Their Lordships on Article 50
.“Bring then above all ignorance, to which add confidence, audacity, and effrontery; as for diffidence, equity, moderation, and shame, you will please leave them at home; they are not merely needless, they are encumbrances.´´
Lucian. Rhetoriticians Vade Vecum.
The problem of the quality and extent of the discourse is very much still with us on Brexit, on both sides of the debate and both sides of the English Channel. The Issues are not clear cut and the problems are political in nature and therefore have a large ideological component. As well as essentially involving matters of opinion this question also involves matters of opinion about Divergent and wicked problems. The EU, The UK Democracy and Political Economy are allHuman constructs they involve choices and can always be changed society and community are emergent systems that are simply not pre-ordained.David Graeber often when he writes points out that most opinions eventually reduce back to the ancient quarrel between Parmenides and Heraclitus.
The Green Parties manifesto on these issues in 2015 is actually absolutely correct about the EU. The Green Party is also correct about the UK and its chosen form of democracy.
What I find most difficult in reconciling the current green leadership attitude to Brexit, Article 50 and continuing membership of the EU is that Brexit is a logical step towards subsidiarity.
The EU has some fundamental ideas they are, Subsidiarity and proportionality, effectively it´s like a political occum´s razor where as much power is devolved to the smallest decision-making forum and that when decisions are taken at the widest area that they are exercised proportionally.
To get the full nuance of this see the attached table and extract from the Commonwealth and foreign office report on the UK´s relationship to the EU. report.
With respect to Monetary policy and money creation, this should not be an exclusive EU competence. In exercising this competence the EU as I note in my extended analysis.
1.15 In particular, the Lisbon Treaty introduced changes to subsidiarity in terms of: • Scope – adding an explicit reference to regional and local dimensions: the Treaties now require consideration of the effectiveness of European, national and local/ regional action towards achieving the desired objective; and • Enforcement: creating new mechanisms to police compliance with the principle by national parliaments, arguably the actor with the greatest connection to citizens in the EU context. 1.16 One commentator described three purposes of these changes as being: 1) To shift the focus from ex-post judicial enforcement of subsidiarity, more towards ex-ante political enforcement of subsidiarity; 2) […] To introduce an external scrutiny of EU competence by engaging the institutions which had the greatest interest in the enforcement or abuse of subsidiarity, i.e. the national parliaments; and 3) […]To borrow some of the democratic legitimacy of the national parliaments so as to bolster the EU’s own political mandate.14
14 Professor M. Dougan and Dr T. Horsley, University of Liverpool, submission of evidence.
NOTE RL. Note that exclusive competence on Monetary policy is excluded from the Subsidiarity principle.
´´Give me control over the money creation and I care not who makes its laws´´Mayer Rothschild-.
Under the principle of subsidiarity, where the EU does not have exclusive competence it can only act if it is better placed than the Member States to do so because of the scale or effects of the proposed action.
This is important if like me you agree with Professor Richard Werner who says this in his Ground-Breaking 2015 Paper on money creation by private banks in the Euro area.
´´Among the many different monetary system designs tried over the past 5000 years, very few have met the requirement for a fair, effective, accountable, stable, sustainable and democratic creation and allocation of money. The view of the author, based on more than twenty-three years of research on this topic, is that it is the safest bet to ensure that the awesome power to create money is returned directly to those to whom it belongs: ordinary people, not technocrats. This can be ensured by the introduction of a network of small, not-for-profit local banks across the nation. Most countries do not currently possess such a system. However, it is at the heart of the successful German economic performance in the past 200 years. It is the very Raiffeisen, Volksbank or Sparkasse banks – the smaller the better – that were helpful in the implementation of this empirical study that should serve as the role model for future policies concerning our monetary system. In addition, one can complement such local public bank money with money issued by local authorities that is accepted to pay local taxes, namely a local public money that has not come about by creating debt, but that is created for services rendered to local authorities or the community. Both forms of local money creation together would create a decentralised and more accountable monetary system that should perform better (based on the empirical evidence from Germany) than the unholy alliance of central banks and big banks, which have done much to create unsustainable asset bubbles and banking crises´´ (Werner, 2013a and Werner, 2013b).
