How can Britain's divisions be healed?

The country is massively divided on Brexit and these divisions are only getting deeper. Here is when Owen Jones, a prominent left-wing Guardian journalist, went to interview people at a rally for Nigel Farage's Brexit Party. He got insulted and shouted at by almost everyone he was filmed interviewing. The main points made by these people were about democracy but ironically almost nobody tried to engage him in rational discourse and one person even said that the Guardian newspaper should be banned:

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sltIisHseA]

The mood at the Brexit rally was one of right-wing anti-establishment anger fuelled by tribal bitterness against anything that they disagree with. Obviously, its a rally and it's the hard-core rather than the majority of party support, but they are the hard-core of a party which is polling very well.

The Brexit Party won't win a UK General Election, but they will probably push the Conservative Party into supporting a no-deal Brexit. Boris Johnson, now the clear front-runner to replace May, has already said that Britain must leave the EU by October 'with or without a deal'. There is no deal that could conceivably be negotiated that would appease the majority of Brexit voters.

The anger and sense of betrayal felt by the people at the Brexit rally is only likely to increase. If the unscrupulous and caddish Johnson walks back on his no-deal promise then Farage and our right-wing tabloids will further inflame these tensions. If there is a no-deal Brexit then there will be a huge recession and people will feel betrayed again. This anger could go in different places but some of it will go further down the well of the nationalist right.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

MartinII · 70-79, M

Two points if I may. First, I think the anger and division over Brexit that you describe is at least partly a symptom rather than the main cause. The underlying division, I suggest, is between the non-metropolitan working and rural classes, on the one hand, and on the other the “liberal” establishment, which includes much of the Conservative Party as well as the nominally left-wing parties. The former category feel themselves ignored, neglected and insulted by the latter. The Brexit referendum seemed like a chance to gain their revenge. They took it, but, as they see it, they have been betrayed.

Second, why do you think a no deal Brexit would be such a disaster? I know you think it would cause a recession, but why, on what evidence? And even if you are right, recessions, while sometimes painful, happen from time to time and countries usually emerge stronger after them. The other day, in the online comment columns of The Times, I pointed out to a former Cabinet Secretary and former friend of mine that his assertion that no deal would be a disaster was a mere assertion, with no supporting argument. Of course I got no answer. I’m sure you can do better.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@MartinII On the first paragraph, you know I completely disagree. It's a perspective which I don't share and there is no way that this Corbynista is ever gonna see any Tory MP as 'left'.

I'm not sure I can do better than a cabinet secretary but I do read a bit of economics.

https://www.ft.com/content/f9a5fd52-4b2a-11e9-bbc9-6917dce3dc62

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/opinion/what-to-expect-when-youre-expecting-brexit.html

https://www.growthbusiness.co.uk/yanis-varoufakis-says-brexit-is-the-worst-of-all-possible-outcomes-2555632/

The FT is a source which traditionally supports the Conservative Party and is anti-left. Krugman is a centre-left American. Varoufakis is more of an outright leftist. All three agree that Brexit would be very bad.

I've also asked other Brexiteers to provide economic evidence for why Brexit will be good or OK and I've never had a detailed answer. I welcome your contributions though and I like that you have good manners
.

MartinII · 70-79, M

@Burnley123On social policy I think you’ll find there’s very little difference between mainstream Conservative and mainstream Labour. It was, for example, a Conservative-led government that brought you gay marriage. Much more difference on economic policy, certainly.

I’m afraid I don’t agree with your description of the FT. It traditionally supports the left wing of the Conservative Party, but has been on the remain extreme of the Brexit debate.

In brief, my view is that Brexit will, or would, open up new markets and facilitate the promotion of an enterprise economy free of the constraints of EU regulation. It is therefore potentially beneficial economically, though it would beup to governments and companies to exploit the benefits. Of course, only no deal, or a very liberal deal, would enable these benefits to be maximised. And a side effect would be reduced protections for those in permanent work, which I would favour but I’m sure you would not, for reasons I respect.

Thank you for your last sentence. There’s no reason why people who disagree strongly about politics shouldn’t be able to have a civilised debate, in my opinion.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@MartinII I likewise welcome your last sentence.

What you are advocating here is the Singapore model of free-market capitalism. This is what Farage, Raab, Javid and lot of the Brexiteers actually want. I'm against this because I would prefer a more social democratic model of capitalism but your argument does have a rational sense in its own terms.

What I do despair at is that so many working class people (who are social democratic on economic policy) support the Brexit Party when the real final agenda of Brexit politicians is not in their interests. People would not support the Singapore model of Brexit if that was actually put to the public and that is why it never is. Instead of more money for the NHS (as of the bus) the Brexit politicians would abolish the NHS.

MartinII · 70-79, M

@Burnley123 You are probably right about some of the Brexit politicians, if by abolish the NHS you mean increasingly privatise it or replace it with a different model of healthcare. But I’m not sure about Farage. The Brexit Party‘s website seems not to mention any policy other than Brexit itself. In 2015 I briefly flirted with the idea of voting UKIP, for obvious reasons. But when the candidate’s leaflet dropped through my letterbox, it was full of half-baked left-wing proposals, or at least ones designed to appeal to working-class voters - higher welfare benefits, more money for the NHS etc, nothing about how such things might be funded. And of course Farage brought us the bus!

As an aside, I note that your list doesn’t include Johnson, and I think that’s right. He seems to me to be more middle-of-the-road, or more open-minded, on general policy than some of the other Brexiteers.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@MartinII This video shows what Nigel's real views are:

What Nigel Farage really thinks

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/nov/12/what-nigel-farage-really-thinks-ukip-video?

Its as I was saying: the real desires of Brexiteer politicians are often not advertised and i do see this as duplicitous.

As of Johnson, I don't think he has any strong beliefs beyond his own desire to be PM. I don't think he really even believes in Brexit but he knows backing it helps his career.

SW-User

@MartinII to go to your point of "evidence" here's, for me, party of the crux of the problem.
Anything is a prediction, an estimate that will be proved right or wrong only in the fullness of time. One of my problems with the leave position from day one of the campaign was what is leave? In out customs Union in out single market or just wto.

I'd point out even ukips position had always been we'd negotiate a withdrawal agreement. That was both major leave campaign positions in the referendum.

Now evidence. Show me another g20 nation ouside an aligned local trading block? Show me any developed nation actually? Show me any country in the world trading only on wto rules? I've only found Moldova but they have a deal to sell steal into EU markets without tarrifs.

We're conducting a massive economic and social experiment never tried before with the world's 7th largest economy. Are we truly understanding or appreciating that risk?

MartinII · 70-79, M

@SW-User Those are good and fair points. I certainly agree it’s a risk. On the other side, I’d argue first, that there’s no example to show it won’t work - as you say, we’re the 7th largest economy and there’s no-one else of comparable size working solely under wto rules. And second, I’m sure we wouldn’t be on our own for long. For a start, the EU would want us as trading partners, and having left we’d be in a much stronger position to negotiate favourable terms.