Today, with the formal request by the UK to leave the European Union, a decision takes hold which may well prove to be one of the most extraordinarily misguided acts in European politics of this century. We still have 80 and more years to go until 2100. A failure of global leaders to control global warming and deal with the impacts of climate change, or politicians wantonly taking risks in international relations that could result in major armed conflict may well be others.

The pros and cons of ever greater political and economic union in Europe are a fair point to debate, and the criticism of distance of the European Institutions from the grasp and democratic control of citizens is legitimate. Inevitably, the more layers there are between citizens and those making decisions that affect everyone, the more it is important to have effective accountability.

Yet the problem we face is not the opening up of debates and searching for solutions. The problem we seem to have more than ever before is egotism in politics. The BREXIT debate and US elections show that some politicians are consciously looking the other way when it comes to the interest of ordinary people.

Personal hunger for profile and power appears to come first, and erratic behaviour, bullying, and the peddling of falsehoods are being elevated to the rank of acceptable ways of some politicians getting their way. This misdirected modelling of behaviour has ripple effects in society beyond the immediate issue at hand. Do we really want societies based on aggression and demeaning of those with other opinions or perceived other identities? Half a century has been spent on raising awareness about and combating discrimination and violence linked to it.

Both the BREXIT referendum debate, and the election campaign leading to Donald Trump becoming US President were fought on unbelievably thin ice, with very limited interest of those seeking to break into the political arena of power to enable a well-founded substantive debate in the electorate.  During these two processes it seemed that the age of reason, and certainly the age of consent, as matters of political culture may have come to an end.

It will be an uphill struggle, but the big task is to strengthen and where necessary re-introduce balanced development of views based on reliable evidence back into the debate and making of decisions about directions and the use of means held in common for the common good. Messianic conviction of leaders about their own cause and populism lead to a nightmare for Europe and the world 70 years ago, and has destroyed in other settings many societies and lives ever since.

While much reviled in the UK (credits to Gordon Brown for not giving up), the principles of federalism in fact offer a number of useful approaches. Four stand out: first, decisions that affect significant parts of societies, need their support to be valid, driving consensus. Second, explaining and negotiating interests between parties may look slower initially, but evenutally yields sustainable results. Third, leadership is legitimised and exercised on the basis of the ability to bring parties together, not running them over. And fourth, power is devolved as much as possible to the decion-making level closest to those affected.

In contrast, egotism in politics is ineffective in the long run for society. It alienates those needed for realising any new social ambition. Throwing people out of the boat does not generally make for safer navigation. The costs of re-adjustment when decisions proved a failure are huge. For these reasons alone egotism  must not be allowed to return as a feature of politics.