When To Attend/Hold Meetings

Britain in a Global World: Rejecting renegotiation, leaving the EU

So far I've attended a few political meetings, from The Campaign For An Independent Britain (CIB) as per How do you become a "eurosceptic"? ,  Global Britain, and the The Bruges Group (as above). It's interesting to note they're all cross-party or non-affiliated (Global Britain) as well as focused on the full picture of UK/Britain in reference to the EU and to the World. As a voter it's a lot more satisfying proposition to be involved and interested in. The "biff-bam" personality politics of party-politics in Westminster as reported ad naseam, by The Legacy Media isn't productive or interesting in my opinion. Evidently it does serve a function, a high-class version of the Celebrity Stories which reminds me of studies done on Monkeys: Monkeys Pay Per View: Adaptive Valuation of Social Images by Rhesus Macaques :-

Individuals value information that improves decision making. When social interactions complicate the decision process, acquiring information about others should be particularly valuable. In primate societies, kinship, dominance, and reproductive status regulate social interactions and should therefore systematically influence the value of social information, but this has never been demonstrated. Here, we show that monkeys differentially value the opportunity to acquire visual information about particular classes of social images.

I've come to the conclusion that the General Elections in the UK are, for a general voter, a complete waste of time but also emotional energy and attention. Voting for squabbling parties that soon forget their promises before an election doesn't encourage much future trust in the system of politics used. So instead of voting for something I don't believe in (thus having to endure some form of cognitive dissonance or Catch-22 dilemma?) 

A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules. An example includes: "To apply for this job, you would have to be insane; but if you are insane, you are unacceptable for the job."

Catch-22s often result from rules, regulations, or procedures that an individual is subject to but has no control over because to fight the rule is to accept it. Another example is a situation in which someone is in need of something that can only be had by not being in need of it. One connotation of the term is that the creators of the "catch-22" have created arbitrary rules in order to justify and conceal their own abuse of power.

The logical extraordinary alternative is to donate a small amount of money directly to a small and specific political cause I do believe in, interact with, contribute actively with and learn from others in such a group; because I've taken some time to try to understand it and think there's a chance it will be a productive function; a positive feedback-loop on decision-making: My own, the groups and hopefully connecting wider and wider until eventually at the national governance level; an example of which is provided by Christopher Booker: Our 'Snatch’ campaign is still saving soldiers’ lives:-

 Catch-22: Do Something Different!

It seems like a more honest and direct way of "voting" to me; particularly if you consider that "half our government is in Brussels as well as Westminster", it's diluted democracy even more as per Sir James Goldsmith Euro Moments: Goldsmith on setting up Referendum Party. Who knows perhaps cross-party groups that promote not voting in the General Elections is a good way to arm-wrestle our government into democratic reforms such as The Harrogate Agenda?

I was fortunate in the CIB meeting, because it was very high quality information and presentation, the size of the group was about right no more than 30 (high-end of classroom size to note); the people there were in general "on the same wavelength" with some of the basics to be presented, discussed and developed, there was diversity in the groups broken down into workshops again changing the dynamic and of course the extra-ordinary material or work being presented by Dr. RAE North (see EUReferendum.com blogroll), FLEXCIT: The Definitive EU Exit Plan For Britain:-

 Flexcit: The highest quality understanding is online for people to use and debate with...

So there are some meetings despite the above being freely available which very much are worth attending. However this raises possibly a critical question to consider upon which the fabric of success or failure is going to be woven into everyone's effort:-

What is the value of meetings for Brexiteers and how can they be of real value to those who attend them and what shape do they currently take?

 No words: The context & body-language tells the story

I also attended a Global Britain meeting, a while ago and although the pedigree of speakers and attendees was extremely high,with almost all "The Usual Suspects", it felt like a lot of "treading water" was being done; a lot of low quality communication exchanges between people: A genteel peace being observed in the room as opposed to exploring and structuring the debate more logically. There was nothing there that anyone serious and committed (in conviction, ideals or finance even) could not have already covered in their own time or even previously up to that point in time with some 3/4 years until a possible referendum out of over 40 years to get to this "home-straight" point in time. From that perspective it was for me, very bizarre ie not very efficient. Why?

