Brexit — Why Did It Happen?

Populism is founded on appealing to the base instincts of people who are essentially dissatisfied with the establishment. A well used cliché among the populists in denouncing the establishment and arousing dissatisfaction among voters is “same old..same old”. However, one cannot deny that those who win over people democratically, whether they be populists or not, show leadership qualities.

by Dr Ruwantissa Abeyratne

( June 25, 2016, Montreal, Sri Lanka Guardian) Now that Brexit has happened much against warnings from the intellectuals and leaders of the world, one could only say that the majority of the British public were not interested in anything but “getting their country back” (whatever that meant) – the words of a controversial person who is much in the news today. Another called the day after the vote “independence day”. The issue of The Economist released just before the referendum said: “A vote to quit the European Union, which polls say is a growing possibility, would do grave and lasting harm to the politics and economy of Britain. The loss of one of EU’s biggest members would gouge a deep wound in the rest of Europe…we believe that leaving would be a terrible error. It would weaken Europe and it would impoverish and diminish Britain. Our vote goes to remain.”

Also in the same club were Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of Britain, Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister of Australia, Francois Hollande, President of France and Matteo Renzi, Prime Minister of Italy, while Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, wished Britain would stay in the EU, as did the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Shinzo Abe, the Japanese Prime Minister said that a Brexit would make it more difficult for Japan to trade with Britain. The International Monetary Fund, ten Nobel-prize winning economists and the Bank of England all warned that leaving the EU could damage the economy.

So why did it happen and why were all the pundits and leaders of the world ignored by the British people? My take, albeit simplistically put, is that the majority of the world might not read The Economist nor would they make world leaders part and parcel of their daily reading or entertainment. National identity, protectionism of employment from foreigners, education and health care for British citizens, however misunderstood in the context of the prevailing establishment, could have been the reason for the upsurge to leave, again in the words of The Economist: “an imperfect, at times maddening club”.

Notwithstanding the above, the core reason for the leaning toward leaving the EU by the British voter by a majority (however small) could well have been populist political rhetoric which, in recent times has been a compelling factor in swaying the voter against the establishment in many countries around the world. In this context, it would be worthwhile to go back to what some of the proponents of Brexit said to the British voter. The Guardian reports Boris Johnson MP and then Mayor of London – a key backer of Brexit : “In typically colourful language, the London mayor told an audience in Kent that the British must “hold our nerve and not be cowed by the gloomadon poppers” who think the UK would not prosper on its own. He went on to issue a plea for voters to “ignore the pessimists and the merchants of doom” who are arguing the UK should fear being outside the EU – an argument made by Cameron on the grounds of economic uncertainty and national security. Johnson then cited Canada as a good example of a country that has free trade deals with the rest of the world while maintaining control of its borders. “I think we can strike a deal as the Canadians have done based on trade and getting rid of tariffs. It’s a very, very bright future I see,” he said”. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. I think there is a huge opportunity. Do free trade deals, believe in ourselves,” he said”.

Michel Gove, Justice Minister of the UK is reported to have said: “’And the appropriate conclusion, I think, all of us can come to is that with growth rates so low in Europe, with so many unemployed and with the nature of the single currency so damaging, freeing ourselves from that project can only strengthen our economy.’

In an earlier essay on politics and good governance I wrote that a simplistic definition of leadership is that it is the art of motivating a group of people to act towards achieving a common goal. Put even more simply, a leader is the inspiration and director of the action. He or she is the person in the group that possesses the combination of personality and skills that makes others want to follow his or her direction. Peter Drucker, the Harvard management guru, defines a leader as “someone who has followers…” and goes on to say “to gain followers requires influence”. Warren Bennis is of the view that “leadership is a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is well communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to realize your own leadership potential. Kenneth Boulding says that “good leaders are made not born. If you have the desire and willpower, you can become an effective leader. Good leaders develop through a never ending process of self-study, education, training, and experience.”

I also wrote that, a political leader has, according to Prem Misir, to combine two behavioural styles – the first being empathy and concern relating to people, which includes respecting people and developing mutual trust. The second is concern with project-completion tasks. Some studies have shown that leaders are effective when they combine both behaviours. Misir states that “political leaders have to not only ‘press the flesh’ but also be knowledgeable about issues and have the capacity to resolve these issues. A good leader can attenuate values from the humanities which bring to a society the elements of empathy and concern and helps build respect and mutual trust. In this context Nussbaum refers to a “greedy desire” and “aggression” in modern society that makes people veer from respect for democracy towards economic success. She quotes Mahatma Gandhi who believed that mutual respect and equality in people must essentially stem from self realization attained through an inner struggle by each person.

There have been regrets among some voters who voted to leave. The Independent reported: “In an interview with Victoria Derbyshire as part of the BBC’s referendum coverage, Adam from Manchester admitted that even though he voted to leave the EU, a result which came true in the early hours of Friday morning, he now regrets his decision. “I’m shocked that we actually have voted to leave. I didn’t think that was going to happen. My vote, I didn’t think was going to matter too much because I thought we were just going to remain”.

Adam may be just one of a few with such regrets but there could be many more. The inevitable fact is that it is now too late. What has been done cannot be undone. This is why the voter must be more astute and intelligent when he decides.