Brexit: leave or remain?

Darlin' you got to let me know
Should I stay or should I go?
— The Clash

In the UK, a furious debate has broken out over the upcoming EU Leave/Remain referendum on June 23rd.  Both sides are functioning as quasi fortune tellers. predicting what would be better for Britain.

Leave or remain in the EU?

Which outcome is a better bet for the UK national interest?

Will we be strengthening or weakening our nation by staying or leaving?

Whichever way we vote, we risk gambling with our nation’s future. We listen to the opinions of the experts, and our own hearts and heads, in the hope of voting for a better Britain. The problem is, the politicians and so called experts, on both sides, are no better at accurately foretelling the future than we are.

Did the politicians predict the financial meltdowns of 2008, and the collapse of the Spanish, Greek, Irish and Portuguese economies? How about those multibillion euro bailouts? The riots on the streets of Athens, the reemergence of fascist groups like Golden Dawn in Greece and now in Austria? How about the rise of ISIS? Did they call that, the biggest existential threat to Western democracy since the Cold War? When Coalition forces bombed the hell out of Libya, Iraq and Syria, did the politicians predict that they'd make these countries uninhabitable for the wretched civilians trapped in the war zones, and subsequently cause the biggest mass migration event in history? 5.8 million refugees, on the march, as a direct result of our politicians’ foreign policy misadventures?

The cold reality is some events refuse to be predicted or indeed controlled, despite best intentions. Similarly, no politician can give us an empirical guarantee what the future will look like for the UK if it stays or leaves the EU, and what it will mean to us in 5, 10, 20 years. If that’s the case, how can we make an informed decision about whether we should leave or remain, and what’s best for Britain?

While we cannot foretell the future, we can deduce the motives of the EU decision-makers, and find out where THEY want to take the EU project. To this end, I visited the European Commission's website to hear, from the horse's mouth, what THEIR plan is for Europe. How does the European Commission view itself and its mission? What are the EC's defining principles? What does it BELIEVE in? What does it think Europe should become under its leadership?

So here it is, direct quotes from the banner page of the European Commission website:

"All EU Member States are part of Economic and Monetary Union, which means they coordinate their economic policies for the benefit of the EU as a whole...."

Is that in the UK's national interest?

"The process of building Europe is one of progressive integration. The single market for goods, services, capital and labour, launched in 1986, was a major step in this direction."

In 1975, our last referendum on the EU, we voted to join the single market. But as Brussels puts it, that was only "a major step". What's the next step? Because the club we voted to join in 1975, is not the same club anymore. It's evolved, and is set to change even further, guided by the controlling ethos of these European Commissioners.

"Economic and Monetary Union and the euro take economic integration even further..."

Ah, so the European Commission's goal is to achieve further economic integration, beyond the initial single market. Is that in the UK's national interest? The Commissioners seem to think so.

"Adopting the single currency is a crucial step in a Member State's economy. Its exchange rate is irrevocably fixed and monetary policy is transferred to the hands of the European Central Bank, which conducts it independently for the entire euro area....In addition to meeting the economic convergence criteria, a euro-area candidate country MUST MAKE CHANGES TO NATIONAL LAWS AND RULES...."

So there we have it. The two governing rules for remaining in EU Club: Hand over your money and change your laws.

Is that in the UK's national interest?

Thankfully, we decided it was not in the national interest to hand over the controls of our currency, and adopt the Euro, but just because we retained Sterling, that doesn't mean the European Commission is going to give us a pass when it comes to further economic or legal convergence. All these battles between the UK and the EC are about financial and legal sovereignty.

First rule of EU club - give us your money.

Second rule of EU club. GIVE. US. YOUR MONEY.

And as Mayer Rothschild, founder of the House of Rothschild, put it: "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws."

This is why, in the final analysis, I will be voting to leave EU Club. Not because of racist immigration scare stories, or the Little Englander battle cries of meta-twats like Nigel Farage. I will vote to leave because the European’s Commission's intentions are deeply anti-democratic. These men and women are driven by the ideological need to create a federal, United States of Europe. But why is that a good idea for them, let alone us?

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that our European neighbours have a vastly different view of the Eurozone, and the importantance of defending national sovereignty. European nations who have suffered under totalitarianism — fascism or communism — are happier to devolve power and put their trust in Brussels, in the belief that their freedoms and economic welfare will be better served by a faceless committee of Eurocrats, rather than their own democratically-elected governments.

Of the 28 EU member states, 24 have suffered the loss of democracy and experienced persecution under totalitarian regimes, either during or after World War Two - Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain.

Of the 28, only Sweden, the UK, Republic of Cyprus and Ireland have escaped totalitarianism, though Cyprus and Ireland have been deeply scarred by civil war, and are arguably more disposed to devolving power to Brussels.

The EU was designed to protect its members from the persecutions of totalitarism. Like so many international disasters in the making, it was founded on best intentions but it has metastasised and — judging by the goals of its manifesto and Commissioners — it will continue to evolve in a way that is adverse to the UK.

Sorry, EU Club, it's time to leave. The Clash nailed it:

If I go there will be trouble
And if I stay it will be double

Dominic Morgan is a screenwriter based in the UK and Los Angeles. He has various TV and film projects in development. Most recently he co-wrote a small arthouse film called Hard Target 2, the sequel to John Woo’s 1990s seminal action flick, starring Belgium’s premiere method actor, Monsieur Jean Claude Van Damme. 

A new poll finds 55% of Britons plan to vote for Brexit. Support for exit from the EU has been increasing as the June 23 vote approaches — Editor.