That was the week that was
Nov. 17th, 2018 09:20 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakHad a very busy week on the road, in which I barely consumed anything fannish and was instead consumed by the two simultanously running "History: A Farce" soaps running in the UK and in the US. No, that's unfair, the US one had a serious plot thread (btw, it's really WEIRD how the Democratic Midterms victory was downplayed initially), with only the tantrum-throwing toddler-in-chief providing the completely over the top satire. Back to the drawing board, scriptwriters. This "President" just isn't believable, not even as a caricature.
More seriously, as an explanation of how the insanity across the channel came into being, this article putting Britain on the couch provides as good an explanation as any as to what went on in the murky depths of (a part of) the public subsconsciousness:
What’s striking is that we can begin to see in this hysterical rhetoric the outlines of two notions that would become crucial to Brexit discourse. One is the comparison of pro-European Brits to quislings, collaborators, appeasers and traitors. (...) But the other idea is the fever-dream of an English Resistance, and its weird corollary: a desire to have actually been invaded so that one could – gloriously – resist. And not just resist but, in the ultimate apotheosis of masochism, die. Part of the allure of romantic anti-imperial nationalism is martyrdom. The executed leaders of the Easter Rising in Dublin in 1916, for example, stand as resonant examples of the potency of the myth of blood sacrifice. But in the ironic reversal of zombie imperialism, the appropriation of the imagery of resistance to a former colonising power, this romance of martyrdom is mobilized as defiance of the EU. (...) Europe’s role in this weird psychodrama is entirely pre-scripted. It does not greatly matter what the European Union is or what it is doing – its function in the plot is to be a more insidious form of nazism.
Meanwhile, this article sums it up shorter, but also to the point: Brexit fantasy going down in tears.
Given I have a lot of British friends whose life will get worse and worse and worse now, I really do wish this were all a tv or radio show, safely fictional. But it's not. Speaking of powerful symbols pertaining to nations, though, I discovered/was reminded again that one of those things I myself am sentimental about is the French-German post WWII relationship. Yes, our two countries have their problems and flaws. (Do they ever.) But dipping into pre and during WWI literature again, it struck me once more how ever present and insidious the assumption of a national feud was, and how self evident today (unless, of course, you're Marine Le Pen or Alexander Gauland) the alliance and friendship. (It's also encouraging to me when the way hatred is whipped up again today not just between nations but within nations makes me wonder how on earth all this tribalism should be overcome. Note to self: it's been done. Fait Accompli.) Macron and Merkel at Compiegne, where the WWI truce was made, was a great illustration for this. (As had been, decades earlier, Kohl and Mitterand at Verdun.) It was also, to me, an illustration of how to deal with a war anniversary without glamourizing the evilness of war in any way (and that war isn't glamorous and heroic but awful is to me the lesson that public consciousness first grasped with the WWI catastrophe, even though it seems we keep having to learn). So, have a few vids from that other reality show, Frankreich et L'Allemagne: c'est possible:
Macron and Merkel at Compiegne (btw, whoever choreographed everything really was extremely thoughtful; note that when they're sitting at the table where the truce was negotiated, they're not sitting opposed to each other, as their historical counterparts did, but at the head of the table, together):
Summary of the entire weekend:
Macron and Merkel at the Peace Forum afterwards:
And to end on a fun note, here's the 101 years old lady excited to meet the President who thought Angela Merkel was Brigitte Macron and, after being told that she was the chancellor of Germany, said "'c'est fantastique':
More seriously, as an explanation of how the insanity across the channel came into being, this article putting Britain on the couch provides as good an explanation as any as to what went on in the murky depths of (a part of) the public subsconsciousness:
What’s striking is that we can begin to see in this hysterical rhetoric the outlines of two notions that would become crucial to Brexit discourse. One is the comparison of pro-European Brits to quislings, collaborators, appeasers and traitors. (...) But the other idea is the fever-dream of an English Resistance, and its weird corollary: a desire to have actually been invaded so that one could – gloriously – resist. And not just resist but, in the ultimate apotheosis of masochism, die. Part of the allure of romantic anti-imperial nationalism is martyrdom. The executed leaders of the Easter Rising in Dublin in 1916, for example, stand as resonant examples of the potency of the myth of blood sacrifice. But in the ironic reversal of zombie imperialism, the appropriation of the imagery of resistance to a former colonising power, this romance of martyrdom is mobilized as defiance of the EU. (...) Europe’s role in this weird psychodrama is entirely pre-scripted. It does not greatly matter what the European Union is or what it is doing – its function in the plot is to be a more insidious form of nazism.
