- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
You must log in or # to comment.
Who could have seen this coming except every single semi informed person.
Problem is: almost everyone thinks he is well informed while almost none ist.
I don’t know why you are being downvoted, it’s not like Dunning-Krueger doesn’t exist
Explains itself.
I feel like polls have been saying that since before Brexit was even finalised :') the only good I ever thought might come of Brexit was it might make things so bad in Britain that it might help spark some kind of revolution…
As soon as the fuzzy “imagine anything you want” of the referendum collapsed into “you must pick one and come up with a plan to mitigate the consequences” of May’s government!
Any specific result would always have had a minority - the ‘majority’ vote was made up of people wanting opposite things.
Yeah. That’s the issue isn’t it. There was one version of remain but dozens of versions of leave but people only got to choose between two options.
Then when the government realised that there were so many different opinions of what leave meant they spent more than a year with no progress.
More like 4 years, right?
Well, after about a year they came out of a meeting at Chequers with a bold plan…… that was almost like being in the EU and got shot down by parliament immediately.
You could argue that coming up with that plan is progress. It was just in the wrong direction.
UK public is too divided to revolt in any way. They’re perpetually on the back foot reacting to “scandals”.
I’m just hoping that after a few decades of maturation (hopefully before it turns blue), they will come back as full members and as one of the main leaders of EU as they should always have been .
What was it actually supposed to accomplish? I mean, I’m an American who mostly followed the whole thing via UK chat and panel shows so I’m sure I missed a ton of detail, but I don’t remember there being an over-arching goal, just a lot of little nebulous promises like somehow generating an extra 350 million a week for the NHS, but with no actual plan for how any of that was actually going to happen. It seemed like the whole point was to let xenophobic shit disturbers flick the Vs at Europe, and the vague notion that once Brexit was done it’d finally be open season on “those bloody immigrants.”
OK, so…
Political necessity?
The reason why it happened is that the Conservative Party government was wildly unpopular in 2013-2014 with all of the indications being that Ed Miliband’s Labour Party were going to storm the Conservatives at the 2015 General Election. Furthermore, ever since the Thatcher governments of the 1980s, the Conservatives were weakened by the ‘Eurosceptic’ branch of their party often being vocal, disruptive, difficult to work with, and harming the ‘Not the Nasty Party’ narrative Conservative Party Central HQ (CCHQ) had often tried to push in the 90s and the 00s.
Offering a referendum on the European Union therefore had two advantages:
- It was a substantial, concrete policy idea that would be easy to implement and massively popular with a certain portion of the populace, not massively unpopular with the other portions, and which Labour would never offer.
- By having a popular ‘stamp of approval’ on the European Union, CCHQ believed it would permanently weaken and weaken the difficult Eurosceptic portion of their party.
This is of course on the assumption that the referendum passed. And never let anyone tell you otherwise, David Cameron (then-PM) and George Osbourne (then-Chancellor; finance secretary and 2nd most important cabinet member) absolutely would not have proposed the referendum if they believed it had any chance of failing.
Furthermore, they assumed they’d be out of government and the referendum would never see the light of day. To the arrogant, and out-of-touch Cameron and Osbourne the policy was all upside.
As it happens, for a variety of reasons, the Conservatives actually won the 2015 General Election with a majority (whereas they were in a coalition before). And, as promised, a referendum was planned.
Ideological basis
For a substantial period of time (late 18th-century to mid-20th century), Britain was unquestionably the most powerful empire in the world. This is within living memory. The culture and expectation of Britain being a 1st rate world power is something that has only begun to fade within the past couple of generations. But a significant number of older people (people who vote) were raised and educated with the fair understanding that Britain was a superpower. For example, all of my grandparents and most of great Uncles and Aunts were being educated at a time when Britain still held all of India and most of Africa.
Since the Second World War, Britain’s place in the world has unquestionably declined. We no longer have the Empire. We racked up tremendous amounts of debt to the United States. For periods in the 1970s, Britain was widely considered the ‘sick man’ of Europe. The feel good moments of the 1990s and Cool Britannia were quickly doused by the War in Iraq, where Tony Blair was universally seen as a puppet of the Bush administration.
Since the 1980s in-particular, life has changed for many in the United Kingdom beyond recognition. Trade unions were razed. Income disparity has skyrocketed. Town centres have become neglected. Internal tourism has been decimated. Cities like Leicester started becoming majority-minority. 2008 and the Great Recession tumbled the New Labour government and brought in a Conservative government. All parties at the 2010 general election bought into the consensus that the only way the country would survive would be to gut public sector spending. Healthcare would worsen. Education would worsen. Adult social care would worsen. Local government services would worsen.
