J.M. MEYER, PH.D.
  • Bio
  • Curriculum Vitae
  • Research
    • Orde Wingate
    • Anthropology of Organized Violence
    • Special Forces in 20th and 21st Centuries
    • Internal Competition in Great Powers Conflict
    • Thinkery & Verse >
      • Press Coverage
      • Projects >
        • Westhusing in the House of Atreus
        • American Volunteers
        • The Priceless Slave
        • Cryptomnesia
        • Veterans' Voices
        • Thinkery and Verse
  • Contact

will Britain's exit from the European union make the world less safe?

6/30/2016

0 Comments

 

The answer is yes.

European political instability and regional nationalism are historically dangerous instruments of human suffering. In the past fifty years, except for pockets of terrible violence in former Yugoslavia, we have largely avoided the terrors that European fragmentation have unleashed on the world.

Of my immigrant ancestors that I am aware of, more than four out of five left Europe because of starvation and violence rooted in that continent's fragmentation. My Palatine German ancestors fled the Rhine river valley as it was sacked by waves of French and British troops in the 17th and 18th centuries. My Irish ancestors fled the famines induced by the English domination of Ireland, which in turn was connected to Protestant suspicions of Irish Catholic religious and political connections to the mainland. Even my Pilgrim ancestors fled the Church of England, established in Holland, and then immigrated to America because their religious way of life made no sense in an increasingly nationalistic England and Holland of the 17th century.

As attested by two world wars and countless smaller conflicts, Europe can be a dangerous place. But the common market provided by the European Union has made it a safer place. The common market helps reconcile the interests of the Germans, British, French, Italians, and Spanish the largest economic powers of Europe. When continental elites benefit from economic cooperation across the continent, they are less likely to drag their nations into war. 

Yesterday the enfranchised voters in the Kingdom of Britain cast a protest vote against the idea of Europe, and demanded that the government at Westminster withdraw from the European Union.

The fact that the British electorate even had a vote was something of a historical oddity. The decision to join the European Union has typically been made in bureaucratic terms,  and largely for bureaucratic reason of facilitating trade, with the added known bonus of reducing the incentive for violent conflict.

But David Cameron agreed to hold the vote in order to appease the far-right members of his own party, and the nationalistic (some say xenophobic) United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). The far-right agreed to support Cameron's continued premiership, and in return he promised them a vote on Britain's membership in the EU.

In holding the vote, Cameron assumed that the British people would, on the day of reckoning, listen to his advice and simply agree to remain within the common market.

But nationalistic politics are dangerous. Nationalism is hard to pin down, difficult to control, and most often develops on playgrounds and kindergarten classrooms rather than in the adult world of economic stability, long-term economic performance, and national security. Nationalism is about fear and jealousy, pride and prejudice.

​The voters who demanded that Britain leave the European Union are not wholly senseless.

​It is true, for example, that the British working class has suffered, and this was also reflected in yesterday's vote. Margaret Thatcher ruthlessly broke the unions in the 1980s, sold off public assets and businesses, and reduced state protections for lower income families.

​But  larger forces were also in play, far beyond the scope of the British government, or the one in Brussels. China opened up to international markets. Eastern Europe emerged from the Soviet Union. Radical Islam swept through the Middle East. American military power flailed restlessly against opponents too amorphous to squash, and instead weakened the foundations of nation-states across the world.

​In sum, David Cameron made a historic miscalculation. The British voters were either angry, confused, or simply disenchanted with the idea of Europe.

​The Brits who wanted to remain in the EU failed to mount a meaningful campaign. But David Cameron did not give them an easy task. It is hard to explain to voters that by saying 'yes' to Europe you are not necessarily saying 'no' to Britain; and that economic security is one of the best ways to ensure international security.

A sliver of the British electorate--perhaps even the sliver that swung the election--may have been reacting to the British-national spirit that swung through the country on the eve of 2014's Scottish referendum. Then, many politicians (Labour and Conservative, Scottish, Welsh and Irish) begged the Scots to keep Britain together.  A year later, and those same politicians were demanding that Britain stay in Europe. For the country's elite, the relationship between these various conceptions of sovereignty is obvious, but perhaps it is foggy for those less drenched in the terminology of security studies, international relations, and economics. 

​At this point, it is not clear that it matters. Perhaps the bravest course for British politicians would be to defy the voters and remain in the European Union regardless of the outcome of the referendum. The EU is, after all, a treaty, and perhaps beyond the scope of direct democracy.

