First Thought: I remark with some astonishment that this is the first time since Ronald Reagan’s 1980 victory that an electoral majority has roundly repudiated the liberal establishment. Astonishment is not a thought; it’s an emotional reaction. My generally grim view of democracy predisposes me to assume the worst of voting majorities. When a majority votes rationally, the obvious must be – to them, at last – hyper-obvious. Thus my astonishment. The two hyper-obvious stimuli of Brexit’s passage are (1) loss of sovereignty, the obverse of which is the rise of a remote bureaucratic dictatorship; and (2) Muslim immigration. (Whenever “immigration” is mentioned in current British political discourse, it means, of course, Muslim immigration.)
Second Thought: Journalistic canvassing since the murder of Jo Cox showed Brexit heading for defeat, but the referendum’s passage by British voters came in at 52% in favor and 48% opposed. Is a suspicion a thought? I suspect that newspapers and broadcasting organizations now routinely lie about trending issues in order to influence outcomes – and that they are untrustworthy. In Austria, the Freheits Partei has decided legally to contest the recent election for the good reason that Austrian federal election officials seem to have colluded with the “Greens” to reverse a plausible actual result – much in the way that Gore’s people in Florida tried to reverse plausible, actual ballot-result in their state in the year-2000 presidential election. The hermeneutics of suspicion whispers to me that the British establishment was scheming in a parallel way to wrest victory from the other side of the argument on the condition that the actual count was very close. As Baron Bodissey has suggested at The Gates of Vienna, the actual count in the United Kingdom was unfavorable to that kind of gerrymandering.
Second Thought Continued: What are we to make of the murder of Jo Cox? I have often characterized liberalism as sacrificial. The inevitable thought is hard to shoo away.
Third Thought: Is a gut-feeling a thought? My gut-feeling is that Britain’s decision to “go out” will provoke a cascade or domino-effect. The Netherlands, Italy, and perhaps even France will want to “go out.” I try never to let optimism overtake me – but if that cascade happened, it would certainly signal a shift in Western opinion that would eventually, or even swiftly, have American consequences.
Fourth Thought: Again – cautioning my optimism to “sit!” and “stay!” – the thought occurs to me that Trump is already that consequence and that synchronicity is at work in the summer of 2016. As I might have mentioned in a comment, I have recently been applying myself to a re-reading of De Maistre’s Petersburg Dialogues. These thoughts and intuitions commune with that study.
Fifth Thought: In Scotland and Northern Ireland, the majority voted to “Remain.” Perhaps the Scots should hold another independence-referendum and perhaps this time they should muster a majority to vote for it. Ditto in Northern Ireland. Iceland is a perfectly decent nation. It has a population of 330,000. Small is beautiful. Belgium delenda est!
Sixth Thought: The UK is, itself, still an obnoxious politically correct totalitarian polity dedicated to humiliating the Anglo-Saxon and British people. In that sense, nothing has changed. On the other hand, because the UK establishment is totally identified with the EU establishment, any repudiation of the latter constitutes by implication a repudiation of the former. The “going out” sentiment might be the beginning of a domestic rearrangement.