A very large number of people came to the rational conclusion that, at least for them, their lives had gotten worse and would continue to get worse. But how does one consolidate this very clear observation with:
- The Queen
- Rule Britannia
- Two World Wars; One World Cup
- Largest empire ever known to man
- The Second World War in-general, and the Battle of Britain in-particular
A lot of the media attempted to bridge this issue with a scapegoat: the European Union.
Euroscepticism
Euroscepticism first found a voice with Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. She often disagreed with a significant number of the leaders on the continent and didn’t appreciate being limited in how she could act.
Thoughout the 1990s and the 2000s, the whole media knew they could gather attention by blaming various problems on the European Union. A notable young journalist, Boris Johnson, was particularly renowned for the ludicrous and inaccurate stories he wrote on European Union directives.
The European Union was an outstanding scapegoat:
- It was ‘foreign’
- It was ‘undemocratic’
- It was ‘bureaucratic’
It had something for everyone. Before the result of the referendum, you’d never hear anyone defend the EU. It was seen by most of its defenders as a necessary evil in a world we could no longer rule, and isn’t it nice you don’t need a visa to go to Spain? No positive case was ever put forward by anyone. There was little point to. There was never any risk of us leaving.
Now, the European Union is an imperfect project. However, thanks to the economic and cultural connections brought about by the EU, Western Europe is at the lowest risk of internal armed conflict in millennia of history. Europeans are more familiar with one another than they’ve ever been before. Smaller states such as Ireland remain independent and sovereign but now have defenders, and allies, and representatives that allow them to assert themselves globally.
These arguments hold much less weight on an island nation, that hasn’t known armed conflict within its borders since the Glorious Revolution (excluding Ireland), who within living memory had the power and the influence to dominate half the globe.
No one appreciated the EU until it was already too late. And all of the rich newspaper editors who made bank on peddling lies about this foreign government to a lost, and disaffected public thought it’d be consequence free.
Conclusion
What was it supposed to accomplish? Nothing. The referendum was never supposed to happen, and if it did, it was never meant to pass. No one with any power or influence had any idea on what to do. What Brexit would look like. What some fringe politicians had promised was an emotional return to self-government, wealth, power, influence, independence. A turning back of the clock.
Excellent post. If there is an equivalent of /r/bestof this would be worthy. It is super telling that rather than stick around and deal with the ramifications of the referendum, Cameron immediately resigned. Another point of context is that Cameron had gambled his political life previously on a different referendum (Scottish Independence) and that one worked out fine, so what is the harm in trying that gambit one more time?
Wow, thank you :) that’s an amazing compliment. Brexit has the dangerous combination of tremendous emotional investment and piquing my interest in domestic politics. Hence the rant 😂
If there is an equivalent of /r/bestof this would be worthy.
You could make one!
This is a superb comment! Thanks for taking the time to post it
What some fringe politicians had promised was an emotional return to self-government, wealth, power, influence, independence.
And what they delivered instead was essentially Britain becoming a de-facto US-client state.
Gee, it’s almost as if you can’t trust right-wingers these days.
Well this was insanely insightful, thank you
As a “foreigner” from the continent, thank you so much for taking the time to so clearly summarise this complex situation.
This is a great post but I would say that there were some people who were absolutely dedicated to achieving Brexit and in large part their participation can be explained by the proposed financial transaction tax.
The idea that a supra-national entity might be able to impose a tax that could be difficult to mitigate was absolutely intolerable to various millionaires and billionaires e.g. The Telegraph owning Barclay Brothers. Any downsides from the resulting chaos, which in any case would only affect the working and lower middle classes, would be more than offset by the ability to bank offshore and retain their profits untaxed.
You’re absolutely correct and if there’s one thing I wish I included it would’ve been a ‘charitable’ description of the possibilities of Brexit. The reason why it wasn’t included is that I think the actual motivations of the arch-Brexiteers within parliament and the media aren’t a contributing factor to why Brexit happened. They certainly had a vision for a potential Brexit but I don’t think that played any role in the decision to hold a referendum, and I believe only a very small subset of the 52% voted Leave did so because they shared the ‘Singapore with worse weather’ vision of the Brexit elite.
Yes, I agree. I just wanted to point out that Brexit wouldn’t have happened without some fairly serious money being put behind it (UKIP’s funding had to come from somewhere and there were not one but two pro-Brexit campaigns Vote Leave and LeaveEU) and that money had to spent with a purpose.
Incredible explanation that captures how I’ve felt/viewed the whole debacle.
