I have commented before on The Economist’s total inability to accept the Brexit vote, to be fair they are not the only ones there are scores of journalists and publications that seem to spend their time in trying to prove that it was the wrong decision to anybody who will listen even though a month has already passed. There was an article in The Economist which thus far has attracted 934 readers comments which is a lot and pretty much all disagreed with the Editors. Amusingly comment 934 was as follows:
“Looks like one thing for sure is that the Economist is not pandering to its readers. Its benefactors maybe, but judging from the comments not the plebes who read it. Perhaps because your truths about globalization are so self evident to your true believers they feel no need to come to its defense.” http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21702750-farewell-left-versus-right-contest-matters-now-open-against-closed-new
Of Course I Commented
As to why I bothered I cannot say, The Economist is quite obdurate in it’s view that Brexit was delivered by xenophobic, knuckle dragging, uneducated and old people who didn’t understand the question and anyway, shouldn’t have been allowed a vote in the first place. Yep, I guess that describes me down to a T !
What amazes me about these “Remoaners” as the Remain supporters who won’t accept the result are now called, is their failure to grasp that Brexit, Donald Trump, Bernie Saunders, Jeremy Corbyn and Marine Le Pen are but symptoms of an underlying malaise felt by many people, none of them are the “cause” of that but each represents a response by different groups of people to those problems or their sense of unease and frustration with how things currently are.
“It is said that Generals always start fighting a new war as if it were the last which is fair enough because that is all they know, that is their experience. The side who’s Generals adapt quickest, tends to be the side that is most successful in a new war.
The problem with The Economist writers is that they have yet to grasp that the situation has changed fundamentally, this is not the “old world pre 2008” that has all been swept away and will not return. Time you got over Brexit and accepted it for what it is, a very sensible ‘STOP’ sign posted by the British electorate. Brexit, Trump, Marine Le Pen etc are not of themselves either the problem or the solution but they are symptoms of the underlying problems which are economic.
People in Western countries have seen their real incomes slashed and job prospects diminished. Globalisation may have lifted millions of people in China out of poverty but it has done so at the expense of jobs in the western economies. It is not just via exports of finished goods from China to the West that a huge transfer of wealth has taken place. The only ‘winners’ in the west have been the holders of capital, the rich have got very much richer, social mobility has collapsed and the majority are worse off in real terms. It amazes me that the metropolitan chattering classes that clearly make up the staff at The Economist just can’t join these dots up, clearly an education was wasted on you lot.
All this has coincided with the Internet and refugees flooding across the Med clutching their mobile phones with a vision of a ‘better life’. Given that whatever the outcome in Syria is eventually, the victor will only gain a Pyrrhic victory, the country is already destroyed, no wonder they want to escape. David Cameron was right on this one, help them and their host countries in the region where they are, Angela Merkel was off her head and apparently still is with regard to refugees.
The changes that are upon us represent probably a major industrial and social revolution, our whole structures, even our concepts of work and voluntary work may well have to change radically. The other feature of this mainly digital revolution is that this time it is not just the unwashed masses that will suffer, even the middle class bastions such as the “professions” will also fall victim. In order to deal with such major changes politically, it is highly probable that most countries will need to control their frontiers so that the people who already live within their borders can adjust to these changes which may involve a major overhaul of taxation and benefits paid by the State from those taxes.
It must be pointed out that this problem is a global one, China too will/is suffering from too much capacity and too many people the same as the EU with youth unemployment running from 25-over 40% in large economies. Anybody who pens an article like this needs to go back to school, it is pretty dumb to say the least, any tendency to ‘isolationism’ as it is described here is purely a symptom of the underlying problems which need to be addressed.”
This is only one measure but an important one because it illustrates a real extreme in society. A middle aged man may well be able to measure the loss in the real value of his standard of living over these past 10 years but when it comes to unemployed young people it is dramatically worse. They have nothing to compare their life to except perhaps their parents which in France may be them having a State job with full benefits in terms of holidays and pensions and in the UK, becoming a home owner with a mortgage in your early 20’s, property prices always growing with lots of opportunities to keep ‘trading up’ the property ladder.
None of these apply to today’s young people and in effect society is saying to them: “We can offer you nothing not even future prospects” this is not just unacceptable in a moral sense but it is also socially destructive. To me, this seems so blindingly obvious, I cannot for the life of me understand the rather moronic “Let them eat cake” attitudes of people like The Economist staff when they write tripe such as in this article, to my mind it is not those who voted from Brexit who are the ‘Knuckle Dragging Clowns’ but rather themselves.