SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
jo cox
Brexit Anyone? Why the US Should Care About Thursday's Vote in the UK
Like its former colony, Britain is in the midst of an ugly debate over national identity.
Jun 22, 2016
The murder of a Labour Party member of Parliament, Jo Cox, just a week before Britain's referendum on its membership in the European Union, stunned the entire nation, briefly suspending an increasingly shrill national debate as the "Leave" and "Remain" campaigns attempted to recalibrate their messages and soften their tone.
In an incident eerily reminiscent of the 2011 assassination attempt on US Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), Cox was fatally shot and stabbed on her way to her weekly "surgery" -- where MPs meet with constituents to discuss local concerns.
Cox's accused attacker, Thomas Mair, is far-right fanatic with links to the US's neo-Nazi National Alliance. When asked to identify himself at a court hearing on Saturday, Mair responded: "My name is death to traitors, freedom for Britain." While Leave campaigners reject any link with their campaign, Mair's call for freedom is echoed in the pro-exit side's rhetoric, which states that Thursday, the date Britons cast their ballots on the so-called "Brexit," could be Britain's "Independence Day." Cox had been pro-European and deeply involved in advocating for migrants and refugees from the Middle East.
Like its former colony, Britain is in the midst of a divisive and at times ugly debate over national identity and the nation's role in the world, with accusations of bad faith the order of the day. And, as in the US, the fissures are not so much along traditional party lines as they are between internationally oriented elites and those who feel misled, undermined or usurped by them and their interests.
Just hours before Cox's death, Nigel Farage, whose United Kingdom Independence Party led calls for a referendum on Europe, had launched his party's official referendum poster - a picture showing thousands of Middle-Eastern-looking men queuing at the border of the European Union with the words "Breaking Point" emblazoned across it. The clear implication: Europe is being overrun by outsiders, a fate that Britain can only avoid if it leaves the EU. On the other side of the debate, European Council President Donald Tusk has gone so far as to say that Britain leaving would be a fatal blow to Western civilization itself.
Internationally, there are fears across Europe that a British exit would trigger a rise in support for the continent's isolationist, populist parties, weakening democracy on the continent and giving succor to Vladimir Putin in his expansionism. How would a weakened, dissolute Europe react, perhaps, to a Crimea-style Russian incursion in member states such as Lithuania and Latvia, which border Russia?
Farage, who has almost singlehandedly brought Britain to this point, is one of the most recognized figures in British politics, perhaps the closest we have to a Donald Trump figure. He has a flair for the outrageous sound bite (suggesting, for example, that people with HIV should be banned from entering the UK), and a casual disregard for the truth that veers from amusing to alarming. During one recent publicity stunt, Farage was seen smoking cigarettes as he led a flotilla of fishing boats up the river Thames to the houses of Parliament. When Daily Telegraph writer Michael Deacon asked why Farage was smoking, having previously given it up, the party leader replied that he believed doctors had "got it wrong on smoking." Like Trump, Farage rails against immigration, though he has twice married immigrants. Within his own party, he is seen as overbearing, and does not cope easily with party colleagues such as the eloquent Suzanne Evans taking any of what he sees is his limelight. Similar to Republican Party leaders' reaction to Trump, the UK political establishment still seems unclear as to whether Farage is a joke or a threat, even as he sets the agenda.
If Leave wins, there would be a strong case that Farage is the most influential British politician never to have sat in Parliament. Ironically, the smoking, drinking, PC-baiting UKIP leader's only legislative service has been in the European Parliament in Brussels. Even so, Farage has campaigned for Britain to leave the EU for more than 20 years, and now is his moment. And, just as Republican Party leaders in the US are being accused of dog-whistling Trump into political existence, Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron could end up taking the blame for Farage. Cameron pledged the referendum before the 2015 general election, in hopes of keeping his party's Euro-skeptic wing from abandoning him in favor of UKIP. As it turned out, UKIP inflicted damage on Labour, with many traditional regional working-class voters viewing the party as out of touch with concerns on immigration. So Cameron's gamble now looks foolish: rather than confront the naysayers in his party who have never loved him (as Thatcher and Blair did in their time), he took a huge risk. His judgment and his job will be questioned if Remain loses, or even if it wins by a narrow margin. Prominent Conservative Leave campaigners, including former Mayor of London Boris Johnson and Justice Secretary Michael Gove, are waiting in the wings should Cameron be seen to fail.
Membership of the European Union has consistently been an issue of contention in British politics since the UK joined, under a Conservative government, in the early '70s. Those from left and right who wish to leave the Union believe that its byzantine structures of councils and commissioners mean the EU is essentially undemocratic; there are fears of a "United States of Europe," with common taxation system and even a common military. Hanging over everything is the word "control": control of Britain's finances and, crucially, control of Britain's borders. Freedom of movement is a cornerstone of the European project, but there is a sense that the UK is a soft target for immigrants for Eastern Europe and the many thousands fleeing from conflict in the Middle East and North Africa who manage to make it to Britain.
