For some people, political allegiance is a fashion statement. Rather
than having to think about the issues and ideas, they simply ask themselves: how can I show that I am modern, caring and sophisticated – without any cost in time or money?
In the EU referendum the Remain campaign have targeted this group of
people.
The essential message has been: “You don’t want to be on the same team as Nigel Farage, do you?”
WATCH: Jeremy Corbyn tells #Marr we can't control migration as a member of the EU. Let's #TakeControl on Thursday pic.twitter.com/kAXTxhwAOO
— Vote Leave (@vote_leave) June 19, 2016
This is the equivalent of Brexiteers noting, for example, that Ken Livingstone is in the Remain camp and therefore that those who vote Remain are associated with anti-semitism. Or that, as Sinn Fein backs Remain, those voting the stay in the EU are terrorist sympathisers.
There is nothing new about this childish game.
In the 1975 referendum on EU membership the mainstream parties pointed to the Communist Party and the National Front backing a ‘No’ vote. However, the fascist leader, Oswald Mosley, urged a ‘Yes’ vote for the Common Market, as it was then known, as he favoured a “united white Europe”.
Fear of guilt by association is not a valid way of deciding how to vote. Each of us should use our own judgment.
To my mind there is nothing extreme about Brexit. It is about democracy. Around the world this experience is usually realised as the people of a nation being able to elect those who will decide the laws they live under. This is not nationalistic or xenophobic.
"I am an immigrant. I believe in Britain. And I wouldn't dream of talking down this country." — Gisela Stuart MP. pic.twitter.com/Bmew1o92Qq
— Robert Kimbell (@RedHotSquirrel) June 10, 2016
As the Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan has said: “No one criticises the Sino-sceptic Koreans for refusing to merge with China, or the Australo-sceptic Kiwis for declining to join Australia.”
Often it is implied – or even boldly declared – that voting leave would be racist because it would be a decision prompted by the desire to gain control over immigration. But to have control over our borders would not mean that immigration would cease. It would become something the elected government would decide – and then be held accountable for.
What is rather more racist is the current arrangement of an open door to those from the European Union (who are mostly white) but a far more restrictive policy to those from the rest of the world (who mostly are not). Control of our borders would make it easier to admit those with the skills we need and provide sanctuary for more refugees.
Yet those who argue against this are portrayed, cynically, as ‘little Englanders’.
FT View: "This is not time to revert to little England. The vote must be 'Remain.'" https://t.co/lrde2RKFN6 pic.twitter.com/IjZbHcjvPK
— Financial Times (@FT) June 15, 2016
There are certainly some angry and unpleasant political groups on the rise on the continent. But rather than acting as a constraint, the European Union, by frustrating democracy, is encouraging this trend.
The Labour MP John Cryer, who is supporting Brexit, warns that “enforced integration is actively fostering nationalism”.
Referendums naturally involve cross-party campaigning. It is inevitable that in the UK, with an electorate of 47 million, we will not all admire all those who are voting the same way as us. But most of us have the sense to realise the decision is bigger than whether you like Dave or Nigel or Boris or George or Jeremy or Gisela. It is
about the future direction for our country.
Some of us will vote for greater self-determination. That goal is not extreme, and those of us voting to make that choice should not be stigmatised as extremist.
