Why delivering Brexit has nothing to do with democracy

There are many people shouting about the current state of our democracy in Britain. A common theme is that in the referendum, the people decided on Brexit, and therefore either failing to deliver Brexit or seeking a second referendum would be a betrayal of that democratic process. But there are a number of problems with that notion. Primarily, it fails to understand the reality of our democracy as it exists today.

Democracy is a great source of stability and justice in our world. The benefits of any democratic system are considerable; amongst other things, the poor have a voice, dictatorships are far less likely to occur, and a broad breadth of issues are brought to the attention of those in power. Yet no democracy is perfect; there is no country in the world where all the people’s voices are heard all of the time and on all matters. No system is perfect in converting all votes into exactly proportionate public representation. And even if a democratic system was perfect it would still face the problem that democracy often involves people voting on the basis of their opinions about complex situations they don’t fully understand. Our democracy is not built on the basis of referendums on specific subjects, it is based on the principle of representation. We vote for a representative and the representative makes the decision based on their expertise. This is how we reduce that problem of opinions about things we don’t understand. Referendums are a useful an addon to that system, but one that comes with a significant risk, the risk that we are not sufficiently informed, to make a decision on the matter in hand. As Winston Churchill is reputed to have said; “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

All that aside however, here’s the bigger point that we always seem to miss. Our democracy, like all democracies, works on the basis of having a defined group of people of whom we can ask the question; ‘What do you collectively want?’ It starts with an already defined set of borders and social groupings. These are groupings that we did not choose. For the most part, the national borders of this world have been decided by war, by dictators, by empires, by long forgotten quirks of geography, by the availability of resources and the half-forgotten arguments of history. For better or for worse, they have been decided by committees, leaders and experts behind closed doors. Even our current local boundaries such as wards, unitary authorities and parliamentary constituencies are decided without our vote. And even if this weren’t the case, it would still be true that none of us get to decide what nation we are born into. 

Our relationship with the EU is about matters that go beyond the simplistic boundaries of nation. It encompasses complex and subtle matters of international law and commerce in the here and now, but also begs questions about our collective relationship to the future and the past. These are questions that even the most highly trained academics struggle to answer. The 2016 referendum took those matters and co-opted public emotions about what constitutes nationality into the impossibly simplistic arena of a yes or no question. A question based on arbitrary national boundaries that no longer define the nature of who we are in the way they might have done fifty years ago. And even if that were not the case, while our external UK borders have not changed in the last three years, over 5% of the UK population are different people to the ones who constituted our population in 2016 as a result of births, deaths and migration. In addition, our representatives in government have changed by a massive 18% since the referendum. In so many ways we are not who we were. The EU has given the younger generations of this country a far softer sense of boundary than we had in 1973 when we joined the EEC. In reality the referendum was partly asking us as a nation to define who we were, and we were not equipped to answer that question, because, for better or worse, that is not and never has been how nations are constituted. Neither the definition of our nation nor our relationship to other nations can be defined, much less redefined by a single binary vote. There are currently at least 67 million different versions of what it means to be British.

One of the primary reasons that Brexit has been a mess from the start, why the original referendum is now practically meaningless, is that it goes beyond the remit of what our current democracy was designed to do, but in order to move forward without significant constitutional reform, a second referendum is probably the only reasonable option. At the very least, if the referendum was ever democratically valid in 2016, it could only be more valid, not less, to ask a better educated set of questions based on what we have learned and how we have changed over the last three years.

GE2017 - Some initial thoughts on how to approach the election

First up...

Should ministers of religion get involved in politics?

Some people think that ministers shouldn't be political. I think that's entirely wrong - Jesus responded to the politics of his age and we are called to follow him. I think what we shouldn't do is be partisan; what we shouldn't do is be party to the personal attacks and character assassinations; what we shouldn't do is shackle ourselves to one party for life, regardless of the flaws of our chosen party.

However, I think we should get involved with the conversation, talk about the issues and the policies, the morality and the ethics. We should challenge and debate and dig under the surface of the popular reactions. We should perhaps offer some wisdom that goes beyond national boundaries and things that look good to me and mine in the here and now, towards those things that are for the good of humanity, the good of all creation in the long run. We should challenge people to look under the surface of the sound bites and the quick slogans to the complex interconnectedness of people, ideas and resources around the globe. When a party's policies or tactics offend us we should say so - and when a party offers a better choice we should feel free to say so too, even though that party will no doubt have other points with which we disagree. That's me, but what about you? ...

Advice for Voters

There's likely to be a lot of toing and froing about who the contenders are for this election and what Theresa May's motives were for calling it now. For now I want to concentrate on the notion that we put too much blame on the quality of our politicians - and not enough on the quality of our own voting or our engagement in the process before the day. The electorate are both the strength and the weakness of democratic systems. I'm not going to say who I think you should vote for at this point. Partly because political landscape of the election is, as of yet, far from fully established, but more importantly because it needs to be your choice. That is the intended nature of democracy. What I would like to do is suggest some ways in which I would like to see people approaching this election.

