Report: BREXIT – Who is Afraid of Group Attachment?

Brexit means what? More than two years on we still do not know. So, in January 2019 I organised a workshop in London to explore Brexit, or otherwise, from an attachment and group-analytic perspective.

Attachment is a primary instinctual force for meaningful human connectedness, as essential for our physical and emotional survival as food and sex. John Bowlby (my mentor and ‘father’ of the theory) and a quintessentially English gentleman, conceived the human mind as a social phenomenon. He proposed that healthy attachment evolves from cradle to grave, from the family group to progressively larger and more sophisticated group configurations.

From an attachment perspective, the European Union (EU) can be described as “a serious, determined and imperfect supranational project in the making – in which increasingly larger, more sophisticated and ever-evolving forms of group collaboration, and of group attachment, are being tried and developed”. EU’s decision-making is based on treaties that have been approved voluntarily and democratically by all its member states. Over the years, treaties have been amended to make the EU more efficient and transparent, to prepare for new members and to introduce new areas of cooperation.

Building on the limited economic and political goals of the 6 original countries which formed the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957, the current 28 EU members have achieved an unprecedented level of economic and legal integration, as well as supranational political authority, surpassing that of any other international organisation. The EU has not replaced the nation-state; however, its institutions have progressively resembled a supranational parliamentary democratic political system – at an increasingly complex and more sophisticated group level. Who is afraid of supranational democracy?

In his manifesto for the general election in 2010, David Cameron promised to reduce immigration to the ‘tens of thousands’, paving the way for the hostile environment towards immigrants created by Theresa May, during her time as Home Secretary. In making the promise, he basically endorsed UKIP’s claims that immigration was too high – and EU’s free movement became a target.

With a view to stay in office for a second term, in 2015 Cameron promised a Brexit referendum – hoping to win back UKIP voters and shut up noisy euro-sceptics within his Tory Party. However, his strategy to secure a remain vote was ineffective. In fact, he demanded concessions on immigration from Brussels, which were refused and inflated anti- EU sentiments. He also failed to grasp the likelihood that many Labour voters would see the referendum as an opportunity to take revenge on the man who inflicted austerity on them. The question was poorly framed; the timing utterly wrong. And, so far, it has not been possible to tidy up the mess.

In the circumstances, I decided to organise a Brexit workshop; which was held at the London Institute of Group Analysis, on 26 January 2019. The workshop was open and inclusive, with the aim of creating an atmosphere where dialogue and mutual understanding were cultivated. Delegates were encouraged to take an active part in the reflective space provided by professionally conducted, small and large discusión groups. The Anglo-Spanish author and journalist and journalists Jimmy Burns, chairman of the British-Spanish Society, was one of the facilitators of such a dialogue.

In order to be fair to all, I invited speakers representing pro-Brexit and pro-EU positions, as well as middle-of-the-road approaches, as follows: British photographer Chris Ridley talked about his strong Brexit feelings. Born in 1940 during a heavy air raid in central London, he was brought up in ‘fear of the Germans’. In 1975, he voted to leave the EU and his opinion remains.

Frances Griffiths, Chair of the Institute, explored the possible role that the loss of the British Empire and the unresolved shame associated to it might have played.

Peter Keller, a British scientist, offered an insiders view on the importance of the international dimension in scientific research.

Maria Cañete and I, both consultant psychiatrists and group analysts, delivered a conjoint presentation: first, a historical analysis of the partly ‘detached’ relationship the UK has had with the EU; second, a dissection of the democratic limitations of the referendum.

Over 6 million adult UK-residents were ‘not eligible’ to vote, of whom nearly 3 million are EU migrants. In fact, the 52% who voted to leave only represent 26% of the population.

The Brexit vote can be seen as the result of a constellation of contributing factors: migratory crisis; nostalgia of sovereign Empire; anti-EU propaganda; unacceptable levels of inequality and social detachment; disdain for the poor and vulnerable expressed through austerity and the undermining of the welfare state; upsurge of a sensationally self-indulgent political ruling class; generational divergence of values and aspirations; rise of English nationalism… The list is longer.

Considering that all these interrelated factors were visible, why no-one persuaded Cameron that taking the lid off by calling a referendum and asking people to endorse the status quo could be a provocation? In contrast to Cameron, Harold Wilson had negotiated a deal with the EEC before putting it to a people’s vote, in 1975. Remain won by a substantial 67.2%.

In many ways, Brexit is less about Britain’s relationship with the EU than about Britain’s relationship with itself. It is partly the projection outwards of an inner turmoil for which the EU has become an ideal scapegoat. The repetitive slogan Brexit means Brexit indicates that the meaning is in the leaving (British-exit), not in what is being left or how.

From a group-analytic and attachment perspective, this drama of departure could be seen as a crisis of belonging; a difficulty in connecting with others; an imaginary conflict between them and us; ultimately, a crisis of group attachment.

Arturo Ezquerro, a consultant psychiatrist, psychoanalytic psychotherapist and group analyst, is former Head of NHS Psychotherapy Services in Brent, London, and has authored Encounters with John Bowlby: Tales of Attachment (Routledge). He is a member of the British Spanish Society.
arturo.ezquerro@ntlworld.com