Early Purple Orchid - Many Thanks To You All

Early Purple Orchid (photographed today: 6th March, 2017)

This was posted by The Boiling Frog over at EUReferendum.com concerning Dr Helen Szamuely:-

On 24/06/2016: Well I was wrong ....

"Yesterday I was thinking about my first meeting with Alan Sked in 1991 at the house of Eva Taylor, widow of A. J. P. Taylor, our common supervisor and what came out of that. What a long way we have come. I claim some credit."

It was The Boiling Frog blog that led me to EUReferendum.com and the variety of useful influences and help in attempting to further expand the scope and improve the quality of political discussion and debate in the UK concerning this subject. I think I came across the blog sometime in early 2013 or perhaps just before. Pete North Politics Blog: Helen Szamuely:

"Helen was a massively influential part of the early eurosceptic movement long before Ukip became a household name. One of the original Brexiteers. She was a hugely respected thinker on the right and a well known voice in conservative circles."

I had not heard of this lady but it brings to mind the many many people who started this movement far beyond my reckoning(some as far back as the late 1960's in the Campaign for an Independent Britain CIB group) and contributed in the right way to it who are not well known but who need to be thanked for their early and essential actions.

On that note, this blog (finally) ends. I aim to start a new a new website and continue what others started:-

John Ashworth has produced another excellent Fisheries booklet... "Seizing The Moment: The Opportunities For UK Fisheries After Brexit" while Scribblings From Seaham has started another website for Real Democracy: Direct Democracy 4 UK "Moving Forward – A Public Consultation." and Lost Leonardo has murmings of starting blogging again...

For current Brexit Research from Dr. RAE North, don't forget to keep checking and reading (and re-reading) The Brexit Monographs at EUReferendum.com as well as the daily blogging.

Sunday Reading: The Political Tea Leaves of Brexit

Don't bother with the legacy news-media's pontificating political analysis: It's all revealed here, above: "All is said and all is revealed!" Did I mention already, it's all here, everything is explained.

People are too easily impressed: Just start wearing a funny-looking hat (or a red scarf) and you're now a recognizable celebrity with a distinct "style". Maybe even talk "funny" and you'll be hailed as a football master tacticien. Now if you're a political analyst, you can slide over the Polls and "voila/ici" you're in business: In fact newspapers and politicians can even just not bother with the polls and make a claim and it's as good as, "I checked the tea leaves - they never  lie because they can't lie!"

Actually the tea-leaves are not necessarily very different from the polls on people. Both seem to be useful within their respective scopes. And what is that? I think it's an external mechanism to remove the internal anxiety loop that afflicts decision-making. The mechanism allows a process of making a decision to begin.

Looked at that way, it's actually fairly useful for psychological reasons, even if for accuracy reasons it's completely useless. For example sometimes a choice can be made merely by choosing to toss a coin: Head -> X or Tails -> Y.

In fact, I think what we're talking about when talking about these types of mechanisms to make a choice is "A Low Information Environment".

In the previous blog, The Political Nexus: Turning Governance Into Garbage, it was considered that in such an environment of complex systems for politicians, interacting with people in democracy who operate their own voting decisions in a low information environment, the trend is inevitable: A gap between Noise and Signal widens in the decision-making basis. It's inevitable because the lack of useful data to use dictates the decisions made which become institutionally more geared to "Blame Risk" and all the associated features of that listed: Rigid, Opaque, Disconnected etc etc.

I think at the moment there's a great deal of "blame" searching going on post-Brexit: 48% of voters "backed the wrong horse" while 52% of voters some of whom probably backed an imaginary horse!!!

Let's look at this in a simple way:-

Post Referendum Fallout

A reversal or roles between remain and leave pre and post result, between honest and possible criteria, oddly enough. Of course the "common wisdom" peddled is that "no-body knows" if remain or leave was the better choice. The tendency is that economically it was better to remain but politically this was not so and hence the referendum which was reckless to give to such low information people but democracy and on and on "ad stupidium". "But no-body is really sure" is probably the "last word" to shut everybody up! Much is made of the dishonestly that Vote Leave promulgated hence the "zero" score. If people were a bit more careful they could probably work out a lot of very interesting things about that result... too bad.

