Jaicee said:
I'm from the U.S., but I think I can help you with a couple things: I find that the term "establishment" anymore is used very generously to describe anyone of an opposing political viewpoint, especially when that viewpoint may be more popular than one's own persuasion (perhaps for damn good reason). That's what it really means anymore, in my observation: that one knows their own viewpoint to be unpopular. The opponents of Brexit mobilize around a campaign called People's Vote. The goal of People's Vote is for Brexit to be held to a second direct vote of the public. There is a reason why Brexit opponents are up for another vote on the subject: because they know their position would likely emerge victorious. Conversely, there is a reason why Brexit supporters insist that no, the original verdict wherein Brexit carried the day by a whole two point margin, must be acted upon: because they know that, three and a half years on, people have now had PLENTY of time to think about and discover the full implications of Brexit and might just vote a different way at this point if presented with the opportunity. Three and a half years is a long time. Public opinion changes. No one disputes that Britain will "survive" Brexit, the question is in what condition. The simple fact of the matter is that leaving the EU will cause significant economic harm to the UK and result in the country enjoying significantly less bargaining power when it comes to negotiating future economic agreements with other countries. In fact, even just the mere prospect of leaving the EU has already put the economy of the United Kingdom into recession. Just the mere prospect of it has already scared away enough investment to produce that result. Imagine if say a no-deal Brexit were actually implemented! Then there are the implications of re-establishing a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland (which I would argue is tantamount to re-colonizing the latter and that that's precisely part of the aim of Brexiteers) to consider. Implications like, realistically the resumption of armed conflict. There's a reason why this scam has been supported not only by an opportunistic U.S. government that would seek a more parasitic relationship to our allies across the pond, but also by Russian intelligence for shit sakes, and it's got nothing to do with advancing the better interests of the United Kingdom. |
Interesting (in regards to both/all responses I've gotten).. I guess I just don't know enough about the issue being from across the ocean. It's just that I tend to have a certain bias for a couple reasons - one being I'm always quite wary of what would be considered larger more globalist power structures. I tend to be of the belief that while power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I gathered from what little I know about the issue is that many Brits seem to think the EU's increasing powers effects their sovereignty more and more while they have officials there they don't even make largely affecting Brittish policies/economies, etc.
Additionally as I said, I'm hesitant of free trade agreements and the like as a Midwesterner who's seen those sorts of policies affect our economies in a tremendously negative way. But I suppose it's vastly different circumstances for different societies. I'm still not sure I totally buy what seems to be fearmongering for leaving the EU, and even if it was once beneficial for Britain circumstances change and things evolve. But again I'll be the first to admist I'm not quite knowledgeable in the topic so I'll leave it alone from here I suppose, was just curious.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident - all men and women created by the, go-you know.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden
