Faith and politics

Faith-based politics can be a hell of a pain. As heretics frequently discovered at the hands of their fellow Christians, of a faintly different shade, in the Renaissance. Or as gays are likely to discover in Brunei, for instance, since that fine country chose to make gay sex an offence punishable by stoning to death.

Forgiving the trespasses of others
When Christians dealt vigorously with differences in faith

But even before it reaches that point, before it comes to power, a political movement based on faith is pretty dire. After all, there’s always the fear that once in power, it’ll behave as badly as the Sultan of Brunei or Renaissance Christians. You start off thinking that the leader cannot err, and the next thing you know he’s decided you have been erring unpardonably, and torturing you prior to your execution, as many a Russian Stalinist discovered to his cost.

The starting point for these aberrations is to take belief as a starting point instead of evidence. Indeed, any notion that contradicts belief has to be discounted, even if it was previously an article of faith. So for instance I was told recently by a Corbyn supporter (I’m resisting the temptation to write “cultist” or even “worshipper”):

For the first time in decades the poor are dying younger than they used to. Deciding to Remain or to Leave will not do a sausage to help the weak. You used to care. A socialist and redistributive government will help everyone whether we are in or we are out. Jeremy Corbyn is fixated on the main prize.

It’s certainly true that someone hungry is entirely indifferent to whether Britain is in the EU or not. At least, in any general sense. But such such people do care about whether there will be any wealth to distribute in their direction.

Whoops! Did I say that?
Corbyn: object of reverence with no evidence to justify it

Whatever harm he did to socialist thinking, Marx can at least be congratulated for realising that its bedrock has to be economic. What economic principle can be simpler to grasp, than the notion that what makes the nation poorer, makes it harder to haul individuals out of poverty?

So while the poor may not care about the EU, leaving the EU will make it far harder to tackle their problem, because it will make Britain as a whole poorer. That really does matter to the hungry. It doesn’t matter how “fixated” Corbyn may be on the main prize (and this is the first time I’ve seen the notion of fixation presented as a good thing), if the resources for reaching it are reduced, it will be all the harder to achieve it.

To put it in simpler terms, the more you reduce the wealth of the nation, the less there is to redistribute and the less likely you are to end poverty.

My Corbynist friend has clearly chosen to ignore such simple truths. Instead, he has a request for me:

Please do not abuse a man who is working for the many and is trying to reconcile Leave voters and Remain voters.

Another fan of the revered leader added:

I fully support Jeremy’s philosophy of moving the conversation away from Leave/Remain, to what is it that we’re actually looking for out of this situation.

Now I think it’s smart politics to move a national conversation away from a subject that isn’t doing you any good, to more favourable ground. So Corbyn’s not wrong to make the attempt. Equally, trying to reconcile leave and remain voters is a wonderful intention.

But let’s try to remember what the road to hell is paved with. Good intentions? No use to anyone if they don’t deliver. They certainly don’t feed the poor.

And are those good intentions leading anywhere useful? Britain has never been more divided between pro- and anti-Brexit camps. The gulf deepens daily. And as for changing the topic of conversation – does anyone really believe that Corbyn has managed to stop the country talking about Brexit?

Well, maybe his fans believe he has. But then they don’t look at evidence. What they’re proclaiming is simple faith.

Sadly, at the moment, I see no sign of its moving even the smallest of hillocks.