Selma

Some weeks ago I suuggested that the American presidential wannabes should be made to sit down and watch The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (OG 4 March). I also mused about an appropriate film to set as required viewing for the warring factions in our own EU referendum. When I watched Selma last night I thought I had found it. As today has passed I have pulled back a little from that view - because they would all doubtless relish the film (hard not to) but it would fly over most heads as to how this very American story relates to the euthanising of democracy that is going on in Europe. I will return to that point but first the film.

Selma at its heart is about a particular battle in a long war - the battle to complete the black man's enfranchisement in Alabama. It has a wider context of course but the film itself is about a very singular skirmish in a war that still clamours. America does this sort of thing beautifully because it is (just about) a nation young enough to take its constitution seriously and to pay heed to its fundamentals. Dignity courses through this film from the outset - the first scene shows Annie Lee Cooper (played by Oprah Winfrey, whose company produced the film) attempting to register to vote and being rebuffed by callous white maladministration. There is no violence in her reaction, just proud composure. At times the film makes you ashamed to be human but by its end you are proud of the possibilities of all of us. It is a member of that select band of films that can make grown men cry. That good. Great films are not always important and important films even less frequently great. I've had twenty hours to think about it and, yes, this film achieves both. 8.5/10. 

Why then would this piece of distinct Americana be of relevance to the EU conundrum. One answer might be that I see everything in that context and I will concede there might be something in that observation, but I'll wade on regardless. Here's my reasoning:

• Selma narrows in on one small objective of humanity and makes it large. That object is the right to vote.
• From the vote grows representation and from representation issue forth laws made with the consent of the governed.
• Within the vote resides the ability to alter or abolish a false or destructive government.

And (you will, if not already so, get tired of hearing this from me) the forthcoming referendum is about the second and third bulleted points above. Please do not take my word for it, go away and read all of the core texts - they are all public documents. The European Union will not take your vote off you. However the vote it allows you will not serve (in many areas of legislation already does not serve) to give you laws made with the consent of the governed. Nor will it give the distinct entity that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland any meaningful right to discard a false government. It is perfectly posssible, though in my view monstrously patrician, to believe that this chipping away at the value of the franchise is  a damned good thing since we sodding plebs can be a bloody nuiance when an educated chap is trying to run a country. You might take the Blair/Cameron position that notwithstanding the gaping stable door and the lack of any visible horses, we can still rein in the administocrats, that we still have a few horses hidden round the back and that by clever poilitics we'll be able to get some new ones. Four decades of experience suggests otherwise.

Or you might look at Selma and think about that tiny democratic tangibility, the vote (tangible I supppose until they make us do it online so that we need never leave our fetid pits). And perhaps, just perhaps, we might think also about what that vote might encompass and not accept the lazy fallacy that we have entered a 'post democratic' age.

I will link you to an article from the pro-EU cabinet minister Anna Soubry. Soubry - Brexit Danger .  She is, I note, a barrister (not automatically a bad thing) but I note that the six EU 'myths' she seeks to eviscerate are all economic matters. The legal and constitutional implications never get an airing. The only people who talk about it are Farage and Frederick Forsyth, the first of whom has justly been consigned to the bin marked 'swivel-eyed loon', as, less justly, has been Mr Forsyth. 

Anyway, enough of all that. See the film. It's brilliant.