Great post dude.
And they would have gotten away w/ it if it wasn’t for you meddling kids!
Remain “More of the same but we will try make it better”
Brexit “the current situation is shit and everyone’s giving you the same old arguments again don’t trust them. If you vote Brexit we can have all your dreams come true”
Remain was one option. Brexit was about 5 different options depending on who was pushing it. So Brexit offered a lot more options in a sort of Schrodinger’s paradox.
Basically what was being offered was more freedom to make our own choices and not have the EU pulling us down. Not having to have the stupid EU rules and not having to pay the stupid EU money, we could keep all our fish and be rich. It offered power, freedom, growth, wealth. (In reality we had great veto powers, we could help form rules, the EU membership was a bargain, who gives a fuck about fish).
Also Boris Johnson is a massive [can we swear here?]. And would sell his own children for his own personal gain, but for some reason is loved by the British, seen it as a way to make a name for himself by going against the grain and pushing for something no logical person would vote for. When that unexpectedly came true he hid in a fridge and ran away for a few months (actually true).
It was an absolute shower and just shows how uneducated the British public is. It’s their own God damn fault all the info was out there, someone just said what they wanted to hear and they believed it.
Yes, you can swear here. Was the redacted word twat?
It was cunt.
That works, too. Makes me think of Australia before England, though.
I’m not English (or Australia).
-
The campaign talked of frictionless trade deals with Europe, but while it looked good on paper the small print came littered with problems that made trade slightly harder than it had been as a member. The new customs processes has seen haulers transporting goods needing to fill out extra paperwork while new infrastructure has been needed to deal with queues.
-
The UK adopted a new points based immigration system, a promise of the Vote Leave campaign, in January 2021. This removed the right for EU workers to come to the UK without a visa and implemented the target to cut immigration to the tens of thousands. The target does appear unlikely, given the number of residence visas issued was higher in the year ending June 2022 than in any year since records began - with 1.2 million issued. Meanwhile, Brexit has created a shortage of 330,000 workers in UK.
This is some of the rhetoric the Leave campaign used to garner votes, but none of it is what it was supposed to accomplish.
The architects of Brexit were proponents of William Reese-Mogg’s ideology of the Sovereign Individual, which basically states that the wealthy should be above the law and outside the pervue of the state. It also calls for the collapse of democracy, via the withholding of the rich’s wealth from the state via tax immunity.
It’s still unclear whether the Sovereign Individualists will succeed in their goals, but they haven’t failed yet, and Brexit was a necessity hurdle on their journey.
I watched a DW video about some woman who voted for Brexit running a shellfish farm and with all the new regulations she’s dealing with very short shelf life seafood that has to get to the EU with a bunch more red tape. She is losing money and might have to sell her side business because of all the excessive fees she now has to pay to get her seafood out of the country. Totally a leopards ate my face party member.
-
The majority of the pro-brexit voters main goal was to ‘deport all them foreigners’, which was impossible with freedom of movement. When brexit ‘got done’ and it turned out those brown people they saw at the doctor were actually third generation brits, but the nice white couple down the street were actually non-brits and were forced to leave, many changed their mind.
But the Tories and new-new labor won’t even consider a re-vote. Heck, after 12 by-election losses, Tories won’t even consider a general until statue forces them.
and new-new labor won’t even consider a re-vote.
Especially bizarre after Sir Kid Starver was the one at the front of the “Peoples Vote” campaign to have a referendum on the final deal!
Arch-Brexiteer Nigel Farage thinks Brexit has failed.
After months of lying to the British people, screwing over GB and becoming a meme, reactionary fuck Farage thinks he might have been wrong. But it gets better:
The former Brexit Party leader told the BBC in May that the U.K. had not benefited economically from leaving the bloc, blaming the ruling Conservatives for having “let us down very, very badly.”
So, no. He wasn’t wrong. How could he ever be wrong?! Like a wise man with a funny voice once said: It wasn’t me.
If you click the link to the article about him saying it failed, he says:
Asked if the U.K. would have been better off remaining in the EU Farage insisted he didn’t “think that for a moment.”
So I think he’s sticking to his guns that leaving was better than staying. The situation sucks for everyone in the UK :(
I am sorry for what happened to you guys who wanted to stay.
Yeah, listening to loud idiots rarely works out
And yet current worldwide politics shows us it does work for the benefit of politicians, military juntas and Big Business.
Time to eat the rich for real.
Well, there’s a lot of idiots who listen and vote for people who hate them for some reason
Can we just throw them out of the windows? Like, I don’t want to literally eat a person.
