I am British. (Laughter) (Applause) Never before has the phrase
“I am British” elicited so much pity. (Laughter) I come from an island
where many of us like to believe there’s been a lot of continuity
over the last thousand years. We tend to have historically
imposed change on others but done much less of it ourselves. So it came as an immense shock to me when I woke up on the morning of June 24 to discover that my country
had voted to leave the European Union, my Prime Minister had resigned, and Scotland was considering a referendum that could bring to an end
the very existence of the United Kingdom. So that was an immense shock for me, and it was an immense
shock for many people, but it was also something
that, over the following several days, created a complete political meltdown in my country. There were calls for a second referendum, almost as if, following a sports match, we could ask the opposition for a replay. Everybody was blaming everybody else. People blamed the Prime Minister for calling the referendum
in the first place. They blamed the leader of the opposition
for not fighting it hard enough. The young accused the old. The educated blamed
the less well-educated. That complete meltdown was made even worse by the most tragic element of it: levels of xenophobia and racist abuse
in the streets of Britain at a level that I have never seen before in my lifetime. People are now talking about whether
my country is becoming a Little England, or, as one of my colleagues put it, whether we’re about to become
a 1950s nostalgia theme park floating in the Atlantic Ocean. (Laughter) But my question is really, should we have the degree of shock
that we’ve experienced since? Was it something
that took place overnight? Or are there deeper structural factors
that have led us to where we are today? So I want to take a step back
and ask two very basic questions. First, what does Brexit represent, not just for my country, but for all of us around the world? And second, what can we do about it? How should we all respond? So first, what does Brexit represent? Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Brexit teaches us many things
about our society and about societies around the world. It highlights in ways
that we seem embarrassingly unaware of how divided our societies are. The vote split along lines of age,
education, class and geography. Young people didn’t turn out
to vote in great numbers, but those that did wanted to remain. Older people really wanted
to leave the European Union. Geographically, it was London and Scotland
that most strongly committed to being part of the European Union, while in other parts of the country
there was very strong ambivalence. Those divisions are things we really
need to recognize and take seriously. But more profoundly,
the vote teaches us something about the nature of politics today. Contemporary politics
is no longer just about right and left. It’s no longer just about tax and spend. It’s about globalization. The fault line of contemporary politics is
between those that embrace globalization and those that fear globalization. (Applause) If we look at why
those who wanted to leave — we call them “Leavers,”
as opposed to “Remainers” — we see two factors in the opinion polls that really mattered. The first was immigration,
and the second sovereignty, and these represent a desire for people
to take back control of their own lives and the feeling that they
are unrepresented by politicians. But those ideas are ones
that signify fear and alienation. They represent a retreat
back towards nationalism and borders in ways that many of us would reject. What I want to suggest is the picture
is more complicated than that, that liberal internationalists, like myself, and I firmly
include myself in that picture, need to write ourselves
back into the picture in order to understand
how we’ve got to where we are today. When we look at the voting patterns
across the United Kingdom, we can visibly see the divisions. The blue areas show Remain and the red areas Leave. When I looked at this, what personally struck me
was the very little time in my life I’ve actually spent
in many of the red areas. I suddenly realized that,
looking at the top 50 areas in the UK that have the strongest Leave vote, I’ve spent a combined total
of four days of my life in those areas. In some of those places, I didn’t even know the names
of the voting districts. It was a real shock to me, and it suggested that people like me who think of ourselves
as inclusive, open and tolerant, perhaps don’t know
our own countries and societies nearly as well as we like to believe. (Applause) And the challenge that comes from that
is we need to find a new way to narrate globalization to those people, to recognize that for those people who
have not necessarily been to university, who haven’t necessarily
grown up with the Internet, that don’t get opportunities to travel, they may be unpersuaded
by the narrative that we find persuasive in our often liberal bubbles. (Applause) It means that we need to reach out
more broadly and understand. In the Leave vote, a minority have peddled
the politics of fear and hatred, creating lies and mistrust around, for instance,
the idea that the vote on Europe could reduce the number of refugees
and asylum-seekers coming to Europe, when the vote on leaving
had nothing to do with immigration from outside the European Union. But for a significant majority
of the Leave voters the concern was disillusionment
with the political establishment. This was a protest vote for many, a sense that nobody represented them, that they couldn’t find
a political party that spoke for them, and so they rejected
that political establishment. This replicates around Europe
and much of the liberal democratic world. We see it with the rise in popularity
of Donald Trump in the United States, with the growing nationalism
of Viktor Orbán in Hungary, with the increase in popularity
of Marine Le Pen in France. The specter of Brexit
is in all of our societies. So the question I think we need to ask
is my second question, which is how should we
collectively respond? For all of us who care about creating
liberal, open, tolerant societies, we urgently need a new vision, a vision of a more tolerant,
inclusive globalization, one that brings people with us
rather than leaving them behind. That vision of globalization is one that has to start by a recognition
of the positive benefits of globalization. The consensus amongst economists is that free trade,
the movement of capital, the movement of people across borders benefit everyone on aggregate. The consensus amongst
international relations scholars is that globalization
brings interdependence, which brings cooperation and peace. But globalization
also has redistributive effects. It creates winners and losers. To take the example of migration, we know that immigration is a net positive
for the economy as a whole under almost all circumstances. But we also have to be very aware that there are
redistributive consequences, that importantly, low-skilled immigration can lead to a reduction in wages
for the most impoverished in our societies and also put pressure on house prices. That doesn’t detract