Last night I attended The Bruges Group meeting, for two preceding reasons: Robert Oulds , The Bruges Group director is in my opinion from his speeches and his book as per Literature And Science : Everything you wanted to know about the EU - But were afraid to ask very informative (facts for memory recall), structured and referenced, well written and organized around "a guiding principle", above all. Secondly, one of the speakers was Owen Paterson, who again has been raised before. For example:-

Owen Paterson ("in beautiful Shropshire"): The EU is doing the leaving (subject) of the UK (object) = New Relationship

I spoke briefly to Robert Oulds, while in the process of acquiring some extra materials for future use (another reason to attend the meeting), and complimented him on a particular passage in his book. The significance, or qualifier of quality of the above two, to single out, is that due to starting with "a guiding principle" (whatever that may be!!), it follows that their thinking and organization of thoughts is invariably conducive to producing the most essential component of progression between arguments: A Concept Shift. This does not have to be as "disruptive (positively)" as a Paradigm Shift but can be in the most simple details or larger general topic realignments/reconnections between different sub-topics within a subject (tbc in future blog post).

 "AN OPTIMISTIC VISION OF A POST-EU UNITED KINGDOM"

~ Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP

 Eg of "a guiding principle": Meta-organization forms content coherence

I took some extensive notes, partly because I was always taught "active learning/listening" is a more productive use of your time but also because I generally have a constitution that requires me to fidget actively to avoid feeling sleepy! Overall I did not learn anything new in this meeting, there were some useful "concept shifts" however from hearing how other people think about things so it definitely useful attending. However the other area that was useful was hearing the type of questions posed and here the flaws were evident. Many of the questions were random. What I mean is that a lot of the people present did not have a "a guiding principle" so many of the questions were of the type: "Basic FAQ", basic preliminary grounding for REAL DISCUSSION. If you're familiar with different forums online, they always encourage new posters (aka noobs/newbies) to read the FAQ because such questions are diverting from productive discussion, evidently. And yet these meetings (Global Britain and Bruges a bit less so fail to apply such conventions in personal groupings? Examples if I refer to my notes were:-

• FUD & Status Quo Effect of Referendums
• Role of The Media eg BBC bias
• Cost of EU Membership
• Priority: Economics of Politics?
• Difference between T. of Rome: Freedom of Movement of Labour and T. of Lisbon: Freedom of Movement of People

Etc. There were equally some good questions and the best of the night was concerning:-

• The role of David Cameron and the question of Trust in what he delivers?

The above question refers to EUReferendum.com (quelle surprise!) of whom the questioner said to me later they are a regular reader, there. It may seem I'm being biased or appear to be attempting a superior tone. But when you've seen an example of the idea of "a guiding principle" then you see it's absence, you really really notice it! We can look at different group contexts:-

• Self-Study, online research to establish the basics for oneself and perhaps more depending on time and inclination.
• Conversation between a few well-acquainted participants who are able to match each other's mental models of understanding more rapidly to then use as a basis for arguing from. Rapid increase in understanding for individuals possible here eg "mentoring".
• Small Group for specific discussion; useful for introducing new ideas to an established idea: Creative, challenging & constructive criticism to refine ideas and test them.
• Classroom Size where differences can be discussed productively atst as progression: Increasing group aggregate understanding is usually the intended result of such group size or depending on the people: Between up and below.
• Large Group/Lecture Size: Generally more 1/Few-Many relationship. The message has to be generalized for a larger variability of understanding and needs.
• Crowd Gathering: Primarily slogans, working the crowd, chanting, singing, much more focus on "group affirmation" what the EU keeps on calling "Solidarity" ie the overhead for "group cohesion" is very high and hence meaningful communication is overwhelmingly reduced.