Defenestration is always preferred!
Yep, we Czechs have some history with that.
Some of us just left the country, worked out pretty good!
Well, he made so many contradicting promises. It would be impossible to implement his Brexit. Pretty sure tha was his plan. When he offered full control over our trade, laws and migration. While also claiming we could be like EEA nations.
Bingo. It’s a typical populist tactic. Over promise, then blame it on the person who gets stuck implementing their shitty plan.
Technically, it didn’t fail. It happened exactly the way anyone sane expected it to. That’s why people said it’s a stupid fucking idea.
Their fantasies didn’t materialize and now the Brexiteers are disappointed and claim their wishful thinking just “failed” instead of realizing it was always garbage.
Briturn when?
Regardless of butthurt feelings on either side, it can’t happen. The EU doesn’t do special treatments anymore, so Britain would be forced to adopt the Euro, and would not benefit from any of the special “opt-out” clauses it had negotiated before leaving. This is unacceptable to everyone who voted for Brexit, as well as to the moderate pro-Europe crowd. i.e. completely politically untenable.
For better and (mostly) for worse, Britain will spend the next few decades isolated on the European level. Best case scenario would be, in a decade or two, for the UK to join the EEA, but that’s still a huge downgrade in every way compared to full membership as British companies would be subject to all the rules of the European Single Market without getting a vote in any of them, in exchange for getting access back to the EU market.
Just wait until the next currency crisis hits and the Pound falls below Euro parity. Since the introduction of the Euro in 2000 the Pound has already lost almost 30% of its value in a direct comparison and could not recover since the Brexit vote.
Regardless of (arguable) merit, the UK will never switch to the Euro. For all that the British Empire has fallen from glory, the GBP is over 1200 years old which makes it the oldest currency still in use, and it is still a respected & stable currency.
They would never get rid of it for a currency controlled by the ECB, it would be political suicide to even propose such a thing.The name is 1200 years old. But the pound of the 800s was only similar to now in name. Not just decimalization. But we were on the gold standard then. Heck, even pence has changed to new pence.
In the unlikely event, we are ever willing and welcome to join the EU again. If we are forced to accept the Euro. The EU is very likely to allow us to print our own. And name it as we like. So options can exist.
As or it being ECB controlled. The idea that any nation has full control over its currency is becoming less logical. As decisions by other nations have too much effect. Back in empire days when the UK had the buying power to effect other nations. The logic existed. But now the events in the US more and more so ECU nations and china. Effect the value of our currency more than actions BOE. Heck, even PM lettuce head was unable to change its value as much as US bank investments in 2008.
If our buying power continues to drop. There will eventually become a point where the idea of a larger group of nations buying power will appeal. More so as the generation raised in EU membership becomes the elderly voters of today.
The US Dollar moved off the gold standard at about the same time as the British Pound. Yet you can still use a 200 year old dollar bill in the US if you so wish (you just can’t redeem it at a bank for gold anymore). Of course if you show up with a 500 year old British Pound and try to pay a fine with it, you’ll get turned away, but the point is that it’s been in continuous use, so I think it’s fair to say it’s the same currency.
Of course those old coins are practically irrelevant to today’s fiat currency, but switching from the GBP to the Euro doesn’t just mean “yeah fuck it it’s all the same anyway”. The currency being controlled by the ECB matters a whole fucking lot because the ECB sets (among other things) interest rates. Recent events should put in perspective how important that is: the ECB’s 2022/2023 method for raising its interest rates to combat inflation has been “raise them as high as we dare to while not immediately bankrupting Italy because they have a lot of debt”. That’s a very real fundamental control that the BOE would be relinquishing by switching to the Euro. Having a currency pegged to the Euro still has those concerns, and also I’m not sure the EU would let the UK do that.
But besides that, I think people do care simply because they like the GBP. Remember that the passport color was somehow a huge thing in the lead-up to Brexit, so I really don’t think replacing all those pictures of QEII and KCIII by pictures of fake bridges would go over so well, to say the least.
Even in my country, one of the most pro-European, pro-Eurozone countries, with a previously tiny currency that no-one else used, lots of reactionaries/conservatives STILL think switching to the Euro was a mistake. And everyone old enough at the time will rant and rant about how “everybody” took opportunity of the currency change to jack up prices.I mean sure, if the British economy falls down so far as to become Eastern European tier, then we might see the tides change. But first of all you still have a long way down to go, and second of all I’m not sure the EU would be willing to welcome the UK back in at that point…
They might in the future. The exchange rate used to be 5 USD to 1 GBP. The pound seems like it will continue its slide, and I can see the remainers living through this and deciding it is worth giving up the pound for EU membership.