Meanwhile, this article sums it up shorter, but also to the point: Brexit fantasy going down in tears.
Given I have a lot of British friends whose life will get worse and worse and worse now, I really do wish this were all a tv or radio show, safely fictional. But it's not. Speaking of powerful symbols pertaining to nations, though, I discovered/was reminded again that one of those things I myself am sentimental about is the French-German post WWII relationship. Yes, our two countries have their problems and flaws. (Do they ever.) But dipping into pre and during WWI literature again, it struck me once more how ever present and insidious the assumption of a national feud was, and how self evident today (unless, of course, you're Marine Le Pen or Alexander Gauland) the alliance and friendship. (It's also encouraging to me when the way hatred is whipped up again today not just between nations but within nations makes me wonder how on earth all this tribalism should be overcome. Note to self: it's been done. Fait Accompli.) Macron and Merkel at Compiegne, where the WWI truce was made, was a great illustration for this. (As had been, decades earlier, Kohl and Mitterand at Verdun.) It was also, to me, an illustration of how to deal with a war anniversary without glamourizing the evilness of war in any way (and that war isn't glamorous and heroic but awful is to me the lesson that public consciousness first grasped with the WWI catastrophe, even though it seems we keep having to learn). So, have a few vids from that other reality show, Frankreich et L'Allemagne: c'est possible:
Macron and Merkel at Compiegne (btw, whoever choreographed everything really was extremely thoughtful; note that when they're sitting at the table where the truce was negotiated, they're not sitting opposed to each other, as their historical counterparts did, but at the head of the table, together):
Summary of the entire weekend:
Macron and Merkel at the Peace Forum afterwards:
And to end on a fun note, here's the 101 years old lady excited to meet the President who thought Angela Merkel was Brigitte Macron and, after being told that she was the chancellor of Germany, said "'c'est fantastique':
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 11:20 am (UTC)And then instead of doing what politicians saddled with some not absolutely ironclad referendum they don't like usually do, i.e. form a bunch of commissions with lucrative posts to do viability studies, planning and strategizing to ostensibly trying to implement something or such, to gain more maneuvering room and basically be the impulse control ego to the id, that they are supposed to be in representative systems, they treat it like a direct order that needs to happen right now like some headless chicken. Sure, just forming a committee to come up with a real Brexit plan and impact assessment first to see where that goes would have opened the anti-Brexit majority of MPs to political damage from the hardcore brexiteers wielding accusations of sabotage against the popular will etc., but right now they are all damaging themselves politically and the country on top of it, so the position they got themselves into isn't exactly better.
I mean seriously, my city had a referendum to make district heating a municipal utility again (happened way before the Brexit vote and with a bigger margin in favor) and it's been over half a decade now of discussions how to realize that and maybe it will actually happen by 2019? And that was binding, not one of the local advisory ones that just get ignored (like the one against privatization of the city hospitals even though that had more than three-forths majority and over 65% participation and was hugely popular).
The whole process from start to now seems like a total failure of the British political establishment to deal with their issues and to actually shape policy from disparate voter input like politicians are supposed to do.
You absolutely cannot do governing by referendums in such a half-assed way. I'm actually less wary of direct democracy than some other people, but you have to set it up right and the use it consistently, not as a special effect thrown in to mix things up every now and then. Like I think going way in with direct democracy like the Swiss do, can work (obviously they also get populism and fear mongering and all that, and have their own EU relationship troubles, but it is not a totally dysfunctional mess either, nor do voters do just wishful magical thinking when presented with choices), but you just can't use referendums as a kind of emotional relief valve to make voters less pissed off with what your political system delivers, and then expect implementable policy decisions.
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 02:39 pm (UTC)The whole process from start to now seems like a total failure of the British political establishment to deal with their issues and to actually shape policy from disparate voter input like politicians are supposed to do.
Yes, the sheer incompetence is breathtaking. I mean, one would almost rather have an evil mastermind somewhere - at least then there's be some sense in where and how everything is going. But this????
(Otoh: Putin. Who is the closest thing we currently have to an evil mastermind leading a country, and that's not helpful to the avarage Russians in anything but thinking of themselves as a superpower again.)
Yes, Minister and Blackadder were supposed to be fiction, dammit.
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 03:30 pm (UTC)And of course from a universal rights standpoint that regards some things as non-negotiable it is always dodgy to leave or put up rights, especially minority or marginalized peoples' rights, to a vote, no matter the voting method. So I'm not sure the direct democracy can be blamed for the long lack of universal suffrage in Switzerland. That kind of problem you can run with most systems.
