First Principles

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Isn't that good? Don't you wish you'd coined it? I do. But, beautiful and properly intentioned as it may be, it is also provides the self-righteous foundation for the American gun lobby. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions indeed (of which a little more below).

All of which is my roundabout way of trying to find a work-around (is that what the tech guys call it when you neatly circumvent a problem because you can't be arsed to suffer the full rigour of fixing it?) for my own frustration at the current charade being played out on the European political stage. We once again find ourselves in that most invidious of positions, namely favourably citing the Guardian - Cameron farce .   

I will not rehearse again my personal conclusion that the EU is a con. A well-intentioned and liberal con but a con nonetheless. Good intentions alone don't rescue these things - The Russian Revolution was well-intentioned and we ended up with the Warsaw Pact. Simplistically (very, but work with me) we can characterise certain types of British politician to have played on the Euro stage as follows: good men for whom their experience of war made them blind to the connivances of continentals who actually rather despised the British (Edward Heath); good men whose experience of the same war left them untrusting of compromised euro-socialism (Benn); hugely clever but mildly bonkers men who feared an unstoppable social democracy (Powell, Redwood); true believers who rather fancied an unstoppable social democracy (Shirley Williams, David Owen, Roy Jenkins, Peter Mandelson, Heseltine, Ken Clarke); those who believed that they could control it ie. the 'better in than outers' (Thatcher during her premiership, Major, Blair, Cameron); quasi-bigots (Farage); sane and principled opponenets (Shore, IDS, Hannan).

All of this is confusing and, in its way, nicely fascinating to anyone with a curiosity about constitutional politics. And God knows I like a nice abstract debate but the trouble is that this has long since encroached into the territory of actually bloody mattering. And (there it is again the OG's stylistic quirk of starting a sentence with a conjunction - this was frowned upon when he did it at junior school but, hey, he's a rebel) what really irks is that the current main players on the stage think that most of us don't matter in this discussion and that our views need neither be countenanced nor cajoled. Because here's the news you smug bastards (and here I'm really talking to Blair and Cameron) - I am already persuaded that you are better equipped than I to lead, that representative democracy is the best way we have come up with. Further (and more immediately important) I am persuadable that, despite everything, the EU might be refashioned to the advantage of civilisation. However I will not be persuaded when you: 1- fashion a slim wish-list of 'demands' to put to the technocrats and recent converts to democracy who constitute the growing EU franchise; 2- inevitably fail in your meaningless attempts to get anything from that shopping list and then; 3- most odious of all, spin it as some sort of progress. I've thought this over (seriously, it cost me sleep last night - that's how sad/engaged I am) and sorry Prime Minister, your performance yesterday was a heap of contemptuous bollocks. There is occasionally a place for contempt. As it happens PM I rather think that you are on the right lines when your temper betrays you and you show contempt for the risible Jeremy Corbyn but, being selfish here and I suppose immodestly crediting myself with some sensibility you doubt I possess, I assert some standing in all of this. You can't put the genie back in the bottle - thanks to the vision and sacrifice of others I have a vote and a semblance of education. Stop patting me on the head and asking me to trust you. I no longer do.

Back to where we started. 'That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men.' Governments of where? What is a viable/practical nation state? The UK? Scotland? The whole of Europe?

Governments derive 'their just powers from the consent of the governed'. But is the consent of Europe as a whole, to be binding on the UK if the UK disagrees? Is Scotland to be bound by the rest of Britain? Is a wealthy London to be held in check by an under-performing 'Northern Powerhouse'? Spain/Catalonia? It goes on and on. Simple it ain't. But worthy of serious discussion? Yes. By all of us.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

 Amen to that. Kindly note, my masters.