My recent blog about Occam’s razor made me realise that this problem-solving concept should also apply to Brexit. The Brexiteers are proposing complicated solutions for a seemingly simple goal: a British exit from the European Union. Their complicated solutions already suggest that their assumptions about Brexit were (very) wrong – or just false.
There is nothing wrong with a philosophical belief in independence (my 2017 blog). Obviously, this same belief in independence should then also apply for domestic territories (eg, Northern Ireland, Scotland). A genuine belief in independence should not be withheld from others.
Complicated solutions also arise as Brexiteers refuse to put their money (deeds) where their mouth (words) is. These inconsistencies are due to a mismatch between thoughts / intentions, words, and deeds, a key concept in Zoroastrianism (my blogs). Brexit is about words. There is a lack of deeds (eg, money) to backup these words. There can only be one reason: intentions.
Brexit has never been a philosophical belief for the key people involved in the Brexit campaign. Brexit was a Russian tool for weakening the European Union (eg, Guardian, Times). The key Brexit people will once be compared to the Cambridge Five. The continued mismatch between their intentions, words and deeds is the root cause for the problems Brexit has been creating.
Solving the Brexit problems requires application of Occam’s razor, which “is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions.”
The Brexit solution that provides the simplest solution with the fewest assumptions is the EU-Norway model: formal independence while still following EU regulations – or obligation without representation. The EU-Norway model is a common example of a “soft-Brexit”. One could argue whether it’s a genuine exit at all. Also see my 2018 blogs of 8 March and 24 March.
Occam’s razor is responsible for the changing Brexit dynamics: from a “hard” or “no deal” Brexit to a “soft-Brexit”. The data quality of pre-Brexit information was (very) poor and pre-Brexit assumptions are now being replaced by post-Brexit facts. The EU-Norway model is the only model that limits – rather than prevents – substantial post-Brexit damages.
There’s little chance that Brexit would not happen as too many politicians would lose face. Initially, nearly all UK politicians were in favour of Brexit while half the country was not. Today, about half (or more) of the politicians accept Occam’s razor and the resulting soft-Brexit.
Brexit may enter contemporary history as an example of a classical Pyrrhic victory: independence in name only. Future generations will continue wondering: Why??
Why (1992) by Annie Lennox – artist, lyrics, video, Wiki-1, Wiki-2
I may be mad
I may be blind
I may be viciously unkind
But I can still read what you’re thinking
And I’ve heard it said too many times
That you’d be better off
Besides…
Why can’t you see this boat is sinking
Note: all markings (bold, italic, underlining) by LO unless stated otherwise
0 Comments