Mr. Davies makes more interesting and creative use of some of the available statistical data than did Jürgen Habermas in an interview reprinted at The Social Europe web site.
Habermas presents his statistical data as some how a form of argument, without an attempt to place it within a political/historical context.Perhaps the reader was supposed to intuit the existence of that context?
While Mr. Davies demonstrates a more informed and intelligent analysis of the Brexit vote, he still manages to sound the notes of Liberal paternalism, opining on the lower orders. With the really inexcusable mention of psychoanalysis, as somehow representative of a viable tool, in the search for the meaning as to the motives, the psyche of the Brexit voter. The scholarship is clear from Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend to Freud’s Paranoid Quest,Psychoanalysis and Modern Suspicion: that Freud was huckster, a gifted practitioner of self-aggrandizement. And then a discussion of ‘fact’.
What did eminent historian J.G.A. Pocock have to say about the Brexit?
Profoundly anti-democratic and anti-constitutional, the EU obliges you to leave by the only act it recognises: the referendum, which can be ignored as a snap decision you didn’t really mean. If you are to go ahead, it must be by your own constitutional machinery: crown, parliament and people; election, debate and statute. This will take time and deliberation, which is the way decisions of any magnitude should be taken.
The Scots will come along, or not, deciding to live in their own history, which is not what the global market wants us to do. Avoid further referendums and act for yourselves as you know how to act and be.
What effect did the Greek Crisis have on the Brexit voter. 4 time defaulter Germany led by Merkel treated the Greeks with utter contempt, as if they were really the leader of The Virtuous Norther Tier, yet this object lesson does not merit inclusion in Mr Davies commentary. Just a confirmation of our writer’s own case of political myopia?