The referendum, Jo Cox and Eckhart Tolle


It does not matter so much whether we vote in or out of the EU, as what we do afterwards. Do we behave like an isolationist country defending our borders vehemently or do we we act humanely and in a spirit of international peace and co-operation?

The death of Jo Cox, shattering for her friends, family and country, has made the voice of humane action more audible on the stage of fear-mongering which has so demoralised and underserved this country in the run up to this referendum. Although most of us had never heard of her before her death, it turns out that she was a champion of human rights and compassion. Her support for the anti-racist, anti-fascist organisation Hope Not Hate and for the Syrian refugees was diametrically opposed to the rhetoric of Farage and Johnson and their posters of migrants queuing to get into Britain.

Not everyone in the Leave camp is on board with the xenophobia, but it essentially derives its energy from the fears of mostly white people who see themselves as British rather than European or World citizens. Some of these people have genuine grievances which are easily (if not accurately) portrayed as relating to immigration - the housing crisis perhaps, the lowering of wages, the demand for school places. Some of them are comfortably off but nonetheless feel insecure - they want to section off a familiar world for themselves where they know the rules and don't have to listen to languages they don't understand being spoken around them (saying who knows what?) .

This is not to blame or ridicule either group. Those in power have long exploited the divisions and the fears in society for their own gain. It is called 'divide and rule'. Scarcity, much of it due to enormous inequality of wealth, could fuel greater social co-operation (think war rationing), but is instead the basis for fear and competition. 

Eckhart Tolle refers to the 'collective ego' which 'strengthens itself through emphasizing the "otherness" of others' . He says ' the ego needs an "enemy" for its continued survival.' Seeing oneself as particularly British (or English) is about collective self-identity, which is essentially the same as collective ego. At the bottom of all this divisiveness is the fear of losing self-identity, of not being able to differentiate oneself from others and therefore not being able to demonstrate one's superiority and greater entitlement.

We desperately need to change this mindset. It can only lead to greater inequality, hostility and misery. Let us hope that the death of Jo Cox can inspire us to move in another direction. Our leaders have a responsibility to call for social co-operation and to reassure everyone that they will all have a share, that there can be enough for everyone.

Making Your Mind Up

I’m in a mixed marriage – I’m in, he’s out. Of the EU that is. My partner is an anarchist, with a loathing of global governance and social control. He’s crystal clear about his decision.

I, however, am an active member of the Green Party, and it is hard to distinguish whether or not my opinions are derived from the peer pressure of being in a party where a Leave vote is considered eccentric and naïve. 

I’m told this is the most important decision of my life, that leading Greens with much more knowledge and experience than myself are campaigning to Remain, and just look at that toxic mishmash of right-wingers who want to Leave! How could I possibly agree with them? 

Yet there is so much that is wrong about the EU – the secrecy, the austerity agenda, TTIP. How can I possibly vote for it?

The challenge is that I, like most of the population who have a vote in the 2016 Referendum, know very little about the structures, policies and laws of the European Union. Its unwieldy complexity acts as a smokescreen making it very hard to judge who we are actually ruled by.

This fog is perhaps at the heart of the debate.  People always want certainty, simplicity, clarity. For the old, this means a sovereign national government, just like the one ‘we used to have’.For the young it means their own status quo – their only experience is being in the EU, so why would they want to take the risk of changing that?

And yet, change is what we so desperately need, in or out of the EU. We need a massive switch of resource and focus onto environmental sustainability across the world. We need to challenge the haywire neoliberalism which has created spiralling inequality and political conflict and is premised on a win-lose paradigm. We need to break down the orthodoxy that says we need infinite economic growth, which is of course impossible. In short, we need a future.

In, Out, Shake It All About

The Green argument is that we stay and fight for reform within the EU. As a pragmatist, I’m trying to make my decision based on whether we are more likely to achieve the required scale of change by staying in or by leaving.

If we remain, then Cameron stays as Prime Minister, the EU limps on, the economy breathes a short sigh of relief. Perhaps we can then put pressure on for the reforms we so desperately need, but it will take a huge amount of concerted effort across Europe and a firm clarity of vision. The contradictions of the EU run deep. The European Commission has climate change as a priority but it also has ‘competitiveness’, often a byword for lower wages and tax avoidance, and in any case a zero-sum game.

If we Leave, then we have to look at Nigel Farage’s smug face (and then the disappointment of those who somehow think this will put an end to immigration) and face the consequences of Scottish independence. Leaving is not a simple process – we will be tied into lengthy withdrawal negotiations and still have to decide whether or not to leave the European Economic Area (which is the bit that creates freedom of movement among other things).

The Tory party is in crisis either way, which is the good news.

 If I stay there will be trouble …if I leave there will be double.

In my pessimistic heart, I don’t think it makes too much difference overall at one level whether we are in or out of the EU. The same greedy and reactionary forces will be at work either way. It is more a question of how best we can fight against them.

Perhaps the single most convincing point for me is that any gains that we make in reforming the EU and getting it to work in the interest of social justice and the environment will be gains made across 28 countries. If we leave and campaign for reform just here in the UK (ultimately perhaps losing Scotland) then our impact will be much tinier.

If this is true then we need to commit to EU reform as a leading area of campaign activity. Now is our chance to articulate what we need from the EU and to use the threat of Brexit as leverage for fairer and more sustainable world.

So, in summary, It’s a Yes from me.

More consultation on the Arena needed

Virtually everyone agrees that the Arena will be a good thing for Bristol, providing a world class entertainment venue and re-vitalising the area just South of Temple Meads. In particular it should bring jobs to a part of town where there is high unemployment nearby.

It was very disappointing then to hear the Arena planning application being deferred last Wednesday.

The application was deferred largely because the Development Control committee (made up of councillors from different parties) was unhappy with the robustness of the transport arrangements for people coming to major events at the Arena. It is self-evident that bringing 12,000 people to an event in the city centre 20 times a year needs some serious planning.

Personally I'm not sure that it needed to be deferred; the committee could have imposed some conditions on the application but allowed building work to begin.

I am fairly confident that the sudden announcement at Cabinet on Tuesday of a very ill-considered proposal to build a car park on the newly acquired Bath Road site on the other side of the railway tracks played its part in undermining the confidence the committee had in the transport planning of the Arena team. Although it wasn't part of the planning submission it had obvious ramifications and it was hard to see how the two could be separated.

I have always been a big supporter of the plans to have a virtually car-free Arena. This has been pioneered successfully by Cardiff and the Bristol site can only work in this way. It is also very important that the Arena Island provides a good cycle and pedestrian alternative route linking Bath Road to Temple Quarter and East Bristol - the current shared path is absurdly narrow and dangerous. I have lobbied hard for this and we have moved from a position where the Bath Road was being completely ignored to one where we have the potential for a wide walk/cycle way and hopefully a ramp which is open 24 hours a day to wheelchair users and cyclists.

I also have spent a lot of time calling for more information to be made to councillors and residents. We had to fight hard simply to get an ordinary consultation event happen in Totterdown where the Arena is being built!

Hopefully the Arena team will get their act together quickly and satisfy the committee. What I would say is that more consultation at an early stage with residents and their elected representatives would greatly assist in making plans which are robust and workable.