So without going down that rabbit-hole, how is the above possible to resolve? I think it's clear that the groups themselves can be broken down into 2 sub-groups each for ease of communication:-

The common conception has been that Leave is dictated by the "extreme branch" of Brexit and the "will of the 52%" will therefore dictate all of the 100% via that extreme group of people. Too often commentators have bitched about "why should 48%" be dictated to? WRONG! "Why should a measly 10-20%, if that, dictate the other 80%? Hmm lower the percentages and you'd almost land up with a General Elections for Representative Democracy  which is apparently norm people are apparently more at ease with!! But, b-but "experts" though...

Why this mistake? Let's look at a well-known phenomenon in communication at mass scale:-

Remember there's various elements going on here:-

1. A Referendum IS more likely to arouse the dissatisfied who want to "pin the blame" somewhere on someone.
2. Blame is a combination of a perception of lack of clarity/honesty involved in a negative outcome and tracking back the source of this. Hence the search starts with "naming" so that "blaming" can occur to eventually lead to "claiming" in this case Brexit the prize of consolation.
3. The legacy news-media appears to thrive commercially on "conflict narration" and always jumps at a chance to blame or credit someone. For example just look at the England Football team: From Hero to Zero faster than any other substance known to man. They'll look for the hero of the team or the scape-goat and pile questions on this angle. Hideous.
4. People are incredibly low information on the politics of the UK and worse the EU politics of the UK (it's complement Brexit). This has the likes of Tim Farron in the extreme remain vs the Farage or Fox or Davis in the extreme Leave. Each is going to haggle the other with extreme bidding to catch the attention of the low information public.
5. If we do look at polls as Roland Smith of the ASI has done: Sizing the ‘Liberal Leave’ position...

You can read the poll summaries at your leisure. This may seem a contradiction of the introduction to this blog, which was fairly critical of polling, comparing it to "reading tea leaves" and now uses the evidence/data compiled above to prove an assertion (ie popular = 1= marginal remain + leave = Liberal Leave).

Well intuitively or using common sense, and calming down a bit, a lot of people were dissatisfied with the EU's outcome or goals achieved (the signal behind the noise) yet the option or risk against changing this was perceived to be too great to change. Or to be even simpler: The LACK OF POLITICAL OPTIONS available for solutions appeared to absent. Why make a decision when there is no clear solution but high risk? That is imho a very sensible decision by marginal Remain voters. We could get all analytical concerning the Leave position on solutions, and I won't bother because this blog is a running record of the work of FLEXCIT which has survived the test of time against all the other dismal plans or solutions. What this tells you without bothering to deduct or derive the conclusion is that the data or signal here is fairly accurate to predictions of the future possibilities.

So what do those tea leaves tell us? We'll see the middle merge in this argument and it will reconcile views when broken down into constituent features or modules that they BOTH SHARE IN COMMMON for example head of the list:-

• Single Market MEMBERSHIP OF
• list.......

What we'll see is a reconciliation on honesty, post-Brexit it will be clearly possible politically and above economically to forge another new option of relationship of the UK with the EU. This "new information" will itself alter the group responses in polls given time further.

That leaves two different groups: The extremes. The Remain Extremes will have a result that they can belong to: The next Fiscal New Treaty of the Eurozone. Good luck with that! That will make clear that group's horrible dishonesty. And the extreme leavers? Again the impossibility of options makes it null and void whether or not their preference is the best Brexit in the whole wide world. They're not so much creating a rod for their back (they're on the winning side) as much as creating a lightning rod of themselves for the other groups to blame for all the unnecessary confusion and conflict!

Thus we'll see the beginning "punit square" above merge and become domestically compatible between what has to be or needs to be done and what people want to be done. The quote of Harold Wilson: "Politics is either a question of presentation or timing (mostly)."

Yes, Representative Democracy probably is something like that. It might one day be a quote from someone else that "Real (direct) Democracy is mostly a question of (voter) information and timing." 

On that last note:-

Campaign For An Independent Britain

There's other and I'd assert stronger ways of "voting" than merely scratching a "X" on a piece of paper x1 every 5yrs or 41yrs (!)... A more "informative and actively participating" way, since 1969.

Both The Campaign For An Independent Britain and EUReferendum.com provide:-

• High quality information
• Various services and organizations
• Direct donation facility

It's clearer to me what I get from them as opposed to what I get from politicians/MP's in Westminter or MEP's in the EU.

