It seems that the No campaigns scare tactics have people worried about unstable governments. But what is an unstable government? Well apparently it’s any government where one party does not have a significant majority. Someone better warn Germany how unstable their government is!
This is a truly amazing position to hold for two reasons. Firstly it follows that the most stable government is a ruthless dictatorship, after all having 100% of the power is clearly the logical conclusion of the “significant majority” argument. Secondly, it states clearly and plainly that the No campaign believes that its politicians cannot cooperate and form consensus led governments; they are, in fact, the political equivalent of two year olds.
Yes, we’ve all had it, the “if it’s not happening my way I’m going to throw toys, lie on the floor and have a damned good tantrum” moment – normally in the middle of a busy supermarket. Fortunately most children grow up and whilst we never really lose that hunger for power, we realise that sometimes you win, sometime you lose and sometimes you have to compromise.
“But that means extremists hold the reins” scream the No campaign. Only if you’re stupid enough to let. If one party wants to ally itself to the extremists and let, as the Americans so eloquently put it, the tail wag the dog, then it will happen. And if your politicians really are so stupid then I suppose you have to protect them from themselves and vote No.
Or you could vote YES! and then vote in some adult politicians who can work with others, secure in the knowledge that they have an overall mandate from constituents. More adulthood, less tantrums please – I’m voting YES!