The point about money creation applies equally well to the UK and also the USA. It is a fundamental question of political economy and the EU has no signs of tackling the question, or the ECB. Toi be fair to our own Finance oligarchy Lord King, and Lord Adair Turner have started making overtures for change as have the Bank of England at a technical level . Mark Carney I think has been a retrograde step in these respects but that he is moving on we will see who he is replaced with to see which way it goes.
Solutions are at hand and Berard Lietaer sets them out on this video. His answer is to have regional complementary currencies and a supranational, international trade based currency. He explains in this video the Matrifocal approach to sustainable economics as opposed to the highly patriarchal system instituted in the EU , this was done against his advice, he designed the EURO and ERM but his advice regarding how to implement a system that would avoid the huge problems of one centralised all powerful money power was ignored.
Check out policy EC661 The Green Party believes that, as the means of exchanging goods and services, the stock of money is a vital common resource which should be managed in the public interest. Yet only 3% of our money supply currently exists in the form of notes and coins issued by the Government or the Bank of England. 97% of the money circulating in the economy takes the form of credit that is created electronically by private banks through the accounting processes they follow when they make loans. for an idea of the full extent of taxpayer value of such a policy see.
Go Green, Go SNP Go Plaid reject the CIA moulded Neo-Liberal ( fascist) branded big budget fake products of the LIB LAB Cons. They are all Packaging and no substance. I wonder What Nye Bevan would make of it all these days. ‘I thought’, said Nye, ‘that you were a Yorkshireman but your Dad has been telling me all about Manchester. Where were you born, boy?’ With a Yorkshireman’s natural pride, I said, thinking of Sheffield’s steel, ‘Yorkshiremen are not born; they are forged.’ ‘Forged were you?’ said Nye in that musical Welsh lilt of his, ‘I always thought there was something counterfeit about you!’Harold Wilson, “Memoirs 1916-1964: The making of a Prime Minister” (Weidenfeld and Nicolson and Michael Joseph, London 1986, p.
The problem we face regarding Narratives and the Karl Rove ´Áctors in History´Condecension of political and oligarchicaL ELITES
Is summed up by Carol Quigley in Tragedy and Hope.
This is the challenge we face in Quigley’s words.p.232 tragedy and Hope.
´´but criticism should have been directed rather at the hypocrisy and lackof realism in the ideals of the wartime propaganda and at the lack of honesty of the chief negotiators in carrying on the pretense that these ideals were still in effect while they violated them daily, and necessarily violated them. The settlements were clearly made by secret negotiations, by the Great Powers exclusively, and by power politics. They had to be. No settlements could ever have been made on any other bases. The failure of the chief negotiators (at least the Anglo-Americans) to admit this is regrettable, but behind theirreluctance to admit it is the even more regrettable fact that the lack of political experience and political education of the American and English electorates made it dangerous for the negotiators to admit the facts of life in international political relationships.”
The responsibility is on all of us as individuals to inform ourselves and to participate in democracy. It is a representative elitist system both in the EU and the UK but all power comes from the consent of the people, by being active and proactive we can increase the power of our polity by taking the trouble to make sure that we only ever give our informed Consent.
ONnthe polarised debate, a plague on both your houses, Rhetoric and sophistry is Karaoke politics and I have had enough of that.
Lucian from the Rhetoriticians Vade Vecum.p. 225
“Bring then above all ignorance, to which add confidence, audacity, and effrontery; as for diffidence, equity, moderation, and shame, you will please leave them at home; they are not merely needless, they are encumbrances. The loudest voice you can come by, please, a ready falsetto, and a gait modeled on my own. That exhausts the real necessaries; very often there would be no occasion for anything further. But I recommend bright colors or white for your clothes; the Tarentine stuff that lets the body show through is best; for shoes, wear either the Attic woman’s shape with the open network, or else the Sicyonians that show white lining. Always have a train of attendants, and a book in your hand.”