FLEXCIT: The Movie

FLEXCIT: A Holistic Argument

FLEXCIT THE MOVIE Intro by Christopher Booker.

 

 

FLEXCIT The MOVIE The Definitive EU Exit Plan Richard North Part 1

 

 

Richard North FLEXCIT THE MOVIE The Definitive EU EXIT Plan Part 2 

 

 

Richard North FLEXCIT THE MOVIE The Definitive EU Exit Plan Part 3

 

 

 

 

The Betrayal Of Britains Fishing - Booklet

The Betrayal of Britain's Fishing to the European Union ~ John Ashworth

The Betrayal of Britain’s Fishing – Booklet now available

"Readers who appreciated John Ashworth’s excellent series of articles on the Common Fisheries Policy will be delighted to know that the eight pieces he wrote for this website have been edited into a single booklet, which is now available free of charge (although any contributions would be greatly welcomed).

If you live in near a fishing port, it will be a particularly useful booklet to distribute, but even if you don’t, what has happened to our fishing industry does not stand alone. This well-researched and hard-hitting account of the destruction of our fishing fleet by government ministers and civil servants epitomises everything that is wrong with our membership of the EU and provides a very powerful reason as to why we should vote to leave. Please contact admin [at] campaignforanindependentbritain [dot] org [dot] uk if you wish to order copies."

 
You can read the above booklet at the link provided or order a physical copy of the booklet by John Ashworth via The Campaign For An Independent Britain (CIB) again using the link or email contact address above.

I previously blogged about this subject and John Ashworth's work as it was being written up at CIB. There's a very very strong reason why it is one of the best works ever produced on Brexit or the EU and with respect to Fisheries as a Political Argument, possibly the best I have personally read. I think I am right in being able to successfully convey this reasoning via the efficacious illustration that I hope will be immensely valuable for framing and structuring conceptual understanding to the work and the factual research and details it's based upon and the core principles from which it continuously refers and repeats and rigorously demonstrates - in reality:-

Useful 'Thinking Framework' for John Ashworth's magnificent work

The Booklet is only 31 pages in total length including supplementary pages. Please take time to sit down and read it and think about it. If you do, you'll have, I'm absolutely sure and confident, understood the core arguments of the EU Referendum and Brexit as applied to a specific policy area: Fisheries. But the principles are transferable to all other policy areas; and hence it is an encapsulation of the complete argument - By reading this booklet you will have successfully learn the core or "kernel" of the political argument concerning the UK's Referendum on its EU membership and its alternative, Brexit; by which you will be informed enough to know how to vote either "Remain" or "Leave".

This booklet really is that valuable.

Many Thanks to John Ashworth for producing such a useful work.

FLEXCIT Application: 0. A Framework for Fisheries

 Restore Britain's Fish: A Model Example of FLEXCIT Applied

Primary Source Material (the DNA):-

• The Great Deception (A History of the EU) ~ Christopher Booker and Dr. Richard North
•  FLEXCIT: The Market Solution to leaving the EU ~ Dr. Richard North et al.
• Consultation on a  National Policy on Fisheries Management in UK Waters ~ Owen Paterson January2005 
• Campaign For An Independent Britain: The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) ~ John Ashworth:-

1. The Common Fisheries Policy – Part 1
2. The Common Fisheries Policy – Part 2
3. The Common Fisheries Policy – Part 3
4. The Common Fisheries Policy – Part 4
5. The Common Fisheries Policy Part 5: Spanish Accession
6. The Common Fisheries Policy part 6: The public swallowed the propaganda
7. The Common Fisheries Policy part 7: FleXcit: Our fisheries’ future.
8. The Common Fisheries Policy Part 8: Can we believe anything?
9. Cameron’s deceit over sovereignty

Correct Framing, Logical Reasoning, Comprehensive Organizing, Balance of Evidence = Brexit Solution Selection within FLEXCIT Paradigm Shift framework

In the previous blog, FLEXCIT: Back From The Future I think I managed successfully to finally encapsulate FLEXCIT in a visible and accessible form for people who have zero knowledge of the subject of the EU Referendum and Brexit. FLEXCIT: The Market Solution can be thought of as the "DNA": It is a compacted store of extraordinarily organized and complex information. Most people will not read this "genetic code". Hence for this "DNA" to be useful, it requires people to transcribe it into different "USE-ABLE FORMS". In this case we're going to do just that starting with The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) as example of applying our method to harvest data/evidence to feed into the question of Supranationalism or Intergovernmentalism. The references above provide all the data. What people need is not mountains of data, they need organization of it:-

Evidence of a Problem: UK Fisheries under Supranationalism = Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).

