London, 19 March 2019 – Minus ten: Labour are engaging in talks, as if the country’s first urgency at less than a fortnight from the deadline, was to vote their ‘custom union’ draft deal or a Norway style EU membership. Talks aren’t even including a second referendum, as evidently what people have determined as their will, after lies, fake news, scandals, bribery, impunity on the leave propaganda machine have been exposed, does not touch the heart of Labour leadership.
Of course, tackling tricks, bribery, foreign influence and misinformation in political campaigns is not Labour’s concern, nor a Tories’ one obviously: those things (i.e. crimes) could happen in any general election, therefore it is better avoiding to put under scrutiny the result of the ‘will of the people’, because reckoning the impact of unlawful political propaganda on undefended, less skilled, poor, marginalised and rural population would equate to acknowledge the truth: the result of such a misleading propaganda is not the actual will of the people.
Thus what happened with Brexit exposed new dynamics and means of political campaigns and that’s why major political parties aren’t interested in tackling this root problem undermining their legitimacy, and insist the people have already expressed their will, as they normally do in political elections.
The only way forward is, therefore, citizens-voters taking back their own decision making power and independence in exercising the right of political choice without being targeted and derailed by hidden, undercover, disguised agents such as banks, tycoons, anarchic fringes, lobbies, foreign powers infiltrating our communities, media, social media and political parties. In order to realise this fundamental guarantee of democracy which as such has priority over whatever EU exit, the country should stop brand Brexit (which is not an actual democratic process, but indeed its counterfeit) by calling a referendum or revoking Art. 50 and, after that, going to new general elections on the basis of the remain result, because at that point, Tories will not represent the real will of the people.
The priority of the referendum in the first place is based on the negative result of the recent no confidence vote called by Labour: now new elections are not looming, unless the rule introduced by the Speaker John Bercow would lead this Parliamentary session to an end; that would be a new chance to try to pass a second no-confidence vote and following new elections.
Besides all this necessary path, the core question is: under which rules a new referendum and following new elections have to be unrolled? Surely not the ones which allowed the systemic mass electoral broil, an organised set of multiple propaganda aimed at determining the leave result by broiling the will of the electorate just because physically messing the ballots is difficult and too risky, therefore they acted through the invisible treads of the web upon the previous stage of the vote, when voting intention is taking shape.
Solutions: or we use the new set of rules the EU is introducing to protect the upcoming EP elections in May from the kind of risks listed above, or we create our new ones. A new law accepted by all the parties involved, from media to campaigns contributors with the introduction of multiple independent watches and observers.
Do we have time for this right now? Asking a long delay or, better, revoking Art. 50, then going to new referendum and after that, to new elections, would take from four to six months. If we rush to throw ourselves down the cliff edge of Brexit to make the main two parties content so they will always be able to play the game of power and status quo using the fake card of the ‘will of majority’ constructed through propaganda, we will pay the long term consequences of our hurry; we can do this, it is quick job: it might satisfy those made poorer and reduced to food banks by ten years of Tory austerity because they feel, wrongly, they have nothing to lose, that it could not get worse for them, when instead they will lose the chance to exit their status and go forward thanks to mechanisms of social mobility guaranteed by the EU.
It might satisfy some foreign powers, competitors, far right lobbies, anarchists, rich elites (the ones who actually have nothing to lose, instead); but, this way, we will never repossess our longstanding, exemplary democracy which is dated 1215: from Magna Charta until today it is a road full of milestones, therefore precedents dated 1604, like the one chosen by the Speaker are not, after all, that old; we can use it to set our future milestones.
Talkeurope.org 