Like a lot of people, I found it very hard to decide which way to vote in the referendum. I've found a lot to dislike in the way the EU has operated since 1992 and thus had no great love for it as an organisation, but at the same time was worried about the potential economic fallouts, as well as how difficult the act of leaving could potentially be. The reaction of those on the Remain side after the result became clear genuinely shocked me though. I've never seen such sheer contempt voiced by so many people for those who happened to hold a different opinion from them, along with a considerable amount of (unjustified) intellectual snobbery and class hatred. There's definitely a lot to criticise on the leave side, but the thing that made me feel most negatively about the society and country I called home was the hysterical, arrogant and frankly childish behaviour of those who lost a vote and then couldn't accept it.
Agreed and, unfortunately, I engaged in that kind of thing in the weeks after the referendum. Fortunately, I'd wised up by the time the People's Vote campaign emerged.
I very much agree with you and remember a Labour party member telling me after the referendum that leaves voters were just uneducated idiots. I did wonder if they knew why the Labour party had been formed.
In defence of the Remainers, I think you have to ask why these people acted as they did. I believe it was fear. Like the author, I believed that GDP would collapse overnight, and I was a moderate voice who accepted the decision. I think some genuinely believed leaving the EU was going to see half the population lose their jobs and our economy to lose its developed world status.
Who knows, they may be right, but I'm sure for some of those on the People's Vote march, the fact we aren't living in Mad Max by 2026 would have been a massive surprise.
That a Labour Party member said that is quite amusing but also depressing. It's like Michael Foot and Peter Shore never existed. I agree it was partly fear but I think something else was also in play. The expansion of higher education has created a large population of people with very average intelligence who now consider themselves to be above the masses. The Brexit vote was a sudden confirmation of the stupidity of everyone below them and a chance to vent their contempt.
'The expansion of higher education has created a large population of people with very average intelligence who now consider themselves to be above the masses.'
Brexit has been quite the ride for all involved! Not sure if you'll agree but one thing I'm struck by now is how useless the media was in analysing and clarifying what was happening prior to brexit and then during the withdrawal negotiations. It seemed almost like "what-if" analyses were being churned out on an industrial scale. In fairness the 2 processes were very complex and opaque, but in hindsight that's not much of an excuse for the relentless nature of the speculation on possible outcomes. Websites gotta get them clicks though I suppose!
Yes, the media could have done a lot better. Though in fairness to the media, academic experts such as Anand Menon featured quite prominently in some outlets.
"Remainers wept because they sensed the loss of the country’s driving seat."
Indeed. Perhaps why so many of them were unable to accept defeat and spent the next three and a half years trying to overturn the result instead of working for a form of Brexit they could live with.
I don't think they have ever really understood how much they alienated and radicalised soft Leave voters, or that whilst there had been arguments for leaving and arguments for remaining there were no good arguments for voting to leave but being forced to remain anyway.
> Researchers have undertaken numerous studies of its effects and find a negative economic impact in areas such as trade, investment and productivity. Given that the vast majority of economists predicted such an outcome, we should not be surprised.
Being unsurprised can be read two ways of course. Researchers and economists "exaggerated" (lied) to manipulate the public; why would they not now publish studies continuing in the same tradition? There were no consequences for their dishonesty after all. Even Paul Krugman admitted this. Universities don't care about intellectual probity so they can continue to lie in perpetuity, and probably be rewarded for it by their peers.
The truth: there was no economic impact. Trade, GDP, whatever stat you choose, nothing much has happened. Britain continues to track the miserable economic performance of the rest of Europe. Trade ratios continued on their long term trajectory. There was no post-vote recession.
The studies that show otherwise are, when read carefully, all just academics lying again. They compare Britain to the USA and claim the gap is because of Brexit. They construct pretend counterfactuals where if Britain had stayed in it'd have experience a huge burst of growth out of nowhere. Etcetera.
When we look back, what we see is:
1. More local control.
2. No costs. Not even many of the famous red lines and cherries. The academics turned out to be bluffers and Britain is back in Horizon for instance, and a bunch of other institutions that were supposedly exclusive to members too.
Thus supporting Brexit was, in hindsight, a completely correct choice with no downsides except for people who wanted to emigrate to the EU, have no financial resources and can't convince a European firm to employ them - but hardly any fit into this category.
As I say in the piece, Remain activists certainly exaggerated the economic effects of Brexit. But I can't agree with your comments about the academic studies. Not only do lots of these studies come to similar conclusions, but I don't agree that the motivations of researchers are so cynical.
