The best explanation of the English rationale for Brexit that I have seen which also explains why the Scots, for example, oppose it, comes from John Lloyd and is published in the Irish Times. Here’s his conclusion:
England – Britain – voted Brexit not because its citizens regretted the loss of empire, thought it could be re-assembled, believed that the commonwealth could take its place or saw the EU as a sadomasochistic monster. They wished to be governed by a parliament and an administration that they understand, and on which they have a direct influence through their vote.
Nor were their impulses those of 1960s racists. Lisa Nandy, the Labour MP for Wigan and a remainer, wrote in the New York Review of Books that her “leave-voting constituents have been called stupid, racist little Englanders. The truth is nothing of the sort . . . when people were asked if they wanted to leave the EU, it was an opportunity to push back against one of the most vivid symbols of a political system that is faceless, unresponsive and unaccountable, where decisions are made by people hundreds of miles awayâ€.
England – Britain – has not gone mad. The chaotic scenes in parliament and the thousands of arguments up and down the country bear witness to a deeply democratic and civic culture. Those who prefer politics to be the smooth management of the people by an elite mistake it for dementia.
Read the whole thing. What many including Americans, Brits, and Germans fail to understand is that government in England is less centralized than in Germany but more centralized than in the United States. The English want to preserve their way of doing things in the face of opposition from the French and Germans for whom highly centralized government is the natural order of things.
The U. S. is a great outlier. What I fail to understand is the ardor of Americans to impose European-style centralization on the United States. Most of those making that argument would have little problem moving to France or Germany. Why don’t they? My only only supposition is that there must be a buck in their staying here.
Hungary, Ukraine, Czech Republic all have lower tax rates than does the US. Why dont conservative all move there? I would assume for many of the same reasons people dont move to France and Germany. You have to learn a new language, culture is different, family is in the US, dont like the food, dont like the weather, job is here in the US. Its the total package that counts.
Also, I dont think all that many people really want highly centralized government, they just want the things it produces, like cheaper, high quality universal health care. (Remember all of that awful stuff said about those health care systems is largely wrong.) If they could have those things without having to have a highly centralized government I dont think many would care.
Steve
Brexit was favored by a majority in all of England outside of London, and even in Greater London, 40.07% voted to leave. A lot of narratives break-down because in most locations, the vote totals fall between what Americans call the 40 yard lines (btw/ 40/60 and 60/40)
If there is any outlier, its Scotland (62.00% remain), but that’s clearly because remain is the means by which Scotland advances self-government, playing the UK and EU off on each other. Besides Greater London and Scotland, Northern Ireland also voted a majority to remain, which I think had more to do with its relationship with Ireland than anything. (Though ÉirÃgÃ, the socialists, campaigned to leave because they think the EU is fundamentally a neo-liberal organization and they believed they would have more ability to influence policy in an independent UK.)
The concerns over self-government is the best explanation because the Irish socialist can favor leave at the same time the far-right British National Party for different long-term reasons.
You cannot will the ends without willing the means.
“I don’t think all that many people really want highly centralized government, they just want the things it produces, like cheaper, high quality universal health care.”. Is there proof that highly centralized government is a pre-requisite to quality universal health care?
Canada is a refutation of that. The Swiss seem to do alright in health care. In Europe, health care is not run by the EU, it is run by the member states.
I’m not an expert on the UK, but I thought the UK is one of the most centralized countries in the world; in many ways more centralized than Germany.
I thought PD was actually more to the point – the benefits and costs of EU membership were not evenly distributed. i.e. London has greatly benefited due to the financial industry, while the rest of the country has not.
IMO both socialized health care systems and highly centralized governments emerge from countries with stronger social cohesion than ours not the other way around. The unification of Germany in the 19th century and Bismarck’s social plan were products of the same impulses. Also, I’m skeptical that lower costs emerge organically from these health care systems. I suspect that the will to cut costs demands stronger social cohesion and higher trust than we have.
“the benefits and costs of EU membership were not evenly distributed. i.e. London has greatly benefited due to the financial industry, while the rest of the country has not.”
Cornwall was being kept afloat by an infusion of 60-70 mil euros/year, and the folks up there were dismayed to learn that post-Brexit, the UK government wasn’t going to continue the dole. See, Cornwall issues plea to keep EU funding after voting for Brexit
Pace Dave and Mr. Lloyd, I not sure many voting for Brexit understood what was really going to happen.
@CuriousOnlooker, England has been becoming more and more centralized over time and may at this time be the most centralized major European state. A large reason is the NHS, the largest non-military public employer in the world. (*) The other reason is that most of the larger states have utilized some form of federalism. The UK does not have a federal government, it has devolved power to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but England lacks any decisionmaking below the level of the union.
“The partial unravelling of the Act of Union by devolution of power to Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast has left England as the largest nation in Europe, without its own political institutions and as one of the largest centralised administrative units in the world. It was the Second World War, in the judgement of the historian Jose Harris, that changed Britain “from one of the most localised and voluntaristic countries in Europe to one of the most centralised and bureaucraticâ€; for “Britain†now read “Englandâ€. The proportion of England’s public spending controlled from the centre is roughly twice that in France, Japan and Italy, and more than three times that in Germany.”
https://newrepublic.com/article/121699/what-does-political-future-england-hold
(*) Fourth overall, behind the U.S. and Chinese militaries and WalMart.