Shrek meets the Owl of Minerva

A very mixed opinion piece in the Graudian today by G. Younge. In the style of typical 'yoof' Gurdian journalism, it starts with a summary of the plot of Shrek Forever After in which Shrek is tricked by Rumpelstiltskin (keep up) in his wish to return to an adolescent stage free from responsibility.

The wisdom and insight of this plot, combined later with citing Heraclitus on not putting your foot in the same river twice, is used to warn the usual critics of Trump and Brexit that they cannot simply go back to a former state when all was happy before the vote for either. Before going any further, I think this sort of comfort-blanket conservatism is indeed a motive for rejecting Brexit, as I have argued before. In Younge's terms: 'The dominant mood among liberals is that we need to go backwards to better times.'

Younge argues that the underlying problems that caused Trump'n'Brexit would still be there. This is the old Gruniad line that austerity causes xenophobia, the real reason for both T'n'B. Younge is analytic enough to realize that this implies that these specific votes must be explained away (but never when 'normal' politics is the result, of course). He cites the usual liberal explanations

these irresponsible decisions were enabled by Russians, ill-informed, misinformed, impulsive, reckless, racist, immediately regretted or ultimately disastrous – and sometimes all of the above – and should not be sacrificed at the altar of anything so quaint as the popular will. The voters should be rescued from themselves.

In true Gdurina liberal style, he argues that impeaching Trump and re-running the referendum could indeed be justified, but adds it is necessary to make:

a crucial distinction between challenging a decision that is procedurally flawed or unlawfully enabled, and nullifying a decision because you think it’s a mistake. First of all, these moments weren’t imposed upon us. They emerged from a democratic process. There were debates and discussion. We could all vote. Some of us lost. There is a cavalier if not cynical attitude among some towards the popular will, as though we should only support democracy when democracy supports us...That is dangerous because it legitimises the notion that voting has a purely decorative function in a system where elites are really in control – which is partly how we got here. But it is also a blueprint for authoritarians who might do us harm.

Fine points which will surely escape most liberal activists, especially those of the social justice warrior tendency. But there is another argument which might have more traction:

The rancour and divisiveness of the intervening years would be added. It’s naive to think the victory would be anything but narrow, or that leavers would give up the fight any more than remainers have, which means the issue would stay live...In both scenarios – impeachment or a second referendum – the suspicion of elites would become even greater, and the political alienation and economic marginalisation that contributed to it would still exist.

Useful material, but right at the end, a hint of another agenda emerges. The same arguments will apply to any attempt to unseat Corbyn:

Apparently unable to grasp that the financial crash and the austerity that followed unleashed a fundamental realignment of our politics, his opponents sought not engagement with the present but comfort from the past and then proceeded to blame the electorate (Labour party members) for its poor choices.

After Shrek and Heraclitus, Younge ends up in bed with Will Hutton: 'These initiatives can only work if they are part of a broader vision for a more hopeful future, rather than a narrowly tailored litigation of a past mistake'. There are no signs of this broader vision emerging, of course, in any politically significant way. To quote some popular culture of my own, it reminds me of the scene in Poldark where Ross and the (armed) petit-bourgeoisie defuse a threatened bread riot by promising a better future -- Ross will stand for Parliament he promises, and, at that, the disaffected peasants mutter among themselves, lay down their pitchforks and wander away clutching their forelocks.