Like a lot of people, I found it very hard to decide which way to vote in the referendum. I've found a lot to dislike in the way the EU has operated since 1992 and thus had no great love for it as an organisation, but at the same time was worried about the potential economic fallouts, as well as how difficult the act of leaving could potentially be. The reaction of those on the Remain side after the result became clear genuinely shocked me though. I've never seen such sheer contempt voiced by so many people for those who happened to hold a different opinion from them, along with a considerable amount of (unjustified) intellectual snobbery and class hatred. There's definitely a lot to criticise on the leave side, but the thing that made me feel most negatively about the society and country I called home was the hysterical, arrogant and frankly childish behaviour of those who lost a vote and then couldn't accept it.
Agreed and, unfortunately, I engaged in that kind of thing in the weeks after the referendum. Fortunately, I'd wised up by the time the People's Vote campaign emerged.
I very much agree with you and remember a Labour party member telling me after the referendum that leaves voters were just uneducated idiots. I did wonder if they knew why the Labour party had been formed.
In defence of the Remainers, I think you have to ask why these people acted as they did. I believe it was fear. Like the author, I believed that GDP would collapse overnight, and I was a moderate voice who accepted the decision. I think some genuinely believed leaving the EU was going to see half the population lose their jobs and our economy to lose its developed world status.
Who knows, they may be right, but I'm sure for some of those on the People's Vote march, the fact we aren't living in Mad Max by 2026 would have been a massive surprise.
That a Labour Party member said that is quite amusing but also depressing. It's like Michael Foot and Peter Shore never existed. I agree it was partly fear but I think something else was also in play. The expansion of higher education has created a large population of people with very average intelligence who now consider themselves to be above the masses. The Brexit vote was a sudden confirmation of the stupidity of everyone below them and a chance to vent their contempt.
'The expansion of higher education has created a large population of people with very average intelligence who now consider themselves to be above the masses.'
I couldn't possibly comment ;-)
Brexit has been quite the ride for all involved! Not sure if you'll agree but one thing I'm struck by now is how useless the media was in analysing and clarifying what was happening prior to brexit and then during the withdrawal negotiations. It seemed almost like "what-if" analyses were being churned out on an industrial scale. In fairness the 2 processes were very complex and opaque, but in hindsight that's not much of an excuse for the relentless nature of the speculation on possible outcomes. Websites gotta get them clicks though I suppose!
Yes, the media could have done a lot better. Though in fairness to the media, academic experts such as Anand Menon featured quite prominently in some outlets.
"Remainers wept because they sensed the loss of the country’s driving seat."
Indeed. Perhaps why so many of them were unable to accept defeat and spent the next three and a half years trying to overturn the result instead of working for a form of Brexit they could live with.
Yes, their reaction was very disappointing and culminated in the disastrous and undemocratic People's Vote campaign.
I don't think they have ever really understood how much they alienated and radicalised soft Leave voters, or that whilst there had been arguments for leaving and arguments for remaining there were no good arguments for voting to leave but being forced to remain anyway.
Easy to do in a bubble!
> Researchers have undertaken numerous studies of its effects and find a negative economic impact in areas such as trade, investment and productivity. Given that the vast majority of economists predicted such an outcome, we should not be surprised.
Being unsurprised can be read two ways of course. Researchers and economists "exaggerated" (lied) to manipulate the public; why would they not now publish studies continuing in the same tradition? There were no consequences for their dishonesty after all. Even Paul Krugman admitted this. Universities don't care about intellectual probity so they can continue to lie in perpetuity, and probably be rewarded for it by their peers.
The truth: there was no economic impact. Trade, GDP, whatever stat you choose, nothing much has happened. Britain continues to track the miserable economic performance of the rest of Europe. Trade ratios continued on their long term trajectory. There was no post-vote recession.
The studies that show otherwise are, when read carefully, all just academics lying again. They compare Britain to the USA and claim the gap is because of Brexit. They construct pretend counterfactuals where if Britain had stayed in it'd have experience a huge burst of growth out of nowhere. Etcetera.
When we look back, what we see is:
1. More local control.
2. No costs. Not even many of the famous red lines and cherries. The academics turned out to be bluffers and Britain is back in Horizon for instance, and a bunch of other institutions that were supposedly exclusive to members too.
Thus supporting Brexit was, in hindsight, a completely correct choice with no downsides except for people who wanted to emigrate to the EU, have no financial resources and can't convince a European firm to employ them - but hardly any fit into this category.
As I say in the piece, Remain activists certainly exaggerated the economic effects of Brexit. But I can't agree with your comments about the academic studies. Not only do lots of these studies come to similar conclusions, but I don't agree that the motivations of researchers are so cynical.
Yes, they are that cynical.