To provide an example the form mentioned above would be suitable for a 10-20 page pamphlet as a visual guide to the referendum and how people can structure their choice to vote to Remain or to vote to Leave. The challenge of the EU is to show to people that our Policy Control is best served when it is by self-governance of the people by the people as well as the positive alternative vision that replaces Supranationalism with Intergovernmentalism. So using our method on this data/evidence set of Fisheries let's begin:-
 

Inheritance: Method to Organize the Evidence for Fisheries - "Use-ably"

The reason we use this structured method is that it feeds into the upper levels which are most relevant to our Referendum Question itself and in a form that is easy for people to appreciate when they (millions) make their choice.

Each of the above:

• Problem
• Solution
• Outcome

Will be summarized from the primary research and references, then at the end abstraction of the "common messages". In turn these common messages will themselves become the form for a new form for people to use to easily understand the EU Referendum question inheriting the positive qualities that originate in the works above (the DNA) and ensuring a direct link to a common source of origin and expertise.

So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish

Restore Britain's Fish (A New Hope)

So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish is the famous line and book from British sci-fi writer, Douglas Adams, a comedy of sorts. Unfortunately the story of Britain's Fisheries is a tragedy. The original campaign Save Britain's Fish to remove the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) failed to save Britain's fish and indeed it's industry and hence the new campaign is now to "RESTORE" (Restore Britain's Fish) it from this politically inflicted disaster both on the industry and the natural resource that make up both sides of the Fisheries of Britain.

Wikipedia guide: The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)

 Map: Fisheries is a visibly significant British Resource; Norway and Iceland remained outside the CFP outside the EU; as EFTA/EEA members

To understand this, we must look at "White  Paper, The  United  Kingdom  and  the  European  Communities" as per The Great Deception: The Great Fisheries Scandal, p.179:-

"There is no question of Britain losing essential national sovereignty; what is proposed is a sharing and an enlargement of individual national sovereignties in the economic interest."

Under "Fisheries":-

"The  Government  is  determined  to  secure  proper  safeguards  for  the  British fishing  industry. The  Community  has  recognised  the  need  to  change  its fisheries  policy  for  an  enlarged Community  of  Ten,  particularly  in  regard  to access to fishing grounds."

 Britain's Fisheries: An expendable political chip

We compare the above communication to the people with the politicians negotiations on 30th June, 1970:-

"Furthermore,  there  was  already  international  pressure  for  a  major  revision  of the  international  law  of  the  sea,  to  extend  national  control  of  fisheries  to  200 miles (or the ‘median line’ between two  nations). When  this  took  place,  the waters  of  the  four  applicants  would  contain  well  over  90  percent  of  western Europe’s fish, some 80 percent of the total in seas controlled by Britain."

These were the conditions for Britain. The condition for the EEC (as the EU was called then).

LeaveHQ: Restore Britain's Fish

 "Britain's Got Talent Fish!"

To quote  John Ashworth at Campaign For An Independent Britain (Who is lead campaigner of both Save Britain's Fish in the 1990's and now again in the new campaign in conjunction with persons from the fishing industry and ancillary industries from all coastal areas from Cornwall to Shetland and Northern Ireland.):-

"Coming back to Britain’s Accession, the original six members, hours before the signed application for membership from the four was handed in, created Fisheries regulation 2140/70, which contained:"

The above shows Article 2 of the regulation as well as quote from Judgment of the Court, Cornelis Kramer and Others, Joined Cases 3, 4 and 6/76 (14 July 1976) with interpretation of the description of this Regulation within contention between "High Seas" vs "Sovereign Coastal Waters". It suggests that under the EEC/EU nations held 12-mile rights but under Article 2 gave up the full 200-miles rights to the community (number of members with equal rights to these British Sovereign Waters).

United Nations: Oceans & Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):-

Sovereign Coastal Waters: 12-miles (EEC) vs 200-miles (UN)

PART V

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

Article57

Breadth of the exclusive economic zone

"The exclusive economic zone shall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured."