The Remain side speaks of Britain's place in the world being stronger within the European Union, giving the UK greater bargaining power in the world. Remainers point to President Barack Obama saying a lone Britain would have to go to the "back of the queue" in negotiating trade deals with the US (bizarrely, some on the exit side picked up on Obama's use of "queue" rather than the American-English "line" as proof that he was being briefed directly by the Remain campaign). Remainers say that any post-Brexit negotiation with Europe would leave Britain still subject to the Union's rules on trade and movement while unable to influence them from the inside.
Many in the country are not in the mood to be told what to do by politicians.
Yet, in spite of UKIP members' lack of electoral success (the party took 13 percent of the vote in 2015, but due to Britain's first-past-the-post electoral system, gained just one member of Parliament), theirs has been the prevailing narrative in Britain for the past year: the metropolitan elite, the story goes, is not listening to the majority of the population who are forced to compete for health care, housing and benefits with newly arrived Europeans who enjoy freedom of movement across Europe's borders. The parallel with Trump's campaign is not hard to see. The Leave campaign says it will "make Britain great again," but seems largely to be built on isolation, nostalgia and promises of all things to all men: there will be more free health care, less bureaucracy and fewer but better immigrants.
Leave has made much of the possibility of Turkey's eventual ascension to membership of the European Union and the imagined ensuing mass migration by Turkish Muslims to Britain. Though this prospect remains almost entirely hypothetical, it has not stopped it being a central theme for many "Brexiteers."
Actual facts are thin on the ground. The Remain campaign has been widely accused of running a campaign based on fear, telling the population that households would lose thousands of pounds per year, and that home prices would fall in the event of a Brexit. This is partly based on the economic uncertainty that would inevitably follow a vote to leave, but to many it feels like bribery, even blackmail.
And then there is the simple fact that many in the country are not in the mood to be told what to do by politicians. An enormous gap of trust has opened between the political establishment and much of the electorate. One poll this week showed that 46 percent of people planning to vote leave believed it was "probably true" that the referendum would be rigged. The paranoid style of politics has arrived in Britain.
It would be easy to dismiss this anger, but the fact is that it is grounded in reality. For many who live there, Britain and Europe do not feel like happy places right now. In Britain, the possibility of ever buying a house is fast running away from millennials, as the real-estate price bubble continues to grow, and the government shows no real will to meet social-housing building targets. The government appears intent on radical overhaul of institutions such as the National Health Service and the British Broadcasting Corporation, with many believing the real aim is to scrap them entirely. The decline of heavy industry such as steel, and even domestic retail chains such as British Home Stores, has left Britons feeling unanchored in a globalized economy. Terror attacks in Europe have made people across the continent feel less safe, and the EU's response to the Syrian refugee crisis has been weak. The response for many has been to retreat. In spite of the more optimistic messages put forward by some Remainers of breaking the shackles and forging new partnerships in the world, the campaign has struggled to get its message beyond the bureaucratic. It seems impossible to make a case for Europe as a cultural, as well as political and economic entity, without sounding like the dreaded metropolitan liberal elite ("But the wine! The cheeses! The opera!").
Against this backdrop, the death of Jo Cox, a committed internationalist, at the hands of a far-right white nationalist in her home constituency in the north of England, felt like a terrible vision of the extremes to which Britain could be pushed by the Europe debate. A close result either way come Friday morning could mean the debate will rage for some while yet.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Jo Cox's Message to the World: We Have #MoreInCommon
We must actively reject hateful ideology from all corners.
Jun 22, 2016
The murder of British MP Jo Cox last week has jolted the world into looking at itself anew. Today, social movements will hold remembrance events to Jo in many cities worldwide.
Members of parliaments everywhere have been asked to "stand together to stem the poisonous rising tide of fear and hate that breeds division and extremism".
We all need to hold ourselves to this same challenge. It feels like the world is entering a frightening new phase. No one and nowhere is immune.
A lifelong cause
Cox dedicated her life to the struggle against injustice and intolerance. I did not know Jo, but so many across Oxfam did and were touched by her.
So many people were inspired by her compassion, commitment, and energy for change. She was an incredible woman.
Jo was a passionate feminist, a woman after my own heart. While working in Oxfam she got involved in a discussion about how women can best become genuinely empowered.
"Education", said one person. No, said Jo, the answer is politics. Support women in political power, and the rest will follow. Everything I have ever experienced - working with women in Africa and worldwide - tells me she is right.
Jo may have been killed because of her views. She is not alone in having paid that price.
