fbpx

On Brexit

Should any country give its residents a chance to vote on how they feel things are going, probably a significant proportion would show their unease, unhappiness, and dissent to an even greater extent that did the Brits. Most never do and have never done so.
[additional-authors]
July 6, 2016

Should any country give its residents a chance to vote on how they feel things are going, probably a significant proportion would show their unease, unhappiness, and dissent to an even greater extent that did the Brits. Most never do and have never done so. In the past, the Brits have been notorious grumblers about everything, mostly about their rotten uncertain weather, a perpetual source of complaint. Since nobody controls the weather and can be blamed other than the weather forecasters, people grit their teeth and accustom themselves as best they can. Nobody gets harmed by the grumbling; it provides an outlet for frustration, inconvenience, and powerlessness. Disagreeable weather is hardly an excuse to leave home. In contrast, leaving Europe is quite a serious business not just for the Brits but for everybody else on the globe.

The insular Brits used to boast that they ruled the waves and that much of their empire colored maps red. They may feel more comfortable once more going alone than being a part of Europe not of their making. They were reluctant to join and now seem more reluctant to remain than stay subject to imposed restraints. They were one of only five founder members of the United Nations in which they have a privileged status in the Security Council and like any other member, the United Kingdom retains its sovereignty and independence irrespective, ignoring the UN’s disunity and feebleness as a governing body. Right now, the world’s attention is concentrated on the perils of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union. Even those who led the campaign to quit have a difficult time to justify their case to return to a splintered Europe that had brought about two disastrous world wars and might bring about an even worse third.

The idealism that once brought both the UN and EU into existence has almost disappeared in the contemporary global society. A great deal in human affairs is in mess that nobody predicted. Instead of a brave new world, it has not brought peace, security, prosperity, freedom and opportunity after all. Human nature has not acquired sweetness and light.  Yes, much has improved since 1945 but not everybody has benefitted. Progress has come at a heavy price And the pace of change has been relentless, perhaps exceeding the accustomed ability of humanity to adapt. The global problems get worse and more complicated Looking to the future, people are probably more frightened, worried, disturbed, and distrustful. Populism plays on all this and gets a good following. It has simple understandable solutions, mostly wrong and will make matters even worse. It goes after the vocal disaffected not the assumed silent majority and finds an eager gullible audience ready for different leadership. After all, the powers that be don’t seem to be all that keen to listen to dissent and their expert advisors appear to be too full of themselves to bother with common folk.

The powers that be take care to do well for themselves. And the populists who want to replace them will also make sure that they too will do even better for themselves. Power corrupts. The powerless are aware of this but hope that something might be done at last by those promising that they will curb injustice, secrecy, manipulation, corruption, exploitation, and maladministration and other blatant societal dysfunctions or at least provide well known safeguards before desperate protesters with little to lose take to the streets or resort to disruption to draw attention of policy makers and institutional reformers. Such protesters do not act out of ignorance or vengeance because daily they are the victims of such dysfunctions until they cannot stand systemic inhumanity. They raise issues of such complexity  that cannot be overcome overnight and need time, scarce resources, and changes in hearts and minds, although all that might satisfy is a simple change in law and law enforcement, or in representation , or in transparency, or in access to welfare and assistance.

The problem with experts is their assumed arrogance because of their superior knowledge and status. Even the best are human and make mistakes; they may not know enough or think too narrowly or exaggerate their competence. They may pose as being objective and impersonal but they can be as prejudiced, fixated, intolerant as the next person, protecting their own vested interests. They cannot avoid being who they are or limited within the circumstances. They have their own idiosyncrasies, emotions, and values. They are only human not gods. They may believe they are not partisan politically but by framing public policy or designing processes of execution they act politically bound to offend somebody or other likely to be affected. That is why it is better to have them on tap not on top. Blessed indeed is the society that can find the rare unassuming genius or the statesman who can rise to the occasion when needed and the government system that enables such leaders to overcome all the obstacles placed in their way. Even better may be the system that indicates they have overstayed their welcome.

Most living persons are unable to complain about alleged wrongdoing, harm, injustice, suffering, and mistreatment nor have anyone complain on their behalf. Their complaints are not investigated by any independent party. Many justifiable complaints have no form of redress or compensation. Many complaint offices have insufficient jurisdiction, finance, staffing, transparency, and follow up. Most complaints are unjustified and without merit. Only few reveal serious injury that calls for urgent remedial action for whole classes of ignored claimants. Almost all show the need for public education and explanation to improve communications, and also the fear by those in authority of being exposed to bad publicity. Every self-respecting responsible organization should have an ombudsman-like office to receive complaints about its performance.

Gerald E. Caiden, Emeritus Professor, Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, July 2, 2016.  

 Email: ncaiden3@gmail.com

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.