HM Government: Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union Fisheries Report (Summer 2014)


Coming back to The Great Deception, it is recorded how various different approaches to finding a legal basis to the Treaty to enact "equal access to all members" was sought via numerous convoluted and tenuous possibilities within the existing Treaties, going back so as to The Treaty of Rome. Effectively the "fingerprints of such actions recorded" gave away the intention/motive of this regulation at it's inception:-

"On  the  basis  of  this  evaluation,  it  was  evident  that  the  Treaty  offered  no justification   for   what   was   clearly   being   considered,   and   therefore   any regulation  enacting it  would  a  legal  base. Nevertheless,  a  regulation  was drafted to define the ‘equal access’ principle, with the intention of placing it in the acquis before  the  four  would-be  entrants  lodged  their  applications. It would  then have to  be  accepted  by  them,  without  argument. By  any  measure or description, this was a trap, aimed at appropriating the applicants’ property in order to share it between the Community members." ~ The Great Deception, Christopher Booker and Richard North, p.180

The next question to ask is: What is/was the effect of this on Britain's Fisheries; quoting FLEXCIT: Stage 4 - Restoring independent policies ~ 14.0 Fisheries, p.267:-

"The  figures  themselves  told  the  story. In 1972,  a  total  of  939,800  tons  was landed  by  British  vessels,  compared  with  145,850  tons  landed  by  foreign vessels. Vessel numbers were then not accurately recorded (and nor indeed was the  entire  UK  catch).  But  in 1995, we  know  that 9,200  fishing  vessels  landed 912,000 tonnes of  fish– not a great difference, but then the CFP was only just beginning to bite."

"In  2002, however,  after  Commission  effects  to  reduce  the  fishing  effort, there were only 7,578 vessels, which landed 686,000 tonnes – a 25 percent reduction in  catches  over  eight  years."

"By  2012,  the  UK  fleet  had  dropped  to  6,406 vessels, comprising 5,032 ten-metre and under vessels and 1,374 over ten-metre vessels. Landings dropped to 627,000 tonnes, with a value of £770 million. But the real contrast came with the imports. In the same year, these reached 638,410 tonnes,  valued  at  £2.6bn.  Of  that,  £797  million  came  from  the  EU-27,  a significant proportion of which were caught in UK waters."

"This  provided  a  graphic  illustration  of  the  way  the  CFP  worked.  Access  to fishing grounds had been dominated by political considerations, on the basis of "equal  access" to  what  was defined  as  a "common  resource"."

Common Fisheries Policy (CFP): Interpreting "Dolphin" for "Good-bye!"

This has been a tragic story; much like the self-inflicted EURO. But the story continues from John Ashworth is writing a weekly blog on this subject starting with The Common Fisheries Policy – Part 1 and continuing each Monday over the next few weeks at Campaign For An Independent Britain. If I've made any factual errors, please let me know: It's a very interesting area of the EU debate, which is hopefully conveyed in the above introductory (background) summary above.

The promises to people by the politicians motioning to join the EEC/EURO/EU or whatever next, have been proven to be great deceptions based on super-political logic that have damaged people's lives, damaged resources and damaged industries, we could end by saying, with respect to Fisheries:-

"It's The Same Kettle Of Fish."

How Not To Remove Stinging Nettles

Chopping down stinging-nettles may feel good, but for how long?

  

In Ecological Succession different founder species form different types of transient habitats towards a "climax community" eg from a grass clearing over time developing via stages into a mature forest. This of course is what is going on when from the point of view of gardeners "weeds" such as stinging nettles (Urtica dioica) establish on a lawn or in a garden and grow. They're easy to chop down, but as anyone knows who's had to clear large bushes of them, they quickly (rapidly!) grow back. Hence some digging finds a complex matt of root systems from which at any point new nettle-stems can grow back from. It's effectively an example of the "roots vs shoots" problem or "root cause". The effort to dug up the root system is considerably more, however it does resolve the problem of permanently removing the stinging nettles from that particular patch of ground.

EU Referendum: The Rule of 2

In Eurosceptic "Amnesia" vs Brexiteer "Total Memory Recall" the importance or input of memory was considered in our arguments. This follows from the observation made in Literature And Science about future qualitative inferences that shape our expectations of future results compared to post-hoc quantitative deductions which can then feedback into our next future decisions. In Understanding The Mountains of Madness we saw how the argument as per the Electoral Commission's Referendum Question:-

 The argument simplified to it's essence

 Is not so much shaped as above, but as:-

• Pro-EU Status Quo which is observed to be not working very well.
• Anti-EU extremism which is considered unsafe and possibly unsound.

