The Complexities of Brexit: What Did the Voters Really Want?
When times are tough and the majority of the country is experiencing economic hardships, there is an inherent urge for change. This historically takes place as a political party's term of office nears an end. A change in policy is usually beneficial for at least five years or until the next general election. However, in the absence of an election, any change, even if it's not ideal, can satisfy the populace. It just so happened that by the end of the previous term, Brexit was available as a political wedge.
The government used Brexit as a tool to transfer blame to the European Union (EU), effectively painting the EU as the cause of all societal ills. The Brexit narrative was framed in such a way that the public bought into it, guaranteeing another term in office for the ruling party. The problem with this strategy was that it was so persuasive that the public actually voted to leave the EU, creating an opportunity for the far-right factions within the capitalist political parties to thrive.
The aftermath was a mix of relief and shock as the government and the public grappled with the consequences of the vote. Those who had campaigned for Brexit celebrated it initially, but as time passed, many realized that the promised benefits were far from reality. A significant portion of the Leave supporters are now shifting their opinion, seeing the decision as a deception, which highlights the complexity and the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote.
Opinions on Brexit from European Citizens: One common viewpoint is that Brexit was a move to revert to the past and a step backward rather than forward. Many voters supported staying in the EU because they recognized that leaving would lead to higher prices, economic instability, and a regression in terms of the country's global standing. They were afraid of losing the benefits of free movement, trade, and the support of the EU in times of socio-economic difficulties.
Some voters, however, supported Brexit based on their desire for greater sovereignty. They believed that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) overruled national laws and that the UK should have the power to set its own regulations. The desire to leave the Customs Union and to shape trade policy according to the UK's unique interests was another significant factor. The argument was that a compromise policy between 27 different EU nations was not in the UK's best interest. While immigration was a less prominent concern, the broader issues of sovereignty and trade policy were enough to sway many voters towards Brexit.
The Far-Right and the Brexiteers: The far-right factions within political parties supported Brexit because it affected their voter base the least. Their influence and pressure were crucial in pushing the decision through, sometimes at the expense of the interests of the broader UK population. This manipulation of public sentiment through cherry-picking certain narratives demonstrates the complexity of the decision-making process that led to Brexit.
Concluding Thoughts: Most people, when faced with an opportunity, vote for change. In this case, the political party gambled the future of the UK for another term in office. The significant drawback was that this gamble was pursued with the complicity of far-right elements, who prioritized their own interests over the general well-being of the country. The relationship between the government, the public, and the far-right elements has been a complex and impactful scenario that continues to reverberate through British politics and society.