​That is unlikely. Cameron has already pledged to begin the withdraw, even as he has set a timeline for his own removal from the premiership, tail between his legs.

​Political events often diffuse throughout regions. The outcome of the British referendum will likely spawn other protests against the EU in less wealthy and less stable European states.

​Over the past half century, Europe has been a model of security and stability despite possessing historic animosities dating back at least a millennia.

​The world is a less stable and less safe place today than it was before the referendum took place.

0 Comments

research assistant with the national center for science and civic engagement 

6/24/2016

0 Comments

 
Over the next several months, I will be helping Wm. David Burns, the head of the National Center for Science and Civic Engagement at Stony Brook University. 

My job is to help David collect his writings into a publishable form, and to encourage the National Center to deepen its connection to its partnering institutions, perhaps through the use of a Summer Institute for graduate students and early-career faculty members.

The basic philosophy of the National Center is simple and sharp. They seek to help Science, Technology, and Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) educators tie their courses to real-world civic problems, like clean drinking water, health screenings, and infrastructure safety. Students who study STEM material through a civics lens have better learning outcomes: they retain more of the information, they know how to connect technical knowledge with real-world problems, and they learn more about how they can influence the wider world if they stick with STEM education. 

This is a great opportunity for me, as it enables me to learn more about the way the STEM disciplines study and interpret the civic problems that make up the meat and potatoes of political science. 
0 Comments

mission continues fellowship at bedlam

6/24/2016

0 Comments

 
Thanks to the Mission Continues program, I have started a six-month fellowship with BEDLAM and BEDLAM Outreach. 

The fellowship enables me to work with BEDLAM as they teach Shakespeare to military veterans. As a part of the fellowship, it is one of my personal goals to begin teaching classes to other groups affected by violence, such as inner city youth, police and fire associations, and refugees. But for the first couple of months I am just learning the ropes and trying to assimilate the BEDLAM way of doing things. Along with Jenny Pacanowski, I will be helping to curate a few BEDLAM Outreach public presentations in the fall and winter of 2016.

BEDLAM Outreach is run by Stephan Wolfert, one of the most beloved members of the veterans artistic community in the country. His show 'Cry Havoc' encapsulates much of what I feel about the arts, especially Shakespeare. Interestingly, we both fell in love with Shakespeare through the same two plays, Richard III and Macbeth.  

Every Monday night, 6pm to 9pm, we host free acting classes and writing workshops for military veterans at the Sheen Center on 18 Bleecker Street. If you are a veteran and want to check us out, please stop by and see us. 

BEDLAM is an outstanding theater company. They are led by Eric Tucker and Andrus Nichols. Since arriving in New York a few years ago, they have taken critics and audiences by storm with inventive, smart, fast-paced interpretations of challenging classics, including George Bernard Shaw's SAINT JOAN, Shakespeare's HAMLET, and Kate Hammill's adaptation of Jane Austen's SENSE AND SENSIBILITY. 

Terry Teachout of the Wall Street Journal named Eric Tucker the director of the year in 2014. He also called their 2015 Midsummer Night's Dream the best interpretation of the play since Peter Brook's white box version opened in 1970. 

Perhaps the best sense for the vibe around this company is that artists, audiences, and critics have been giving BEDLAM's work repeat viewings: this is the kind of small-scale stuff that carries the excitement of a Beach Boys song, where the fun surface is under-girded with a deep understanding of the classical structure and intelligent ideas that have informed theater for hundreds of years. Their plays are filled with sharp acting, playful excursions into the audience, and clever staging.

Check us out sometime. 


0 Comments

    Author

    J. M. Meyer is a playwright and social scientist studying at the University of Texas at Austin.

    Photo Credit: ISS Expidition 7.

    Archives

    July 2023
    December 2019
    October 2019
    July 2018
    May 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    September 2017
    May 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    June 2016
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013

    Categories

    All
    Africa
    Article Review
    Art Sighting
    Biography
    Book Review
    British Empire
    Churchill
    David Stirling
    Dudley Clarke
    Education
    Film Review
    Gandhi
    Harold Pinter
    Hermione Lee
    Hermione Lee
    Humanities
    India
    Jawaharlal Nehru
    Jinnah
    Johnny Meyer
    Justice
    Middle East
    Military History
    Orde Wingate
    Orde Wingate
    Plutarch
    Psychology
    Relationships
    Robert Graves
    Second World War
    Strategy
    Tactics
    T. E. Lawrence
    Theater Essay
    Theatre
    Verse
    W. B. Yeats
    Werner Herzog
    Writing

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly