Beware the false dichotomy

The stench of mire in our political chaos is growing. The omnishambles that is Brexit, is beginning to make one of the oldest modern democracies in the world look very silly indeed.

We've known for some time that there is something rotten in the Kingdom of Fleet Street and in 2017 we sank to fortieth in the World Press Freedom Index. Fortieth. There's been a great deal of talk in the last 12 months about pride in our country, and yet we are obediently living in a nation where by freedom of the press measurement, we are barely in the top 25% of the world. https://rsf.org/en/ranking What surprise then that our dodgey and agenda-driven press has led us into a cul-de-sac?

How did this happen? False dichotomies. We love them. Our whole political and media-system is predicated on them. First Past The Post sets the scene and all else follows. Don't like Theresa May? You'd better vote Labour then. Offended by Mr Corbyn's dress sense? Better throw your weight behind the Tories. Other parties may be available, but when the chips are down, as this year's General Election showed, we can't trust our electoral system to cope with nuance, or voting for what one truly believes. We were forced into a false dichotomy of blue or red.

Our elected representatives are equally stymied. If there's a debate in Westminster it's no good going against your party whip. If you want to call yourself an MP of one party or another, you eventually have to leave your brain and conscience at the door and line up in obedience to the party line. “You're either for us or against us”, the ultimate false dichotomy, perfectly sums up the approach of the big parties. How dispiriting for all critical thinkers everywhere.

What of the foul trickery of the coalition with the DUP? Apparently we can't countenance a hung parliament, a minority government. Heaven forfend a situation where Mrs May could only propose laws of which progressive politicans might approve. Much better to ensure she can be wholly and unstoppably regressive in her policy-making – even if it involves bribery, mocking austerity and all who have suffered by it, and jeopardising peace in Northern Ireland. Again the false dichotomy – if she doesn't have a majority, we are told, the Government will be paralysed. Why? There is a third option – cooperate with others of differing viewpoints.

And the broadcast-media is just as bad. Most political and news programmes that claim to facilitate discussion do no such thing. In a dumbed-down, entertainment-skewed travesty of debate, the lazy set-up is to get two people of opposing views and set them to flagellate each other, in a modern-day gladiatorial spectacle. No attempt is made to reach concensus or listen to the other person, still less respect their concerns and acknowledge the common ground. To present two views and imply that only one can be correct is a false dichotomy. The truth is that there are almost never right and wrong answers to complex questions. In an ideal world, our politicians would each bring their own insights, experiences and leanings to the issue at hand, and together wrangle the best-possible answer that can tick most boxes.

Today David Davis has admitted something that Remainers have been saying for over a year: the task of delivering Brexit makes “the Nasa moon shot look quite simple”. Finally, the man says something honest and that we can all agree with. So why, oh why, did this most complicated of issues get presented to an uninformed electorate to decide? Why, oh why, was it presented as a false dichotomy of in or out, yes or no? According to one's view on this tangled question, why, oh why, are we all now labelled as patriots or traitors?

And most insidiously of all, why does this government seek now to label our residents as native or immigrant, requiring registration and ID for some and not for all? This latest false dichotomy resembles other initiatives of history that no civilised country should ever again countenance. That way, evil lies.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Brexit Apathy

“The death of democracy...will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.” These words of Robert M Hutchins seem rather pertinent to our current situation. Every day I ask myself again whether it's time to “let it go” and accept Brexit. And every time I ask that question, two big issues rise up to block the way. The first is the unbelievably cavalier way in which the individuals most affected by this are being treated – the EU nationals who live in the UK and the UK nationals who live in other EU countries. We have, as the saying goes, thrown them under a bus. And when you consider the stir caused this week by CCTV footage of a London jogger doing exactly that to a woman on the pavement, it brings home what a shocking analogy it is. As long as the politicians insist on playing games of chess with real peoples' lives, there will be millions of us who dig in our heels and say “unacceptable”. The second big stumbling block to accepting the out
Read more

Brexit - Secret Option Number Three

There's talk of riots if Brexit doesn't go ahead. It's hard to know whether this is a serious possibility – a proposed protest at the Supreme Court in December was hastily cancelled at the last minute when barely a few dozen showed any interest. But let's just for a moment assume it is a real and credible possibility. The prevailing narrative over-simplifies the choice – implement the result of the referendum or don't. Implement it and cause certain impoverishment to our nation. Ignore it, and risk riots and undermining the cause of democracy. But why is our vision so narrow? What if there is a secret option number three? There are five Ws that help us get to the bottom of a story – What? When? Who? Where? And Why? The first four are essentially fact-based and are in themselves often rather dull. They are answered easily enough with regard to the referendum result. The interesting question is the last one – “why”. And over a year later, we are still no clearer
Read more

Windrush - twig or branch?

I can't stop thinking about the so-called Windrush scandal. I say so-called, because I think there's a danger that we have got hold of the wrong end of the stick if this is 'only' about the Windrush generation. Or rather, we have grabbed firmly on to the twig, but if we run with that, it will snap away, leaving the main branch, the bigger point, unmoved. Don't get me wrong - the Windrush scandal is certainly shocking. The way individuals have been treated correlates with my definition of criminal. But these individual cases are but twigs from a thicker branch of systemic hostility to "the other". If we allow ourselves to be focused on individual cases, we allow Theresa May and the Government and, in fact, ourselves, off the hook. If the concern is that person A is deported in error, an apology can be made, decisions reversed and even, potentially, compensation made. And there the story dies, with no hint of "lessons having been lear
Read more