimes against numerous groups, including Muslims, the disabled, women and ethnic minorities. It appears to have been legitimised. Mr Trump, the right-wing parties and right-wing propaganda are slowly and surely bringing this sickness to the surface, and an increasing number of people are giving in and allowing their sickness to consume them.
The cause of this current epidemic is not just Mr Trump or the right-wing parties. I admit this next statement might be controversial, but I would say that, right now, the so-called Islamic State is winning. It is achieving all of its goals. It is not winning on a day-to-day timescale, in that we are not all cowering at home, terrified to go out to public places; in contrast, whenever an attack does occur, there is generally a feeling of solidarity among those affected and the wider world. But, on a longer timescale, they ARE winning - in that, through their attacks, they are causing the sickness to spread, insidiously and slowly, creeping into our minds like the red weed in Jeff Wayne’s War of the Worlds. Mr Trump and the right-wing parties, for political gain, are using and accelerating this process, and in my opinion this road eventually leads to only one outcome.
To lighten the mood ever so slightly, this outcome is scarily depicted by the writings of Gene Roddenberry, the original creator of Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry died in October 1991 so, throughout his life although terrorism existed in smaller regions (e.g. the IRA or Basque separatists), the idea of global terrorism and IS was not yet around. Nevertheless, the back story to Star Trek (which was first aired on TV in the US in 1966) is that at some point in the mid-21st century a power emerges and gradually threatens global freedom and democracy.
Does any of this sound familiar?
In the Star Trek story, this ultimately results in World War III and the death of millions due to nuclear warfare. The Earth is left devastated and all governments are dissolved, with the world being divided into individual factions. Eventually, many years later, First Contact is finally made with extra-terrestrial life and issues in an era of global peace, as we finally learn we are not alone in the universe. Of course, I am not saying that the 2nd part of the story will happen (although it could), but in my mind the first half of the story feels very very familiar. If Mr Trump becomes the next US President, if other countries in Europe follow Brexit, if existing alliances and groups break up, if people who want to threaten freedom and democracy are allowed to do so, and if the sickness is allowed to spread, then I fear this outcome is inevitable.
It’s difficult to conclude on a positive note, so instead I will conclude with a plea. For any Americans currently unsure as to which way to vote, and for any Europeans thinking that Brexit should be repeated, and for any British thinking that Brexit was a good idea: I implore you to stop and think about the wider picture, and prevent the sickness from taking over. For the Americans, I am very aware that Mrs Hillary Clinton has her drawbacks (as does any politician), but for the prosperity of the US and the world as a whole she is a million times better than her rival. For the Europeans, breaking up a strong and solid Union only benefits one group of people - those who want to impose their own ideologies on everyone else and therefore threaten freedom. For the British, it is perhaps too late for us and it now seems likely that, sparing a miracle, Article 50 WILL be invoked. All we can now hope and fight for is a ‘soft Brexit’, in which we retain at least some access to the single market and, importantly, maintain freedom of movement and labour. Stopping this would inevitably devastate every sector of the UK, ranging from science and universities all the way to pubs and bars. It would be wholeheartedly giving into the sickness and, as already explained, that road has only one destination.
The day after the EU Referendum in the UK, I said on Facebook that I was ashamed to be British. I have perhaps mellowed slightly since then, and have a little bit of hope and faith left in humanity - I believe it is still possible, if everyone made that extra effort, to stem the rising tide and cure the sickness (or at least suppress it, as it will never be completely cured). For me personally, I still love Europe (and always will) and still plan to go there regularly - I just wish there was a way for them to know that.
