GoogleTranslate Service


Thoughts about Brexit – Part Two: The campaigning

February 2nd, 2020 by Pekka Kamarainen

With my previous post I started to spell out my thoughts about Brexit. As I said, I didn’t really want to take up this theme on my blog. And, moreover, I didn’t have the least intention to present myself as a historian or as a political analyst. What I have written in my first post about the pre-history of Brexit is mainly based on what I have learned from German media. Now, when we get to discuss the campaigning before and after the referendum 2016, I am able to bring into picture my own observations of the time when I visited UK twice during our project meetings. So, I was there and following the British media as well as the German media. And I had several conversations with our UK colleagues. Below I try to sort out my impressions of that time.

The dynamics of the campaigning

A specific feature of the campaigning was that the two leading parties were divided between those who wanted to remain in the EU and those who wanted to leave. The party leaders wanted to avoid splits in their parties and left it to the opinion leaders of the fractions to lead the campaigns. They themselves kept a low profile. Thus, their position vis-à-vis the achievements and benefits of the EU membership was ambiguous. Later on a resigning British Member of the European Parliament formulated it in this way: “They did not take ownership of what had been achieved with common European policies and never explained this to their voters.”

Instead of political parties taking the major role in the campaigning, specific campaign organisations were built and self-appointed opinion leaders stepped up to lead the debates. In this way the political debate around the referendum was decoupled from substantial issues – of the benefits and limitations due to the membership vs. on the consequences of leaving the membership. Instead, the campaigns became image campaigns.

The atmosphere during the campaigning

In the light of the above the debates during the campaign became very heated. The Leave campaign was successful in promoting the idea that the Brexit is mainly about ‘getting control back’ and getting rid of financial obligations to Brussels. The slogan that was painted on the campaign bus told that the money that was paid for membership fees could be invested into the National Health Services. The importance of the EU support for the agriculture and for the regional development in the UK was plaid down. The issues on getting back customs between the UK and the outer borders were not the lead issues.

Altogether, the atmosphere during the campaigning got polarised and heated. The worst incidence was the murder of the Labour MP Jo Cox at a market place when she was campaigning for remaining in the EU. She had been a moral instance in the Remain campaign and spoken for decisions to be made on the basis of valid arguments. She was stabbed by a fanatic who called her as a ‘traitor’. The funeral of Jo Cox and the memorial service that was sent by BBC was a touching moment – but the voters had made up their minds.

Facts, myths and manipulation

Afterwards the campaigns – in particular the Leave campaign – have been analysed from many perspectives. It appeared that blunt lies could be told and repeated without fear of being caught. All fact-checks were late and had no impact. People tended to believe the arguments that addressed their interests and wishes. Also, the campaign organisations could use big data for targeted messages. Furthermore, during the campaigning period fake profiles in social media were used to multiply the impact of some messages. I don’t want to go into details but this was part of the picture.

The impact on the political parties

Since the main parties were divided when preparing for the referendum, the result was no relief. The prime minister who had promised the referendum had to resign and the Conservative party had to choose a new leader. However, the situation was not easier in the Labour party. Both major parties had to cope with the fact that their supporters were divided on the Brexit issue and that there were vehement supporters of the Leave campaign and of the Remain campaign among the MPs. Furthermore, whilst the result of the referendum gave a clear message that majority wants to leave the EU, it was not clear on what terms. At this point it was symptomatic that opinion leaders of the Leave campaign stepped aside and gave the floor to others.

So, the debate seemed to be have been concluded. The hard work for preparing the terms of departure and making the decisions started. Thoughts on that period will be presented in a further post.

More blogs to come …

PS1. Disclaimer: These are merely thoughts of the author – an observer from the European continent. Pontydysgu as an organisation is not responsible for the views presented above.

PS2. What could be a better musical theme for reflections on this period than “Let it be“?

 

Please follow and like us:

Comments are closed.

  • Search Pontydysgu.org

    Social Media




    News Bites

    Cyborg patented?

    Forbes reports that Microsoft has obtained a patent for a “conversational chatbot of a specific person” created from images, recordings, participation in social networks, emails, letters, etc., coupled with the possible generation of a 2D or 3D model of the person.

    Please follow and like us:


    Racial bias in algorithms

    From the UK Open Data Institute’s Week in Data newsletter

    This week, Twitter apologised for racial bias within its image-cropping algorithm. The feature is designed to automatically crop images to highlight focal points – including faces. But, Twitter users discovered that, in practice, white faces were focused on, and black faces were cropped out. And, Twitter isn’t the only platform struggling with its algorithm – YouTube has also announced plans to bring back higher levels of human moderation for removing content, after its AI-centred approach resulted in over-censorship, with videos being removed at far higher rates than with human moderators.

    Please follow and like us:


    Gap between rich and poor university students widest for 12 years

    Via The Canary.

    The gap between poor students and their more affluent peers attending university has widened to its largest point for 12 years, according to data published by the Department for Education (DfE).

    Better-off pupils are significantly more likely to go to university than their more disadvantaged peers. And the gap between the two groups – 18.8 percentage points – is the widest it’s been since 2006/07.

    The latest statistics show that 26.3% of pupils eligible for FSMs went on to university in 2018/19, compared with 45.1% of those who did not receive free meals. Only 12.7% of white British males who were eligible for FSMs went to university by the age of 19. The progression rate has fallen slightly for the first time since 2011/12, according to the DfE analysis.

    Please follow and like us:


    Quality Training

    From Raconteur. A recent report by global learning consultancy Kineo examined the learning intentions of 8,000 employees across 13 different industries. It found a huge gap between the quality of training offered and the needs of employees. Of those surveyed, 85 per cent said they , with only 16 per cent of employees finding the learning programmes offered by their employers effective.

    Please follow and like us:


    Other Pontydysgu Spaces

    • Pontydysgu on the Web

      pbwiki
      Our Wikispace for teaching and learning
      Sounds of the Bazaar Radio LIVE
      Join our Sounds of the Bazaar Facebook goup. Just click on the logo above.

      We will be at Online Educa Berlin 2015. See the info above. The stream URL to play in your application is Stream URL or go to our new stream webpage here SoB Stream Page.

      Please follow and like us:
  • Twitter

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Meta

  • Categories