Not what but how, the vote was achieved
"I would like to start by saying to the British people that its always hard to accept a decision that you disagree with. But we have to accept it. Their choice is clear and it needs to be respected, at least on that more than the 700 members here can agree. So it's in my feeling that not so much the choice they have made is hard, because choice is the essence of democracy and of our democracy. What makes it so hard for me and I think also for the other group leaders and everybody here in this house is the way it succeeded. The absolute negative campaign."
Guy Verhofstadt - 47th Prime Minister of Belgium during the first EU Parliamentary session after Brexit [28 Jun 2016]
Fully agreeing with Mr. Verhofstadt, I remember being in a form of disbelief, shame and disappointment as I watched the leave campaign flaunt large billboards of groups of refugees flooding into Europe and eventually UK (an image later claimed to be photo-shopped), the £350 million sent weekly to the EU which can be redirected to the National Healthcare Service (NHS), a statement retracted as incorrect the morning following the Brexit vote and other obnoxious statements which were extension of the truth or more often blatant lies. In the 21st century democratic Britain, viewed at the forefront of diplomacy, multiculturalism and transparency, it was heart-wrenching to witness a campaign of fear and extreme-nationalism override facts, figures and the reality. It simply goes on to demonstrate that irrespective of the gross domestic production (GDP), level of literacy or the side of the digital divide a nation belongs to all humans are wired to be more partial to emotions than intellect, and even the best of us crumble to unite under the wrong cause when presented a so-called common enemy.
National gullibility
The media obviously had a field day the day after the Brexit vote highlighting the spike in google searches of 'What is EU?'and the general disbelief demonstrated by some leave voters when they came to terms with the true impact of their actions on the British economy, as predicted by the opposition repeatedly. Even if one ignores the google searches and the teary interviews given by repenting leave voters, the question of were roughly 16 million citizens of Britain this gullible needs to be addressed. Apart from the emotional drive of wanting to make Britain independent again and gaining control of its borders, it must be presumed that leave voters took into account the economic repercussions, weighed it against other factors and dismissed as worth risking. Why then was there a level of shock, disbelief and betrayal when the British pound and the stock market dramatically flopped in the weeks to come after the vote?
In my opinion there are simply 2 explanations. Firstly it may have been than the leave campaign did a much better job at breaking down the key points, irrespective of their credibility, to their supporters. Simple slogans, numbers and pictures on the side of large red buses and billboards were easy on the eyes and brains of the wider British public. The leave campaigners spoke a language understood by the people and their ideologies became household discussions shared around the dinner table. So when the stay campaigners with their expert opinions, statistics and forecasts came forward to dismiss the exaggerated and mostly false comments it was too late. The warnings and predictions of instability and drawbacks of leaving Europe continued to fall on deaf years like the doctor's advice to a high risk heart patient on avoiding a full-English breakfasts.
Secondly people just didn't know, didn't care or couldn't really comprehend the reality of the Brexit referendum and its aftermath. Regardless of being able to conduct independent research by turning to the internet and reading the figures and discussions related to the matter, it appears that individuals were content with the information provided by mainstream media and their politician of choice. The dangers of a human mind that doesn't question nor critically analyze the information it encounters need not be elaborated except to say, it often leads to self inflicted tyranny.
Economic Vs cultural compatibility of an immigrant
I consider myself a more global citizen with little regard for nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender and most other concepts the human race has used over the years to divide and appear superior to others. I believe there is no one way to be British, American, catholic, hippie, well you get the point. Personally I believe if an individual is able to contribute to a nation's economy in a positive manner, adhere to its laws and maintain a civil relationship with his/her neighbours (and the people he/she encounters on a daily basis), the said individual is pretty much a model citizen and an integral part of the local society. However, I was speaking to a young, highly educated, well traveled, politically well-versed, Caucasian, male, British, upper-middle class friend who voted leave, when something he said sparked a stream of alternative thought in my head.
He told me that for many years when people voiced their concern over growing levels of immigration, they were dismissed as either being racists or as disrupters of economic prosperity. He told me that after a long day of work when he's catching the train back home which goes through parts of town where he could hardly understand the language being spoken or identify with the faces of the people, he feels like he's lost his home. He believes that politicians have always measured immigration on a scale of economic loss or gain, when truly the problem was brewing at the heart of cultural identity. Though he appreciated that there are many people out there, such as myself, for whom cultural elements are of little to no significance, it is of great importance to him and he is tired of being silenced with a gag of racism, leading him to finally voice his opinion through the leave vote when provided the opportunity.
As we sit at the brink of the next United States election, reminiscing over the broken road to Brexit these are 3 points not only global leaders but all of us as responsible citizens with sufficient levels of intellect to obtain and critically analyze information, need to seriously consider. Regardless of how progressive the information technology is at present, it is important to break down facts and figures in a manner which is appealing to all levels of society. Furthermore, democracy is not simply the right to vote and decide but also to proactively seek out the truth or the closets version of the truth, and then electing people to follow it through. Pointing fingers at main stream media and cheap politicians for misleading once all is done and dusted, as demonstrated by Brexit, will achieve nothing. Finally not only must people be allowed to voice their concerns which go against the popular/model views in safe, constructive and judgement-free environments, but they need to be taken seriously and addressed in effective and sustainable manners. If not it is fair to say Brexit will only be one of the many negatively driven campaigns with colossal socio-economic repercussions the Western world will face in the years to come.
Comments
Post a Comment