I have some interesting notes from The Bruges Group meeting, but I can't help think the above consideration is a higher priority to establish. And this comes back to what Dr. RAE North has been saying time and time and time again:-

Chimpanzee Politics!

EU Referendum: biding our time:-

"When it comes to running the campaign, one of our strongest suits is that we are the only group to have adopted Flexcit, and thus are the only group promoting a comprehensible and credible exit plan."

EU Referendum: agreement on a plan:- 

"But the paper ignores Flexcit, as do most Europhile organs, inventing any number of excuses for doing so, when challenged. But they all amount to the same thing. They dare not acknowledge it because it so comprehensively demolishes their superficial and facile arguments."

Honestly I would be almost persuaded to express some form of demonstrative "cri de coeur!" of unfairness, except there's no reason to when if you think about the behaviour of The Legacy News Media, of our own Government in Westminster and even of some deceptive or self-deceived "eurosceptics" that their collective behaviour is something you'd expect to be reported by the primatologist Frans De Waal, in Chimpanzee Politics:-

"As we watch the chimpanzees of Arnhem behave in ways we recognize from Machiavelli (and from the nightly news), de Waal reminds us again that the roots of politics are older than humanity."

As referred to, The Bruges Group meeting had some useful contributions, group affirmation itself is useful, not least for donations to the group itself or the chance to hear the people "in the trenches in politics" giving their views live to a room aka these days as "Face Time" and meeting some other people and learning what their point of view is. It was useful to provide elements of the above "group compositions" as above too. But the limitations and contradictions of not having an Exit Plan in contention with maintaining "group integration/disintegration" and the ambiguity this casts everything else under this shadow resulted in for example contradictions, repetitions, lack of deduction, circular reasoning etc etc, in my opinion, too much of that "treading water" sensation.

 FLEXCIT: A fully integrated, researched argument: A Concept Shift and A Guiding Princple: All-in-One = a fully Scalable National Argument usable for different group sizes

There's a distinct lack of understanding the difference between: "A Guiding Principle" (Integration) and "Diversity of Details" (Differentiation). This is in my opinion the basis for holding meetings for different group sizes, their quality and hence productive "scaling up of arguments" over time to more and more people. Of course different people will be receptive at different group sizes and hence type of message. But you have to have the actual "concept shift" itself first before "scaling up the argument to different group sizes" instead of "scaling down of arguments" to reach more people, aka "Dumbing Down" That's back on The Road To The European Union. And surely this relies on "a guiding principle" already agreed upon?

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.

Eurosceptic "Amnesia" vs Brexiteer "Total Memory Recall"

High-Level Diagram of Computer Architecture

In Dr. Charles Severance's Python For Informatics: Exploring Information book 1.2 Computer Hardware Architecture p.3: The above diagram illustrates the main components of a computer design: The Central Processing Unit (CPU) to execute "decisions" and "ask the next relevant question" to manipulate from the next input and hence "compute" a 'newly present' result or "current result". The Main Memory to retrieve stored information, The Secondary Memory for long-term memory, input/output devices for the user to interact with the computer and a Network connection which connects other sources of information and in a sense memory sources too, to add to the "decision execution process" of the CPU.

Looking at the diagram it boils down to a very contained and literal decision-executing machine. However with a few core rules, the number of ways these can be combined make for powerful application to solve a variety of problems ("Turing Complete" or some such mathemagic!). In effect it's a bit like a simplified or abstracted concept of our own brains and how we go about making decisions. It's also applicable to how our national discussion of politics plays out in the News-Media who purport to report the information provided to them from our politicians.

 Central Processing Unit (CPU) exists in the Present Continuous! What Next? (NOW!!)

Of course there's extra-dimensions of complexity in this compared to the simple diagram above! However as demonstrated in Strange Trails if we lack "Strong Foundations" or an "Intellectual Architecture" a lot of how we perceive and interpret information in this greater context, effectively is "short-circuited" by Prestige as per Pattern Recognition and we all know this to be true as was "calculated" concerning the relationship/ratio between democracy and time in Of Democracy and Time Dilation (Recap: 5:9 ratio General Elections: Major New Treaties with zero public vote!). We also know that the Legacy News-Media predominantly appears to be "trapped in the present" in it's reporting, devoid of context as per I've Been Expecting You... . This was extended further to demonstrating how the News-Media only shapes the argument in binary 2D: Pro-EU vs Anti-EU in Fatal Car Crash: Two Dead After Car Accident which is yet more output from an endless loop (aka "infinity loop") in Argumentum Ad Infinitum.

The "Sphere" appears as a magically changing and vanishing circle to Flatland's people

One of the features of this blog is to use Memory to recap on previous information or "take-homes" to then input into subsequent new discussion, adding greater context: Building an understanding beyond the 2-dimensional reporting of the Legacy News-Media, as exhibited in Understanding The Mountains of Madness. To use a well-known example of comparing the 2-Dimensional "stuck in the present" reporting of the Legacy News-Media to arguments built with "Total Memory Recall", ie an extra dimension we can refer to Edwin Abbott's famous Flatland Analogy (above).

In the story, Flatland a square "A" inhabits a 2-Dimensional World. He's visited by "Sphere" who appears to be a circle in flatland that can magically change his size and/or disappear at will, as depicted in the diagram above. Also "Square" cannot comprehend the concept of 3-Dimensional World unless he personally experiences it for himself. One of the repetitions in this blog has been the reference to Dr. RAE. North and Christopher Booker's history of the European Union, called The Great Deception:-

 Spanning 1920's-2005; Covering 1749 References of myriad places, peoples, times and decisions & feeding into: "What Next?"

We know that the politicians "trapped in the concerns of control of the present political "reality" as per Big Ben: The Four-Faced Liar are therefore vulnerable to behaving like "Fashion Victims" in Politicians: No Taste, No Style, So Derivative! and so it shows in the "Amnesia" in our debates and the lack of progress that then allows Our Government: "Ifs, Buts, Maybes" to hedge their words and hence their inactions, against alluded to possibilities and to exploit their positions via the lack of "Total Memory Recall" driving emotional decisions based on "Quick Feelings" in people, as we can perhaps glimpse in the erratic nature of poll results: Their fickle and superficial measures of public Sentiment.

 Erratic public sentiment of EU Membership: A sign of amnesia?

We know from biology that people are "primed" to make quick decisions based of reactions to danger as part of our evolutionary legacy to respond in a timely manner to danger. For other problems however, "Slow Thinking" over a prolonged time period is required such as the Referendum on our EU Membership that accesses our long-term memory records to input into our decision-making. Professor Steve Peters provides a useful cartoon diagram of this in his book The Chimp Paradox:-

Danger/Threat and Familiarity trigger the type of "What Next?" execution we use: Fast = Emotional or Slow = Intellectual

This is another way of thinking about the Status Quo Effect: The Chimp gets to choose first if it's a danger/threat and hence voters invariably tend as a population to vote conservatively (as documented concerning Referendums). But immediately we see the importance of "The Computer" which is a symbol for our "learnt memory or experiences" to deal with a situation depending on it's familiarity. We already looked at how due to the above the government has used FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) to exploit the Status Quo Effect proactively eg "Project Fear". But there's been very little appreciation or acknowledgement of how equally important the understanding of situation via Memory input is as a major/key component in forming an "Intellectual Architecture" (eg Flatland). Various stories have taken this problem of Amnesia such as Philip K. Dick's We Can Remember It For You Wholesale adapted to Film in Total Recall:-

 Our Memory creates a foundational frame of reference to our subjective experiences and hence our self-identities

Without the foundations of a complete and concrete Frame Of Reference, as was made clear in The Greatest Political Problem of Our Time we can never be sure of our own motivations, our actions and their authenticity and this itself reflects the value of memory to our core identities we have of ourselves! This can be illustrated very easily, also, in the real world reference to the tragedy of dementia and the value we question of an individual's life when particularly in old-age this disease of the brain tends to more commonly manifest.

The arguments concerning our Membership to the European Union often come down to forms of deception. They come across as such in ways that are appealing in appearance and intended to be persuasive to many. For example: The 2 extremes of the argument are currently setting up a "Cameron Fudge" of the Middle Way as explained, and yet looking at history we know this is another case of Our Government: "Ifs, Buts, Maybes" avoiding referring to the concrete rules, such as Article 50 TEU Lisbon Treaty as a universal frame of reference for both the UK and the EU. Hence we see as per Mr. Brexit (see blogroll An Independent Britain) The real 'Vote Leave' objective they won't openly admit to . Effectively what it means is that the people without "Total Memory Recall" are prey to being taken advantage of in unfamiliar or emotional contexts where they are feeling pressure to make a decision: Much like exhibited in the stupendous Glengarry Glen Ross film between Ricky Roma (Al Pacino) and James Lingk (Jonathan Pryce):-

A Faustian Pact: "Sign on the dotted line..."

The Faustian Pact arguments are subtle and sophisticated only when we are unsure of our own bearings, then the arts of persuasion appeals to our vanity and hence appears attractive to ensnare us in our own "Chimp's" natural greed and gratification:-

1. It is extreme to "hold onto the past"
2. The past itself, if not written-off above, repainted as ambigious and up for debate.
3.  What counts now is a "game-plan" to persuade more voters to out-bid (out trick the devil!) David Cameron's renegotiation attempts - if only we'll play our cards right we'll increase the number of "eurosceptics" and win!
4. Reform is the socially-conscious thing to do in the EU and finally now the EU is listening! It's sophisticated and mature politics to "compromise", afterall.
5. etc... 

What's the difference between eurosceptics and Brexiteers? Memory. As with the above diagram of the importance of memory in our decision-making processes, you have an incomplete "computer" without it and hence a very reduced capacity to use information to make decisions; especially when the Political-Media Bubble also limits the network of information used in the debate to control it's substance.

Memory defines us and translates our information into action when we refer to it to make our decisions. Coincidentally that just happens to correlate with what we have learnt guiding our actions and hence our decisions are honest and hence our own. Will you accept anything less than that in your chance to vote for the first time in over 40 years?

The Price Of A Glass Of Water

An empty glass 'of water'

  

The Pro-EU argument is more or less reliant on the above result:

 

1. If we leave the EU our glass of water will become empty.
2. The danger of an empty glass of water is not worth taking unnecessary risks over. It's made of glass and is fragile and could easily break and can't be put back together again. People's lives depend on access to that glass of water.
3. Even if our glass is half-empty in the EU, then staying in allows us "to work with our European colleagues" to "reform" it so that it becomes half-full.

 

 A full glass of water

 

The Anti-EU argument is more or less the opposite result (unsurprisingly!):-

1. Outside of the EU we will have a full glass of water as befits our place in the world. 
2. All the water we save from leaving we can use to make lots and lots of money. 
3. It will all belong to us and we wont' have to share our full glass of water with anyone we don't want to.

In effect, the message I think most people who are dimly aware of the EU and Brexit and the Referendum will form is to access to what degree:-

 

Is the glass half empty or half full?

"Is the glass half empty or half full? is a common expression, generally used rhetorically to indicate that a particular situation could be a cause for optimism (half full) or pessimism (half empty)"

 Is the glass half empty or half full?

 

I think most people would like to think of themselves as "glass half-full people". For this reason, and the trends already outlined, the new fashion in EU Politics is to call oneself "eurosceptic" Politicians: No Taste, No Style, So Derivative! with a perfect example only today from Michael Fallon on The Andrew Marr Show:-

 

 Michael Fallon smartly sports the latest trends

 

Secondly it will be less effective for the politicians to re-use "Project Fear" aka FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) as The Brexit Door (see blogroll) writes about: Project Fear – IndyRef is not the EU Referendum and in fact CER are worrying over this issue too on their side: EU referendum: What should the In campaign be saying? - Is it time for hope or fear? (Which sounds a lot like our Glass Full (hope) vs Glass Empty (fear) analogy) not least because exposure via x1 Referendum in our memory "inoculates" us from subsequent dosages inherently; added to which the well-accepted truisms of our EU Membership for over 40 years have become so hackneyed (and therefore accepted) as to form myriad cynical jokes and hence humour is a potent antidote to the above:-

 A fabled EU 'black & white horse'

 

"A prize was to be awarded for the first person to discover a horse with black and white stripes like a zebra.