But Brexit wasn't that kind of question, like asking about capital punishment in a referendum. The objection you see to settling a question like Brexit in a referendum is that complicated national policy questions are somehow fundamentally unsuited to referendums because voters aren't informed enough to understand and communicate what they want in such a micromanaging way and that it should only be done via delegation through intermediate professionals aka politicians. And I think that actually is not true, and that Switzerland shows that you can have a stable and functioning democracy with a lot of direct referendums including complicated stuff, but the system needs to be designed for it, so that the questions put to voters are sensible and the voters are involved that way consistently.
But this referendum as gimmick stuff in a system that is designed to work via delegation is like getting the worst of both systems. Especially if you throw in just one referendum and at a point when many people are discontent with the representation. Then you get this kind of angry muddle and neither the question nor the representation issues get solved, because both get so mixed up.
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 12:20 pm (UTC)I have yet to meet a single brexit voter who wouldn't accept May's deal. Nobody cares about the details. They wanted to leave the EU, this has us leave the EU so job done, let's talk about something else.
One of the problems we have on the doorstep is as far as most people are concerned brexit is a done deal and yesterday's news so nobody wants to talk about the details. Ukip have had similar issues, people aren't interested in the difference between hard brexit, soft brexit or no deal brexit. We're out so lets talk about something else.
Where as brexit politicians are only notable for hating the EU so they have to hate the EU on everything hence their rejection of a perfectly harmless deal based on trivialities that none of their voters care about.
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 02:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 02:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 04:32 pm (UTC)* Endless War on Terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan...and Pakistan, along with various other countries in that area, including Syria
* Increase in immigration from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan and especially the immigrants from Syria
* Media emphasis and outrage at the above
* The power of certain conservative corporate internet and television media outlets that are deeply associated with both countries - ie. Rupert Murdoch and his brethern. Not to mention Facebook's Mark Zukerberg, etc -- who fanned the flames so to speak.
I remember having discussions with Brexit and Trump supporters in 2016 and 2017 that were eerily similar in that both were terrified of the on-coming hoard of immigrants the media told them about. Convinced that they were going to lose their jobs, homes, etc as a result of it - because certain media outlets had reported it happening.
And this..
But the other idea is the fever-dream of an English Resistance, and its weird corollary: a desire to have actually been invaded so that one could – gloriously – resist. And not just resist but, in the ultimate apotheosis of masochism, die. Part of the allure of romantic anti-imperial nationalism is martyrdom.
This is not just true of Britain, but true of the US as well. What Britain and the US also have in common is both countries decided to interfere with the makeup of the Middle East and Persia at various points in history. Either for imperialistic reasons or purely economic ones (related to oil).
And...another thing I've discovered, in both Great Britain and the US, the majority of the population that supported Brexit and Trump lived in the "rural" areas or "suburban". They did not tend to live in the more urban areas. In the US Mid-Term elections, the urban and suburban areas voted Democrat and against Trump support, while the rural areas voted Republican and for candidates that supported Trump. I'm seeing the same pattern emerging in Great Britain -- the
more urban areas are anti-Brexit, while the rural areas were for it. Also in both cases, a lot of this has been fueled by fear and rage, directed by various media outlets.
And in both cases...the US and Britain...the political scandal sheet is playing out as a bit of an insane political satire, right out of Shakespeare or a Greek Tragedy.
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 07:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-11-18 07:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-11-19 02:40 am (UTC)But, I've been noticing a programming trend away from fear and rage in "fictional television series" and some reality shows in the US. (Can't really comment on programming outside of the US, since I haven't seen enough of it.) There's a reduction in the violence and the angry disenfranchised "white" anti-hero trope. And more shows featuring minority characters.
Also in films, television shows, advertisements, theater, art and books -- I'm picking up a commentary about that rage and anger, and a desire to go in a different, kinder, less nationalistic direction -- which is encouraging.
For a long time, I felt our culture was echoing rage and fear, now it appears to be cycling in the opposite direction. Commenting on it, but attempting to show something else -- the shows that are doing well rating wise seem to be more positive and less negative. So, I think the rest may follow eventually. Things do tend to run in cycles...and while I do think things are going to get a lot worse in 2019 and 2020, I also think they may have to in order for everything to turn around in the right direction.
[Of course this may be just wishful thinking on my part, I've admittedly backed off of the news and negativity to maintain mental sanity.]
no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-11-17 11:07 pm (UTC)The old lady in the last vid is so sweet.
no subject
Date: 2018-11-18 07:30 am (UTC)