With twenty-two days remaining until that historic EU vote, I’m touring up and down the country, fighting hard with everything I have, sleeves rolled up, for my beliefs and values.
In all of my recent speeches on the EU, I may have indicated that I consider mass participation in political decisions to be somehow less than desirable. I have admittedly argued that the UK’s voters should not have any direct influence over the rates of VAT, the levels of immigration and the imposition of tariffs, because this would disrupt the smooth workings of international capitalism. Far better, I have urged, to leave all of these decisions to the wise managerial leadership of the European Commission, which is above petty nationalist concerns and the obligation to deliver on any actual promises to the voters. Far better to have a European Parliament which is just a decoration and unrocked by any pressure from the masses.
Now, however, several weeks into my campaign, it appears that many voters have taken my arguments against democracy to heart. My polling team tells me that few people are going to turn out to vote for the EU. Surprise, surprise: it seems that those who are the most likely to appreciate the EU are also those who are the least likely to vote.
So, just as a one-off, can you all please troop out of your houses and vote for this thing. But don’t make a habit of it, otherwise the EU won’t work!
Yours, with insincere urgency and temporary desperation.
Rt Hon David Cameron, Prime Minister.
Update: An earlier version of this message mistakenly featured an image of the Lannister family. All of my leaflets and campaign literature come with pictures of random families having fun together, because I assume that you won’t read any of the words and instead associate my name with the depicted values of homeliness and security. Unfortunately, the team who composed this message for me selected the first photo of a family from Google Image Search, with disastrous implications.
[Note to team: the latest Harvard public relations handbook recommends response XF695, “Ignoring the mistake will manipulate the respondee into accepting that the rareness of the glitch validates the overall impression of statesmanlike competence.” Yet response XK867 insists that, “a suitable expression of weakness will make you appear human and ordinary, which can refresh the agenda at this precise stage in a campaign.” Tell me which makes me look less of a dickhead, yah, but don’t print this.]