A German, a Frenchman, an Englishman and a Spaniard participated hoping to win the prize of €1 million.

The German decided to spend weeks in the National library researching into horses with black and white stripes. The Englishman went straight to a shop in Piccadilly which specialises in hunting gear, bought all the equipment necessary and set off for Africa in his quest for this strange creature. The Frenchman bought himself a horse and painted it black and white . The Spaniard went to the best restaurant he knew in Madrid, ordered an expensive meal for himself with a fine bottle of wine; after the meal he ordered an expensive Havana cigar and a Napoleon brandy, sat in a luxurious arm-chair in the hotel and began to consider what he would do with the 1,000,000 euros once he had found this remarkable horse with black and white stripes."

And thirdly, it's just "plain, common sense" to most people: Selling the EU as a benign force has lost it's sheen as we discussed in Lakshmi: Goddess of Prosperity (2) and this seems to be in agreement with Jon Worth's Britain Stronger in Europe – horrible framing and imagery, and a message bordering on the disingenuous.

 

This must be tempered however by the overblown hype and noise of the Anti-EU campaigners; for so long "a single, niche issue" they're still in "Attention-Seeking" mode, not realizing that switching to making what they have to say interesting because it's informative is very important as Mr. Brexit (see Vote To Leave EU blogroll) warns: Brexiteers: Europhiles at play, so be precise in what you say; namely that their glass-full conceit is falling into a trap as Pete North writes (see blogroll) TheKnow.EU - it's a problem 

 

Lost Leonardo (see blogroll Independent Britain) at also points this "Glass Half-Full or Half-Empty"simple form of the debate in Cutting Through The Noise and of course this is backed up by Fact Check: FactCheck: more questionable numbers in the EU debate

Both sides arguing over "The Price of A Glass Of Water"

 

We're seeing that they're arguing over:-

1. How much water is in the glass?
2. Whatever amount of water there is, how much money does it cost or save?

Dr. RAE North (see blogroll: EUReferendum.com) writes effectively this is leading to: EU Referendum: bored to death. This was all already covered in FLEXCIT :-

"But we do expend some effort in looking at the referendum which precedes the Article 50 notification. In  so  doing,  we  seek  to  remedy a  major  weakness  of  the  IEA's original exit scenario,  which  asked  contestants  to  look  at  the  exit  plan  in isolation. It did not allow for the possibility that the referendum campaign, and the events leading up to the decision to leave, might have a significant effect on the conduct of the exit negotiations – and vice versa.

This is a point that cannot be emphasised enough. The negotiations will not take place in a political vacuum.

The other point, here, is that these will be negotiations – i.e., a process which involves discussions with other parties, culminating (we trust) in mutual agreement. The UK proposals, therefore, will have to take account of the views of their negotiating partners, and we will have to accept that compromises may have to be made." 

If we ask the simple question: "How much is the price of a glass of water?" We probably come to the conclusion it's either free (eg tap-water) or at the most a very small charge compared to any other beverage. But if the context of the question is imposed:-

 What is the price of a glass of water in the desert?

It becomes an altogether different answer: The "price" of life or death possibly. And so it is concerning The UK retaining access to the Single Market as the price of withdrawal from "Political (Ever Closer) Union".