1. Don't just leap to the defence of the people you like - or attack those you don't. Hear what they are really saying and respond to real policies.

2. Don't just vote on the basis of how it affects you, remember that if a policy hurts someone else, even if you don't have an innate moral sense of responsibility to all, ultimately one day that someone else might be you - and even if it's never you, the world that you live in will be populated by people you decided were less important than you when you voted. And they may not thank you for that.

3. Question everything, get the other side of each report and hear the voices of those whom the policies effect. Question the 'facts' as well as the motives - and get independent confirmation of each story.

4. Understand that economies are never static. It's right when somebody says 'we will invest in...' to ask where the money will come from - but whenever somebody says 'we will save money by...' - ask yourself what the flipside is. What is the long term effect of not investing in this or that; what is the cost of not spending? (Think education, health, small businesses, infrastructure etc.)

5. Avoid the politics of character assassinations, but do look for leaders who have personal qualities that go beyond the policies. Ultimately policies will need to be adjusted to fit the reality of the situation. Those with a strength of character, with compassion and an understanding of the real needs of real people will adjust those policies in a direction that serves all the people - not just the ones that hold the power.

6. Understand that while we might hope for a level playing field for the opportunities of all people - and whilst for many in Britain, prospects are more equal than they might be in other parts of the world, no such level playing field exists yet. Don't judge the decisions of people whose lives you have not lived and whose experiences you haven't experienced. And be deeply suspicious of any politician or policy that does try to make such judgements. Any policy that considers someone as other, not our problem, or unworthy because of poor life choices is stepping beyond the bounds of what good politics are meant to be. Government should be for the benefit of all, not just those that the current government deems worthy. I think this understanding should be true for all people, it certainly ought to be true for any of us who would claim to be Christian.

An alternative take on the Christmas story



Bethlehem by night 2009 by Sengaska

Matt 2:1-16 (In a parallel universe where time and space got a bit mixed up)

Narrator: After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, some Islamic Imams arrived in Jerusalem.  They had travelled from Iraq, through war torn Syria and Palestine. They asked some of the locals;  

Imams: “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”

to which the locals replied,

Locals: "I'm sorry, are you crazy people? Perhaps I misheard you because of your strange foreign accent, but it sounded like you said you followed a star, and something about some sort of baby-king. Anyway, don't you know we had a census and it showed that we have no more room for any more immigration from the east."

The locals walked away and tweeted the story - followed by an LOL.

Soon after this, King Herod, the actual proper king, not this new fangled baby-star-king, heard about this conversation, because of course he'd been tracking people's emails and social media for information about terrorism, and the tweets about the visitors from Iraq had flagged up as a terrorist plot to overthrow the Herodian leadership. So King Herod shouted to all who would listen;

Herod: "Hey, nobody loves babies more than I do, but look, I can make Israel great again. I'm not a monarch, I'm a king of the people. But this kid can't be king - he just can’t close the deal, he doesn’t care about jobs. He probably wants to get rid of all our guns, he can’t even handle his e-mails. And look, he's being funded by terrorists who are coming illegally into our country.  I will build a wall to keep these people out - and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me. And I build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our eastern border, and I will make Palestine pay for that wall. Mark my words."

- and with almost no concrete information, he conveniently leaked this version of the story to the press and as a result the good people of Jerusalem shared his shock and dismay. When he had called together all the people's chief priests and teachers of the law, King Herod  said,

Herod: "I don't like these kind of people coming here, and I don't like it when baby kings are mean to me and try to stop me being king. Do we know where the Messiah was supposed to be born?"

they replied,

Priests: “In Bethlehem in Judea, for this is what the prophet has written:

“‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
    are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler
    who will shepherd my people Israel.'”

Then Herod called the Imams secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. He sent them to Bethlehem and said,

Herod: “Go look for the kid. Soon as you find him, give me a call so I can... show my respect.”

After the Imams had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw the star, they were overjoyed.

On coming to the house, the Imams saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.

The Imams asked where the father was and Mary replied,

Mary: "Oh, Joseph, he'll be in the inn, probably arguing about religion and politics."

So on their way out of town, they went to congratulate him. But he said to them,

Joseph: "Thanks, but I have little to celebrate, this child will bring about political turmoil in a time already too full with tension. I can already see the locals looking at you with suspicion, because you're not from round here - even though many of them haven't lived here for ages.

We used to celebrate the foreigner in our land and treat them as our own, but since the Romans took over, we've got more and more nervous about people who are different. Rome has helped many people, but hurt many more.

Our country is calling for independence from Rome, but not because  they want to lift the oppression from the people that Rome has hurt, but because they think they can be stronger without them – seems like nonsense to me.

I can see a time of trouble coming, war and destruction. God will bring about eternal peace though my son Jesus - but I doubt I'll see any of it in my lifetime."

Imams: "But you are a good strong man of God, you will find a way through this."

Joseph: "I will do what I can, but most of it is out of my hands. Mary was the one whom God trusted with bringing the Messiah into the world and it's that child back at the flat who will turn the world upside down. Can you imagine that? A world transformed by a woman and a little child; a woman and a child - and we strong men, for all we have learned, are powerless."

Having an ounce of common sense the Imams decided not to go back to Herod, as clearly he was a little strange, so they returned to their country by another route.

When the Imams had gone, a man in the pub, one of the local sheep farmers, spoke to Joseph and said;

Shepherd: "You need to get out of here, Herod's just been quoted on the news, apparently he held a rally tonight and said that he's kicking all the Muslims and illegal immigrants out of the country,  and he's planning to detain anyone associated with the terrorist threat in Bethlehem - including small children."

So, Joseph took the child and his mother and escaped to Egypt. Where they stayed in a refugee camp alongside many fleeing the war in Syria. They stayed there until Herod died.

Remembrance 2016 - A warning about what it really means to say 'never again'

Remembrance 2016; A warning about what it really means to say 'never again'.

Based on my Remembrance Sunday sermon for that year.

I often hear the words, 'they don't write hymns like they used to.' Or 'they don't write pop song like they used to'. A friend of mine was talking about how the songs from the 60's were so much better, and the young people today listen to such terrible lyrics. I had to remind him that he grew up listening to 'She wore an itsy bitsy, teeny weeny, yellow polka dot bikini.'

The truth is, we often edit the past to suit the story we want to tell. We sing the hymn 'O God our help in ages past' as a song of nostalgia, of comfort in times of change, and of God's offer of help in times of trouble. We forget that Isaac Watts, a dissenter, wrote that hymn in a time of political turmoil, when the 'stormy blast' came at least in part from the religious oppression of Queen Anne and her government. We take little notice of the verse that says;

   The busy tribes of flesh and blood,

   With all their lives and cares,

   Are carried downwards by the flood,

   And lost in following years.

And we even edit out the verse that says;

   Thy Word commands our flesh to dust,

   Return, ye sons of men:

   All nations rose from earth at first,

   And turn to earth again.

For Watts, the trust placed by people in political structures, and national powers, was false, fleeting, and ungodly. His comfort was in knowing that the present oppression was, in the eternal scale of things, just a fleeting moment.

These were the three readings for our Remembrance Sunday service this year;

Malachi 4. 1-2a, 2 Thessalonians 3.6-13, and Luke 21. 5-19

Three readings, with three warnings;

·       Malachi offers a warning for the arrogant and evil people.

·       Thessalonians gives a warning against idleness.

·       Luke's account of the words of Jesus give a warning against those who put their trust in human built structures, fancy buildings, and powerful organisations.

But in each there is hope;

·       hope for the one who revere's the name of God;

·       Hope for those who work for what is right;

·       And even eternal hope for those who

trust in God. Even though we face persecution, there is eternal hope for us, and for all, if we speak up for what is right.

We come together today to remember those who gave their lives for us in battle, for those who live with the trauma of surviving while their brothers, and sisters in arms were lost. To remember those families who made, and continue to make the sacrifice of waving farewell to loved ones who are sent around the world to fight, to defend, to break down, and to rebuild; to rebuild communities free from oppression. We remember, those families who honour the solidarity of a globally connected human race; who allow their loved ones to fight, and possibly to never come home, because they know that when one part of the human race suffers injustice and oppression, we are all damaged by it.

We remember, as we always do at this time, those who fought for good and worked for what is right. But perhaps this year, more than ever, we need to heed those warnings not to become arrogant or complaisant; not to become idle in our comfort, and not to allow ourselves to be convinced by the false stability of human power and strength over the evils of this world, or our natural human mortality.

It is a year when the debate has turned to refugees fleeing wars, to peaceful borders becoming ever so slightly less friendly, of the rich threatening to build walls to keep out the poor, of arrogant leaders declaring their greatness, and the still small voice of God's justice being lost in the cacophony of people who would claim they have earned their position; that the world owes them something, that their needs are greater than those people of other nations, and that their rights do not need to be considered in a wider context, or without responsibility to the wider human family.

