Poor Journalism again!

As a subscriber to the New Statesman I have digital access to articles both those printed and those published on the Web site. Last week I came across an article on the Web site by Paul Mason entitled “The Ukraine war has invalidated Brexit”. So I thought I had better take a closer look since “invalidated” usually means not legally acceptable. On closer investigation this, at best, just more Journalistic hyperbole. So I haven't missed a decision of the Supreme Court nor even a unilateral decision of the ECJ. However warming to his hyperbole Mason asserts (i.e. without a shred of evidence) that Brexit in it’s original form is dead and refers especially to “defence, energy and even trade”. Of course the phraseology “in it’s original form” is meant to be pejorative and therefore not related to any prior rigorous analysis, objectivity nor subsequent rational conclusion. I would just ask for the evidence – there is none! - because the events to which Mason refers are only 3 weeks old! To bolster his argument he then goes on to state that the “alliance” between Russia and China (of militarised dictatorships) means that the UK is isolated and therefore geographic proximity matters a great deal now. The UK is supposedly unable to survive without the (s)mothering hands of the EU. In support of this argument he suggests that discussions between the USA and Venezuela (about energy supplies) are an example of what is required (last time I looked the distance between Caracas and Washington was 2059 miles by air!). Not a lot of proximity there! Moreover $60 a barrel is the point at which it becomes profitable to start pumping American shale oil! (currently Brent Crude is $114 {21^st March} per barrel). So the UK must “re-engage” with the EU. Please provide evidence that the UK has dis-engaged and that the EU has not – shall we look at satellites, science and security. Again partiality and lack of objectivity! He (Mason) states that the UK has walked away from 70 years of leadership in Europe. Au contraire the UK has not wanted to lead the EU for many and varied reasons – e.g. Maastricht and Lisbon Treaties (ever closer union) despite promises were never consented to by the electorate; history – two world wars originated on the continent of Europe; Charles Michel (President of the Council of the EU) has openly sought to create an empire out of the EU (with support from Macron). If there was ever a dangerous thought that is it! Throughout the piece there is the conflation of the EU and Europe

which is both geographically and politically incorrect. Additionally it would seem that it is alright to refer to Britain but not the UK. I think it is about time this narrative by this remainer should be confined to the dustbin as it is devoid of meaningful analysis, objectivity and sense! Poor Journalism and even worse reasoning.

I shall come to Marr later!