They say there are no absolute truths. However, the protesters are absolutely -- not relatively -- right.
I hate to tell you this, Prime Minister Boris Johnson, but the solution to the Brexit mess is an easy call.
A reasonable one, too. The protesters are handing it to you.
Background: on June 23, 2016, a referendum was held to see if the U.K. should stay or leave the European Union. The actual wording: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” 51.9% voted for leave, 48.1% to remain. That wording is crucial; we will return to it in a moment.
Three things to consider:
(1) Contrary to what both the stay and leave proponents said/implied -- and are still saying/implying -- the referendum results were NOT legally binding. They had all the statutory power of a Gallup poll.
(2) Never confuse "majority" and "consensus." Exactly that is what Boris and his pro-Brexit group are doing. A majority is 50% plus 1. A consensus, on the other hand, by all standard definitions, e.g., Cambridge, is a generally accepted opinion; wide agreement.
Yes, a majority favored Brexit. However, by no stretch of the imagination does 51.9% constitute a consensus.
So, where exactly, in quantitative terms, does a consensus begin? Yes, it has to be more than a majority, but where?
The question cannot be settled once and for all because of cultural and historical differences. However, I would make an opening bid at 55%. Anything less is decidedly not a consensus.
The proverbial bottom line: the U.K. referendum in 2016 showed there was no consensus in the U.K. about staying or leaving the European Union.
As a general policy, I believe change should be difficult to make, but not impossible. For starters, a change should always require a consensus. A tie (less that 55%) goes to the champion, in this case, the status quo. England would have remained a member of the European Union.
(3) The wording of the 2016 referendum was simple: stay/leave. That is the equivalent of asking: "Do you like freedom of speech? Yes/no. " That is qualitatively a very different statement than asking: "Do you think a fascist should be allowed to speak at your local high school. Yes/no." In the 2016 Brexit referendum, there was no concrete, observable, empirical, detailed proposal on the table. Today, there is one -- the Boris Plan.
A new situation, very unlike that of 2016, exists. The issue of Brexit is no longer a misty water-colored idea; it has been operationalized.
The proper thing to do, therefore, is to have a second referendum on the real, tangible Brexit plan. I lived in London. My common sense tells me that the U.K. would now vote to stay in the European Union. The pro-Brexit forces would have only Boris and Theresa May to thank for that outcome; she, most notably, completely, totally, absolutely botched the negotiations with the EU regarding the conditions under which the U.K. would leave.
Could it have been otherwise?
Here´s the real deal.
* * *
"He´ll be leaving soon."
If you want to get rid of a guy in power, there´s no better way than to start that rumor. I watched it work countless times over the decades in both legislative and executive branch politics.
Authority is a time-related event. No time; no authority.
"The United Kingdom will be leaving soon." That is what May announced to the world immediately after the Brexit referendum. Instead, she should have gone back to the EU with referendum results in hand and pointed to the widespread dissatisfaction. "We don´t really want to leave but..." then bargained for reforms.
She did no such thing. Forget reform; all or nothing.
Boris, May and the U.K. may get to see up close and personal what nothing looks like.
* * *
Another recalcitrant, oh-so-sure-of-himself politico was caught in the same leaving soon trap. The only difference was, he was too naive to know it.
Throughout the peace talks with North Vietnam, Henry Kissinger pranced and preened before the press in a Paris chateau. And why not? After all, the fate of the entire world rested on his teeny-weeny Bavarian shoulders.
The reality was of course entirely different. What did Kissinger have to negotiate? Do we leave Vietnam now or do we leave later?
The North Vietnamese weren´t the only ones to see through Kissinger´s ridiculous posturing.
Centuries earlier, Shakespeare caught the drift:
A tale told by an idiot,
full of sound and fury.
signifying nothing.