Brexit and the Art of Georgian Profiteering

Since the Brexit debate has been running in the media, in its current form, there is one massive conceit that sits at the heart of this largely unfathomable Gordian knot: How can we reconcile the political, economic and social implications of a split from the European Union to anyone's satisfaction? Not one single person will be satisfied with any available settlement. So why are we implementing the 'will of the people'? The answer of course is that any sort of Brexit is not the will of the people. When the majority of voters cast for 'Leave', no one had any settled or complete idea of what terms of separation should be decided upon. The specific terms of our divorce - that are acceptable to 'the people' - depend on their interests in any particular sphere: immigration, job security, standard of living, accessibility of foreign beaches, house prices, the food on the table... There are too many variables to list, let alone reach a favoured agreement upon. The task of unravelling over 40 years of common practice and legislation in 2 years or even 10 is a Herculean task beyond our current legislative and democratic processes.
I have no practical suggestions for how we address this conceit, but I have been thinking about its limitations...
Britain is a Nation of Shopkeepers - so said Napoleon - or at least the English as he addressed us at the time. In looking for historic parallels it is worth analysing what he was reported to have said in it's relevance to our modern dilemma... His Doctor on St Helena records him saying:


Your [The English] meddling in continental affairs, and trying to make yourselves a great military power, instead of attending to the sea and commerce, will yet be your ruin as a nation. You were greatly offended with me for having called you a nation of shopkeepers. Had I meant by this, that you were a nation of cowards, you would have had reason to be displeased; even though it were ridiculous and contrary to historical facts; but no such thing was ever intended. I meant that you were a nation of merchants, and that all your great riches, and your grand resources arose from commerce, which is true. What else constitutes the riches of England. It is not extent of territory, or a numerous population. It is not mines of gold, silver, or diamonds. Moreover, no man of sense ought to be ashamed of being called a shopkeeper. But your prince and your ministers appear to wish to change altogether l'esprit of the English, and to render you another nation; to make you ashamed of your shops and your trade, which have made you what you are, and to sigh after nobility, titles and crosses; in fact to assimilate you with the French... You are all nobility now, instead of the plain old Englishmen.


Napoleon was mistaken. Our victory at Waterloo was of course not about military power, but about a settled Europe, one that we could freely trade with. But his analysis of the English [British] as a nation of merchants, whose real power is commerce and our lack of geographical and mineral wealth is as true today as it was in 1815 after the Wellingtonian alliance victory for Europe over the dictator's Grand Armee...


The parallel is striking because at the very time when a shattered Europe was expecting a new political and economic alliance led by the British, the United Kingdom withdrew it's influence from the councils of the wise and concentrated on a political settlement focused on The Empire rather than Europe.
In 1950 the UK took the same route as in 1815, by not joining the ECSC and in 2016 - here we are again. But this time there is no Empire, No Commonwealth and no special relationship with the US to keep us economically afloat. So where are we 'shopkeepers' going to make our money?


The answer is of course... from each other. If we cannot trade at the levels and volumes we need overseas, we will develop internal markets. Good old direct supply and demand... If we can't import Spanish Tomatoes we will grow them here. A free market in a demand led economy... perfect.... or is it? If there is one thing the Napoleonic era taught us it is how to profiteer in a crisis. 'Brandy for the parson, 'Baccy for the clerk... ...watch the wall my darling as the gentlemen go by' as dear old Rudyard Kipling so delicately put it... Weak or crisis driven government creates an economically permissive society where the short end goes to the consumer and the fat end goes to anyone prepared to risk capital and operate in the margins - a grey or even black economy... Tax inefficient, burdensome and of no use to anyone but the profiteers...


So what is the executive going to do about this wartime economy? I believe, Tory or Labour they will reach for the nearest shield to protect their jobs from public opinion - legislation or a thinly veiled equivalent to protect consumers from a ravenous horde of shop-keepers bent on profit... A mixed or control economy!
 
It will be said by both Remain and Leave thinkers that the very foundation of our liberal democracy is free market trade. I would argue that in erecting any kind of borders with our biggest market we have given up that basic principle and we must recognize a prohibitive mixed market is the price of controlling our own borders... or put another way, we are sacrificing our economic principles for political ends that have no place in a Nation of Shopkeepers.

Binneyink