 

 

Lakshmi: Goddess of Prosperity (2)

Lakshmi: Goddess of Wealth, Fortune and Prosperity

In Lakshmi: Goddess of Prosperity (1) we brought up the subject of "Prosperity" and it's central place in the argument: Our financial health in the UK and as part of the "ailing EU". But we also expanded the real meaning of prosperity above and around and underpinning it's more material and visible manifestations of Wealth or Fortune (Our "modern high priest's" favourite words: Confidence vs Uncertainty). We also looked at it's central role in "Good Governance", much maligned by Nigel Lawson's joining of the ERM and Gordon Brown's almost economic re-enactment of King John: We need a form of Magna Carta for our Money Supply: See Positive Money. Finally we considered our attitudes and their implications on the running and ruining of our economies:-

Daniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister (Gordon Brown) of a devalued Government

It's no surprise to see and hear so much of our arguments on EU Membership are crystallized exactly in the same way, hence. They operate under especially in the Westminster-Media Bubble according to a Supply-Demand Basis of our Relationship with the EU. So long as the EU appeared to be a "force for good"  eg increasing peace as per winning the Nobel Peace prize and that was itself built from "prosperity":-

2012 Nobel Peace Prize:-

The 2012 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the European Union (EU) "for over six decades [having] contributed to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe" by a unanimous decision of the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

The decision highlighted the reconciliation of France and Germany, stating that "over a seventy-year period, Germany and France had fought three wars. Today war between Germany and France is unthinkable. This shows how, through well-aimed efforts and by building up mutual confidence, historical enemies can become close partners." The decision also highlighted the EU's contribution to the "introduction of democracy" in Greece, Spain and Portugal, the advancing of democracy and human rights in Turkey, the strengthening of democracy in Eastern Europe following the Revolutions of 1989 and overcoming of "the division between East and West" and ethnically based national conflicts, and finally the EU's contribution to the "process of reconciliation in the Balkans."

From our knowledge of The Great Deception, however we know the above is a "Disneyfication" (tvtropes warning!), packaging the EU as the force for Peace from which Prosperity can flourish. We've seen however with the "wilting of the flower of prosperity" that upholding or living up to this image has been more challenging for the EU. Such articles as Threat of Brexit is now very real or Opinion: British getting comfortable with idea of leaving the European Union are the kind of superficial understanding but indicative nonetheless of the picture we tried to create in Understanding The Mountains Of Madness:-

• Greek Protectorate status
• The Handling of Greece by the EU/Germany sentiment
• The Failure of competence concerning Migration
• The EURO Crisis: Creditor-Debtor usury and misery.

The image the above brings more closely represents The Four Horsemen of The Apocalypse:-

War, Famine, Pestilence, Death

• Deaths of mass immigrants flooding into Europe (highest since WW2)
• War with Russia over Ukraine geopolitics
• Famine of austerity, food-banks and mass unemployment (EZ particularly)
• Pestilence in our politics/politicians and our civilization's decay in thinking

The reactions to these clear observations are superficial: People en masse have been told the doctrine of the EU as above and now all they can see is the above negative outcomes. As we explored in Strange Trails, a conceptual understanding of our predicament (Dr. RAE North's "3-Legged Stool" of Problem-Solution-Outcome or our emotional adaptation of this in the above blog to: "Cage - Cage Door - Beyond The Cage" is what is needed, a full "intellectual architecture". Instead due to our conditioned way of thinking we revert to type and try to reuse old ways of thinking: Our Demand-Supply Relationship is adhered to:-

 Dominic Cummings vs Will Straw: The Prestige of fake prosperity arguments

Here we arrive in the middle of the message to convey in this blog. You wish to see if you can identify the pattern up to this point before preceding, as per Pattern Recognition? The effect of the above "reverting to type" is effectively:-

A New Demand-Supply Relationship between the UK and the EU

Understanding it in this way may help save people the waste of their valuable time, attention and energy, wading through the seas of lies and crossing the "mountains of madness" and in the future the mass reconditioning from the "great campaigns of confusion". We know this is the be-all-end-all of David Cameron's Reform-Renegotiation-Referendum mishmash Middle Way Fallacy as per Big Ben: The Four-Faced Liar and laying claim to arguments from authority: There is not a day that goes by when City AM invariably as conduit to the IMF voices yet another:-