We learnt from The Life Changing Magic of Tidying Up what our arguments concerning "good governance" reduce down to and how this principle has the potential if applied to make us happier as a people. We looked at elegant patterns in Pattern Recognition and adding to that from the above booklet "A House Divided": Can Parliament serve two masters: the Nation and the European Union?

(1) Design for EU, 1947: "No government dependent on a democratic vote could possibly agree in advance to the sacrifice that any adequate plan must involve. The British people must be led slowly and unconcsiously into the abandonment of their traditonal economic defences..." ~ Peter Thorneycroft, later Chancellor of the Exchequer and Chairman of the Conservative Party.

(2) What Germany Means by "Integration": "Does free Europe want to join Germany? Germany is the heart of Europe and the limbs must adjust themselves to the heart, not the heart to the limbs." ~ HANS SEEBOHM, Minister of Commerce in Dr. Adenauer's Government 1950.

(3) "In this challenging time we are naturally encountering difficulties. They are the birth pangs attending the creation of a United States of Europe." ~ Jean Monnet (The father of the EU) April 30 1952, addressing the Washing Press Club on the European Coal and Steel Community.

 Common Market Referendum - MP Nigel Spearing was there - The country was Duped!

You can compare and contrast with Edward Heath's quotes here in a timeline:-

I would argue the above are "the roots" of the EU Referendum argument. Mostly hidden in the sands of history. And hence we see a pattern emerging:-

• 2-Speed EU: Periphery and Core
• 2-Stage Referendum Process
• 2-Extremes on the political spectrum where a Middle Way is manufactured above.
• 2 actual arguments: The Government-EU Argument (Top) and the Government-People Argument (Down) (which will be attempted to be neglected).

Effectively the Government-EU argument comes before our own. We're excluded from it as per David Cameron's hush-hush Reform Details and avoiding mention of the EU Time-Table towards Association Membership. What concerns them is the argument of the present such as:

In fact far from Brexit causing the UK/Britain to collapse... it's the very reverse proposition that worries "the powers that be" and well-spoken by Xavier Rolet in the above too: The consequences for uncertainty on the EU/EUROZONE, itself. For this reason, this argument cannot accept the primacy of the "ultimate frame of reference itself: Time and History" to our arguments and hence what must happen as their objective and therefore as the visible public argument leading up to our Referendum is their argument: Chopping down stinging nettles not removing their roots. This is backed up again in Conservative Home piece attempting to persuade via the political angle: Nadhim Zahawi MP: Our best future in Europe would be a multi-speed EU – not the divorce that would be worse for everyone .

Surely it seems reasonable to help the EU/EZ as Europe affects us either way we vote? There's nothing unreasonable in suggesting this. However, we have to consider our choices a little more deeply... to bring up from The Campaign For An Independent Britain (see blogroll)

• The millions in EU funding the BBC tried to hide
• Anti-Democratic and Second Class
• Déja Vu 

We can witness how deep the seeds of deception have gone into our national identity, attacking it and further as per again the latest booklet from The Campaign For An Independent Britain (CIB):-

 Generations Betrayed: Cutting the roots of our National Identity (in education)

“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”  ~ George Orwell. 

The great problem we as a people face is with arguments which do not actually engage with our own arguments as per democracy but seek to attack and undermine our identity and hence the abuse of power by our own government, our own ruling institutions that underpin democracy we see as per the warning from The Road To The European Union directly applicable to us! When we make a choice we are representing ourselves, our identity, what we value and what we work towards. All those assumptions that help us form a successful nation are undermined when we don't act in accordance with them, when we fail to remember them and fall for the persuasive arguments as per Eurosceptic "Amnesia" vs Brexiteer "Total Memory Recall" .

The above "mocked-up ballot paper" may seem extremely tendentious, but what I think it symbolizes is not to worry about all these exterior postulations from David Cameron who is "a prisoner of his own making" (just count the number of lies he's made and the continuation of The Great Deception under all our Prime Ministers); it's to remember to count on our own interior understanding of our place in the world; draw on our own roots which if we keep healthy like those pesky stinging nettles will grow back out of the ashes of The Great Deception: It's those roots we must look after, not the ever-changing political weather of the day.