I didn’t realize the pound was the oldest currency still in use. Does that mean you could use coins minted in the 800s as legal tender? (Regardless of the fact that they’d be worth far more than their face value due to their age)
As of 2020, the oldest circulating coins in the UK are the 1p and 2p copper coins introduced in 1971. No other coins from before 1982 are in circulation. Prior to the withdrawal from circulation in 1992, the oldest circulating coins usually dated from 1947: although older coins were still legal tender, inflation meant that their silver content was worth more than their face value, so they tended to be removed from circulation and hoarded. Before decimalisation in 1971, a handful of change might have contained coins over 100 years old, bearing any of five monarchs’ heads, especially in the copper coins.
There is a continuous history for the GBP from the 800s up to now, but that doesn’t make it legal tender. The good news is that they’re all worth way more simply because the value of silver is higher than the face value of the coin.
Britannia waives the rules.
This must be the most underrated pun I’ve seen on Lemmy.
Spoiler: a play of Britannia rules the waves which was a common saying a hundred years ago
I can’t take credit for it, sadly.
I kind of wonder if the UK completely broke up and each country joined it might happen faster.
Honestly. Not any time soon.
To many brexit voters think it was done wrong. Rather then a bad idea in the first place. So any attempt to rejoin will constantly face a fair and balanced news media. Presenting people who will outright lie about what is possible
The whole of the UK has to accept that the version of Brexit they got was the version they asked for. That the promises of all the benefits of trade. With no restrictions in rules. Do not exist. Any trade we do anywhere in the world requires products to meet that nation’s standards. Borderless trade will require us to follow the rules of that trade area. Any trade where that is not a fact. Will require some form of customs check to ensure the products being imported meet their rules. Not our own.
Until the nation is willing to accept that. We cannot be a nation the EU will want back.
That’s the paradox. The people too stupid to understand it’s a bad idea are also stupid enough to believe when people tell them it wasn’t the idea’s fault
Agreed. But 30plus years of the UK government falsely blaming the EU and tabloids supporting it. Really does not help. More so as both side of the house did it. So no one was really selling the truth until the end.
Imagine if that actually happens within the next few years.
Then we have another call for brexit in another fifteen.
It surprises me that so many people think it didn’t fail. Remainers, which as far as I can remember nearly made up 50%, will almost all think it has failed from the start because they see the whole Brexit as a failed idea. And many Brexiteers seemed to have very unrealistic ideas about Brexit, seemingly thinking that they could just boss the EU around and get everything their way. And because we don’t live in their fairytale Brexit utopia world, they would always have been disappointed. Add to that the general incompetency of the Conservatives and it’s honestly quite astounding that anyone still thinks it’s going well.
Maybe someday one of the politicians will grow a pair and either launch rejoin agenda or at the least a Norway/Swiss model.
It should be clear to anyone with more than an 🦠 for a brain cell that it is a failed ideal.
The eu won’t allow another Norway or Swiss model. It’s created too many headaches. Of the uk rejoins, they will commit to the euro and lose their CAP rebate, just like any other new entrant. It’ll probably only take 10 years before accession talks.
The price the UK will have to pay. What can I say, play stupid games win stupid prizes.
But even that price would be more beneficial than the present state of affairs.
Lol. Right now British passports are waiting in the “everyone else” line at various immigration checkpoints around Europe. Citizens of fucking Bulgaria get to go through the express entry, which is basically just scanning your passport like you’re entering the subway.
Bulgaria has a better passport than you Britain, and you’re waiting behind some fat Americans saying they can’t wait to “see the home of French fries”, in Paris…
EFTA already said that they don’t want the UK to join.
Literally everyone saw this coming but they didn’t listen. If only more of the people who wanted to remain went out to vote back then…
Now do climate change.
Propaganda is a powerful drug. They didn’t listen because Rupert didn’t want them to.
Robert Mercer (and thus Russia) is to blame. Also Dominic Cummings and his “Vote leave” smear campaign.
Everyone who didn’t should see Brexit - The Uncivil War
And many people were too lazy to go vote.
I knew since Day 1
I thought there was a LeopardsAteMyFace community in this server
“Cor blimey, leopards ate me face, innit!”
Not sure in what scenario someone that uses “blimey” would also use “innit” but, we’re here for it!
Task failed successfully!
when you have to suffer for the slow learners.
farage will never take responsibility for anything. absolute slug of a man.
Harsh on slugs.
It’s has been truly bizarre watching that country commit to communal suicide even as an American. You out Murica’d America.