On average, three to four people are killed each week defending their lands. A few months ago in Honduras, for example, Berta Caceres, a community leader, was shot dead in front of her children for defending her community's land rights, having been threatened for years by big business interests.
On average, about 70 journalists are killed each year simply because they are journalists. Women are murdered just for being women, such that we had to invent a new word for it, "femicide", 40 years ago.
In the United Kingdom alone, hate crimes reported to the police rose 18 percent last year to 52,528 - and 82 percent for race hate, 11 percent for sexual orientation hate, and 6 percent for religious hate (PDF).
Carefully manufactured hate
This is a global pattern. The mass kidnapping of girls in Nigeria, the murder of tourists on a Tunisian beach, of Parisian concert-goers, the shooting of 49 gay men and women in Orlando - the murder of an MP in a small English town - are among countless examples of hatred unleashed.
This hatred is by carefully planned manufacture. Fearful, hate-filled arguments are winning people's favour, but they are being stoked by those without any interest in ordinary people.
The rules of acceptable behaviour in society have been mangled towards isolationism, greed and intolerance.
The core values of humanity, as reflected in international law on human rights and humanitarianism, particularly refugee rights at the moment, have been undermined by rich and powerful interests.
Across the world, politicians are playing fast and loose with myths and lies to further their short-term agendas. This is eroding trust and tolerance in our societies.
We have experienced this time and again in Africa, where politicians have whipped up hatred and fear with no care for the cost. The wounds from genocide have not healed and Africans are still dying every day in conflicts fanned by ethnic hatred. Media owners reward pit-bull journalism to sell fear.
Researchers craft arguments to justify economic extremism. Religious messages are warped. Guns and bombs are allowed into the hands of radicalized minds, with predictable consequences.
I think that we feel less safe now to speak our views and stand our ground. No matter which side of the argument one is on, tolerance is in short supply.
No woman or man should be threatened for holding peaceful views, whether these views are from those you agree with or those you don't.
Defending hard-won freedoms
What can we do? Tolerance comes from respect, from a feeling that those opposed to you are at least as valuable as you, as people.
This is not something that is granted or ceded. It is won by struggle. Fighting racism, tribalism, discrimination and xenophobia means to challenge it as unacceptable actively.
It is won at home when you talk to your children, when you engage with adults especially women, through to public mobilisation and voting at the polls.
Sometimes, it might feel uncomfortable, dangerous. For some, it is life-threatening. But it is necessary to stop asking ourselves what we have become.
It is easy to laugh or shrug off today's demagogues, thinking that our values of tolerance and security are somehow immune, that we can't slide backwards. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Each generation is responsible to defend and renew hard-won freedoms, and extend them to those people who have never had them.
I am proud to be part of that fight, and to work with so many who Jo's desire has touched for a better world free from the hatred and racism that killed her.
We must actively reject hateful ideology from all corners. We must support communities everywhere to replace it with a culture of peace and tolerance based upon social justice.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Wake of Jo Cox Killing, Voters Back Away from Brexit
One survey found that support for "Remain" had jumped to 44 percent, while support for "Leave," had fallen to 43 percent
Jun 20, 2016
New polls show the British public may be rethinking its stance on exiting the European Union after last week's killing of Labour Party MP Jo Cox, who was known as a "champion of refugees" and was in favor of keeping Britain's membership in the group.
An exclusive survey for the Independent conducted over the weekend found that the "Remain" campaign may have pulled back into the lead, and three polls released after that found public opinion swinging back to the pro-EU faction.
One survey by YouGov conducted for the Sunday Times found that support for "Remain" had jumped five points to 44 percent, while the support for "Leave," also known as "Brexit," had fallen three points to 43 percent.
Nigel Farage, leader of the UK's right-wing Independence Party, admitted on Sunday that the Brexit campaign "did have momentum until this terrible tragedy."
"It has had an impact on the whole campaign for everybody," Farage said.
The suspect in Cox's killing reportedly made anti-immigration and nationalist statements before he shot and stabbed her as she met with constituents in Birstall, West Yorkshire. Her death prompted both sides of the Brexit vote to halt their lobbying for three days. According to some experts, the tragedy and the subsequent pause in campaigning may have been enough to change the game.
On Monday, David Marsh, European markets columnist at MarketWatch, wrote that the turn of events "may spur a sharp sympathy vote for Remain protagonists favoring the status quo."
Marsh added that "Opinion polls--largely based on surveys before Thursday's assassination--show both sides are still neck-and-neck. But the widespread assumption is that Cox's demise dents pro-Brexit forces."
The Independent also noted that one in 10 voters are undecided, but when asked to predict what side they would be more likely to support, 20 percent responded in favor of Remain, and only 11 percent said they would vote for Leave.
Britain votes on Thursday whether or not to exit the European Union.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular