Brexit means Brexit: The problem with referendums and votes.
I'm seeing a lot of pictures and stories from the UK with Brexit supporters arguing that there has to be a hard Brexit because people voted for Brexit.
But... that isn't true really. People voted to leave the EU. There was no referendum on the specifics and the way to get from being a member of the EU to not being a member is one filled with decisions and negotiations.
There was no options in the referendum regarding the "hardness" of the "Brexit". There was no way to indicates ones preferred degree of "Brexit-ness" as it were. Claiming that the vote to leave the EU constitutes to a vote for a hard Brexit is impossible to substantiate. Of course, the whole referendum isn't even binding in any way whatsoever. But heck... who cares right?
The problem with politics is exactly this. You're given the right to vote on people and, on rare occasions, policies by way of a referendum. And those policies aren't always (and in fact rarely are) defined at the point that a vote is taken. I would say, given the form of their government and constitution, that in the UK the people voted to show their support for whatever a government tailored exit from the UK looks like.
Now, I don't believe that the people (in general) actually understand that. But that doesn't change the reality.
And this is because people are idiots. And I don't mean groups of people. Individuals truly are dumb as well. Sure, there are smart people out there and they can act dumb in groups... but people are essentially as stupid as they are permitted to be.
Everyone thinks that they voted for their own interpretation of what a Brexit was. They have feelings on how the government should act, how the economy should respond and what the long and short term benefits should be. The vast majority of the beliefs of the vast majority of people will be proven to be wrong.
Granted, if I were in the UK, I would be outraged. But for different reasons. Remember, as I mentioned above, you effectively got to vote on 2 things here at 2 different times. You voted for the people running the country and you voted for this vague concept of what that would entail. IF you weren't voting like a blind idiot, you had to have cast your vote based on who was in power to interpret the results of the referendum... but guess what? On both sides the leadership bailed leaving the people with new leaders they didn't (and couldn't have) anticipated would be responsible for interpreting and implementing the results of the referendum.
Anyway, the talking about Brexit wasn't my true intention with this. It was to use that as the backdrop to help explain why so many people voted to leave. And likely why so many people voted for Trump in the US; idiots voted for something based on vague promises and their own interpretation of the situation. Even when it was at odds with everything reality had to offer.
In this connected era where anyone can get just enough information to justify any stance, people side with the party that makes the boldest claims. The boldest claims promise the most amount of change and the least amount of pain. Frankly, I see a scary pattern of increasing instability as a result. While I think the end result is benign, I think this explains Trudeau in Canada, which happened first. Almost like a political testing of the water. Then, Brexit and things got a little worse. And then Trump. It'll be interesting to see what happens next. France and Germany both look primed for right-wing takeovers as well.
But, let me back up a bit, it isn't just that the Liberal's won that was indicative of something amiss. It is that they went from a distant third to being able to form a majority government that makes this otherwise anomalous. Historically, a large chunk of voters were people who always voted for the same party and a handful of people who fluctuated would determine who won and by how much. In that world, seats in parliament shifted slowly over time. Today however, the group of voters are very different. The party faithful's are terribly outnumbered... and that is a good thing were it not for what has taken over.
In their place has sprouted a generation of imbeciles who pick their champions for shallow reasons and defend them with the weakest attempts at confirmation bias I've ever seen. And the complaints and misinformation continue long after the elections. It is amazing we don't have ongoing civil war in every country at the moment. Hopefully I'm not jinxing that.
I guess my point here is more of a plea; if you're going to vote, actually research all of the candidates, with an open mind and assume that, if elected, they might implement everything they promised.
Oh, and if national agencies seem to be swaying the vote, or other countries are believed to be spreading propaganda... THAT SHIT ISN'T NORMAL!!!!
Side note: The country that spent a solid year freaking out over the NSA potentially spying on them just elected the guy that the FBI and Russia clearly wanted. I suspect many people never asked themselves why the FBI preferred Trump. Or Russia.
But... that isn't true really. People voted to leave the EU. There was no referendum on the specifics and the way to get from being a member of the EU to not being a member is one filled with decisions and negotiations.
There was no options in the referendum regarding the "hardness" of the "Brexit". There was no way to indicates ones preferred degree of "Brexit-ness" as it were. Claiming that the vote to leave the EU constitutes to a vote for a hard Brexit is impossible to substantiate. Of course, the whole referendum isn't even binding in any way whatsoever. But heck... who cares right?
The problem with politics is exactly this. You're given the right to vote on people and, on rare occasions, policies by way of a referendum. And those policies aren't always (and in fact rarely are) defined at the point that a vote is taken. I would say, given the form of their government and constitution, that in the UK the people voted to show their support for whatever a government tailored exit from the UK looks like.
Now, I don't believe that the people (in general) actually understand that. But that doesn't change the reality.
And this is because people are idiots. And I don't mean groups of people. Individuals truly are dumb as well. Sure, there are smart people out there and they can act dumb in groups... but people are essentially as stupid as they are permitted to be.
Everyone thinks that they voted for their own interpretation of what a Brexit was. They have feelings on how the government should act, how the economy should respond and what the long and short term benefits should be. The vast majority of the beliefs of the vast majority of people will be proven to be wrong.
Granted, if I were in the UK, I would be outraged. But for different reasons. Remember, as I mentioned above, you effectively got to vote on 2 things here at 2 different times. You voted for the people running the country and you voted for this vague concept of what that would entail. IF you weren't voting like a blind idiot, you had to have cast your vote based on who was in power to interpret the results of the referendum... but guess what? On both sides the leadership bailed leaving the people with new leaders they didn't (and couldn't have) anticipated would be responsible for interpreting and implementing the results of the referendum.
Anyway, the talking about Brexit wasn't my true intention with this. It was to use that as the backdrop to help explain why so many people voted to leave. And likely why so many people voted for Trump in the US; idiots voted for something based on vague promises and their own interpretation of the situation. Even when it was at odds with everything reality had to offer.
In this connected era where anyone can get just enough information to justify any stance, people side with the party that makes the boldest claims. The boldest claims promise the most amount of change and the least amount of pain. Frankly, I see a scary pattern of increasing instability as a result. While I think the end result is benign, I think this explains Trudeau in Canada, which happened first. Almost like a political testing of the water. Then, Brexit and things got a little worse. And then Trump. It'll be interesting to see what happens next. France and Germany both look primed for right-wing takeovers as well.
But, let me back up a bit, it isn't just that the Liberal's won that was indicative of something amiss. It is that they went from a distant third to being able to form a majority government that makes this otherwise anomalous. Historically, a large chunk of voters were people who always voted for the same party and a handful of people who fluctuated would determine who won and by how much. In that world, seats in parliament shifted slowly over time. Today however, the group of voters are very different. The party faithful's are terribly outnumbered... and that is a good thing were it not for what has taken over.
In their place has sprouted a generation of imbeciles who pick their champions for shallow reasons and defend them with the weakest attempts at confirmation bias I've ever seen. And the complaints and misinformation continue long after the elections. It is amazing we don't have ongoing civil war in every country at the moment. Hopefully I'm not jinxing that.
I guess my point here is more of a plea; if you're going to vote, actually research all of the candidates, with an open mind and assume that, if elected, they might implement everything they promised.
Oh, and if national agencies seem to be swaying the vote, or other countries are believed to be spreading propaganda... THAT SHIT ISN'T NORMAL!!!!
Side note: The country that spent a solid year freaking out over the NSA potentially spying on them just elected the guy that the FBI and Russia clearly wanted. I suspect many people never asked themselves why the FBI preferred Trump. Or Russia.
Comments
Post a Comment