And yet the IMF as part of the Troika are working such wonderful magic in the EU/EURO

Because the EU requires a New Treaty for the Monetary and Fiscal Union of the Eurozone members, this opens the door to the above New Deal/Reform as above and hence dire warning as above combined with "promises of riches" in our New Association Membership" Relationship thrashed out by endless arguments from the likes of the above 2 players and the sage wisdom of The Undiplomats: Right-wing populists and their foreign policies castigating anyone who is not "adult, sensible or reasonable" in accepting the new Demand-Supply Relationship paradigm being offered above:-

The Centre for European Reform (CER) (0 decoy) is a think-tank devoted to making the European Union work better and strengthening its role in the world. The CER is pro-European but not uncritical. We regard European integration as largely beneficial but recognise that in many respects the Union does not work well. We also think that the EU should take on more responsibilities globally, on issues ranging from climate change to security. The CER aims to promote an open, outward-looking and effective European Union.

We've heard all this before, from British Influence (1st decoy) then from Open Europe (2nd decoy) and then Business For Britain (3rd decoy) (this site may be hacked)  and now Business For Elliott's Vote Leave - Take Control (4th decoy) until we come to the final decoy: David Cameron & EU (5th & Final Decoy) with all the preceding along with CER "conditioning" people towards this end New Deal:-

QUACK!! QUACK!! If they all quack like ducks...

The assertion is not unnecessarily long here. It's a complex web we have to loop back again to remind ourselves of in Argumentum Ad Infinitum building that case and hence building this case. The next stage will be to demonstrate that now Cameron's Reform/Middle-Way is an EU Norm with other non-EZ nations as per The Cameron Contagion: Britain spreads referendum fever across the EU

However to rephrase a proverb, we're already going down a road and it's to Damascus not Mecca, O Pilgrim! The "Economic Reform" framing of the debate and it started a while back:-

• IEA Brexit prize: a challenge
• IEA Brexit prize: the farce continues
• EU referendum: voting out to stay in
• Brexit: a lack of realism from Bootle
• Brexit: questions to answer
• Brexit: The Winning Entry?
• Brexit: interesting coincidences
• IEA Brexit prize: last post
• Brexit: another nail in the coffin?

The IEA Coincidence: A "rational" Min-Max Economic Relationship

You can see the monumental efforts taken in order to frame the debate as Pro-EU (red) vs Anti-EU (violet) = Demand-Supply New Relationship (Green). The EU can't supply enough confidence to the UK and the UK's demands via it's own comparative confidence have risen. But as pointed out previously, this is an inferior position on prosperity; it's also an elitist argument that simply drives the people to "vote the right way" for those in charge and will bore people and hence effectively disenfranchise them, "politics as usual" leading to "business as usual" and we can guess where that will lead to again. A prime example of what prosperity "We The People" might like to reconceptualize:-

An insightful comment at EUReferendum.com

There's any number of examples of this real form of prosperity underpinning the raw material of peoples' everyday realities and experiences:-

• School Choices and Localism: Why should a decision about a Sevenoaks school be made at a Whitehall desk? 
• Junior Doctors Working and Pay Conditions: Doctor Roshana Mehdian (NHS Junior Doctors Contracts)

I believe we have a couple of examples of real people in strong contexts where their views are simply the logic of the clear benefits that demanding a democratic CHOICE inputing their experiences and their views towards a positive solution that affects THEM can lead to. That in my opinion is the essence of Prosperity and it's aided by real democracy. As we explained in Our Government: "Ifs, Buts, Maybes" they're not part of the solution towards greater prosperity, they're prolonging the problems towards a more inclusive and prosperous outcome.

Effectively people have to start trusting their own decision-making for their own lives, more than our politicians, otherwise they'll end up wasting yet more of our valuable time, our valuable attention and our valuable energy: The real roots of our prosperity.