We come together today to remember those who fought for what is right, but we cannot do that if we forget the right they fought for. We come to remember the people, not just of our nation, but those of the many nationalities who fought with us in the World wars. We remember not just the Christians, but also the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and all the people of other religions who fought with us in the wars. We also remember those people, who were just as imperfect as we are today, and got caught up in the evil of oppressive regimes; who fought against us, who found themselves convinced by unscrupulous politicians that the cause they were fighting was the right one. We need to remember that it could have been us, it could still be us if, in our idleness and arrogance, in our confidence in human structures, and our blindness to evil, we forget the freedom, and justice that was the very reason for the call to sacrifice.

We remember the freedom they fought for, the peace they fought for, the justice and the love for all of God's created people, and we need to continue to fight for that today, in our day to day lives, in elections - in charitable giving and in campaigns for justice. In how we spend our money in the shops and supermarkets, that can hold national economies to ransom in order for us to have a cheaper tin of baked beans or cup of good old British tea.

We say never again, Never Again! But those words ring hollow if they mean we would become the thing we once fought against in order to avoid an argument. They ring hollow if they mean never again will we rise from our slumber to help a world in need. They ring hollow if they mean never again will we raise our voices in protest as long as the injustice is harming them over there, and we remain safe within our borders. Never again needs to mean, never again will we let injustice and oppression go so far unchecked that millions have to die to stop the machinery that we should have seen being built. Never again will we let it get that far.

We come to remember those who fell, the peace that they fought for, and to remember that the work is not yet done.

`

Beware that you are not led astray, Brothers and sisters, do not be weary in doing what is right. But persevere , Because by your endurance you will save others and in saving them we will also be saving ourselves.

Facebook, Politics and Rising Nationalism

If my Facebook friends were the world - and liking official Facebook pages of politicians constituted real votes, then this is what the world would look like;

4.5% Like Jeremy Corbyn (Labour)
1.3% Like Boris Johnson (Conservative)
1.0% Like Natalie Bennett (Green)
1.0% Like David Cameron (Conservative)
0.8% Like Hilary Clinton (Democrat)
0.6% Like Bernie Sanders (Democrat)
0.3% Like Donald Trump (Republican)
0.2% Like Nigel Farage (UKIP)
0.2% Follow Tim Farron (Liberal Democrats)
0.1% Like Nicola Sturgeon (SNP)
0.1% Like Angela Merkel (Christian Democratic Union)

There's some odd stuff there and they're rather low percentages over all, but I'm kind of OK with the world as constituted by my friends - thank you friends.
However, taking the same list of politicians with the same rules and looking at the whole of Facebook we get this result;

7,871,190 Like Donald Trump (Republican)
4,012,803 Like Bernie Sanders (Democrat)
3,568,682 Like Hilary Clinton (Democrat)
2,030,104 Like Angela Merkel (Christian Democratic Union)
1,093,513 Like David Cameron (Conservative)
  620,285 Like Jeremy Corbyn (Labour)
  485,027 Like Boris Johnson (Conservative)
  351,007 Like Nigel Farage (UKIP)
  213,646 Like Nicola Sturgeon (SNP)
   53,493 Like Natalie Bennett (Green)
    6,841 Follow Tim Farron (Liberal Democrats)

(N.B the choice of politicians were selected by myself - there were others I looked at, but they didn't have official pages)

 

There are some encouraging and some disturbing things about both lists, but the 7,871,190 who have been fooled into supporting selfishness, bigotry and aggression towards our fellow human beings need to hear from the rest of us that this is not OK. It's not OK to build the politics of the future on who you hate, who you fear or who you consider to be different. It's not OK to build the politics of this age on walls, guns, being stronger than the other guy and blaming the poor for their poverty.

 

It is impossible as a Christian to support this kind of politics (if you think you are and you do then it's time go and learn some things about the Jesus you claim to follow). It should be harder than this for any intelligent human being of any faith or none to think this is the direction the world should be going.

 

We need to start speaking up for politics that are about caring for each other regardless of race, gender, culture or religion. We need to break down the walls not build them up; we need to be more together not more separated. National boundaries are a false division and the nationalism that is growing in global politics can only end badly if this tide does not turn.

 

The politics of the right in Britain are not so disturbing as Trump and America, but we are not without our problems; not without those who are willing to vote in similar ways for similar reasons, not without those whose fears about staying in Europe are rooted in that same false sense of separateness, not without people who will constantly vote for politicians who claim to do good for 'us' at the expense of 'them' and end up being bad for all but the very rich, because 'them' and 'us' are all part of the same system.

 

Jesus said "Come to me, all you who are weary and carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

 

Leviticus 19:34 says "The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt."

 

Jesus also said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

 

Paul said "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

 

And even if none of that had been said, choosing nationalistic politics that place the growth of national economies over the wellbeing of the poor and set the wellbeing of one nation against another, would still be a bad idea in a world with limited resources and a shared biological makeup. My wellbeing depends on your wellbeing; that is the nature of sharing the same eco system, the same creation, the same world that has no interest in national borders. Surely, at the very least, the international world of social media should know better.