from the fact that it’s positive, but it means more people
have to share in those benefits and recognize them. In 2002, the former Secretary-General
of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, gave a speech at Yale University, and that speech was on the topic
of inclusive globalization. That was the speech
in which he coined that term. And he said, and I paraphrase, “The glass house of globalization
has to be open to all if it is to remain secure. Bigotry and ignorance are the ugly face of exclusionary
and antagonistic globalization.” That idea of inclusive globalization
was briefly revived in 2008 in a conference on progressive governance involving many of the leaders
of European countries. But amid austerity
and the financial crisis of 2008, the concept disappeared
almost without a trace. Globalization has been taken
to support a neoliberal agenda. It’s perceived to be
part of an elite agenda rather than something that benefits all. And it needs to be reclaimed
on a far more inclusive basis than it is today. So the question is,
how can we achieve that goal? How can we balance on the one hand
addressing fear and alienation while on the other hand
refusing vehemently to give in to xenophobia and nationalism? That is the question for all of us. And I think, as a social scientist, that social science
offers some places to start. Our transformation has to be about
both ideas and about material change, and I want to give you four ideas
as a starting point. The first relates to the idea
of civic education. What stands out from Brexit is the gap between public perception
and empirical reality. It’s been suggested that we’ve moved
to a postfactual society, where evidence and truth no longer matter, and lies have equal status
to the clarity of evidence. So how can we — (Applause) How can we rebuild respect for truth
and evidence into our liberal democracies? It has to begin with education, but it has to start with the recognition
that there are huge gaps. In 2014, the pollster Ipsos MORI published a survey
on attitudes to immigration, and it showed that as numbers
of immigrants increase, so public concern
with immigration also increases, although it obviously
didn’t unpack causality, because this could equally be to do
not so much with numbers but the political
and media narrative around it. But the same survey also revealed huge public misinformation and misunderstanding
about the nature of immigration. For example, in these attitudes
in the United Kingdom, the public believed that levels of asylum were a greater proportion
of immigration than they were, but they also believed
the levels of educational migration were far lower as a proportion
of overall migration than they actually are. So we have to address this misinformation, the gap between perception and reality
on key aspects of globalization. And that can’t just be something
that’s left to our schools, although that’s important
to begin at an early age. It has to be about lifelong
civic participation and public engagement
that we all encourage as societies. The second thing
that I think is an opportunity is the idea to encourage more interaction
across diverse communities. (Applause) One of the things that stands out
for me very strikingly, looking at immigration attitudes
in the United Kingdom, is that ironically,
the regions of my country that are the most tolerant of immigrants have the highest numbers of immigrants. So for instance, London and the Southeast
have the highest numbers of immigrants, and they are also by far
the most tolerant areas. It’s those areas of the country
that have the lowest levels of immigration that actually are the most exclusionary
and intolerant towards migrants. So we need to encourage exchange programs. We need to ensure that older generations
who maybe can’t travel get access to the Internet. We need to encourage,
even on a local and national level, more movement, more participation, more interaction
with people who we don’t know and whose views we might
not necessarily agree with. The third thing that I think
is crucial, though, and this is really fundamental, is we have to ensure that everybody shares in the benefits of globalization. This illustration from the Financial Times
post-Brexit is really striking. It shows tragically that those people
who voted to leave the European Union were those who actually
benefited the most materially from trade with the European Union. But the problem is
that those people in those areas didn’t perceive themselves
to be beneficiaries. They didn’t believe that they
were actually getting access to material benefits of increased trade
and increased mobility around the world. I work on questions
predominantly to do with refugees, and one of the ideas
I spent a lot of my time preaching, mainly to developing countries
around the world, is that in order to encourage
the integration of refugees, we can’t just benefit
the refugee populations, we also have to address the concerns
of the host communities in local areas. But in looking at that, one of the policy prescriptions
is that we have to provide disproportionately better
education facilities, health facilities, access to social services in those regions of high immigration to address the concerns
of those local populations. But while we encourage that
around the developing world, we don’t take those lessons home and incorporate them in our own societies. Furthermore, if we’re going
to really take seriously the need to ensure people share
in the economic benefits, our businesses and corporations
need a model of globalization that recognizes that they, too,
have to take people with them. The fourth and final idea
I want to put forward is an idea that we need
more responsible politics. There’s very little
social science evidence that compares attitudes on globalization. But from the surveys that do exist, what we can see is there’s huge variation
across different countries and time periods in those countries for attitudes and tolerance of questions like migration
and mobility on the one hand and free trade on the other. But one hypothesis that I think emerges
from a cursory look at that data is the idea that polarized societies
are far less tolerant of globalization. It’s the societies
like Sweden in the past, like Canada today, where there is a centrist politics, where right and left work together, that we encourage supportive attitudes
towards globalization. And what we see around the world today
is a tragic polarization, a failure to have dialogue
between the extremes in politics, and a gap in terms
of that liberal center ground that can encourage communication
and a shared understanding. We might not achieve that today, but at the very least we have to call
upon our politicians and our media to drop a language of fear
and be far more tolerant of one another. (Applause) These ideas are very tentative, and that’s in part because this needs
to be an inclusive and shared project. I am still British. I am still European. I am still a global citizen. For those of us who believe that our identities
are not mutually exclusive, we have to all work together to ensure that globalization
takes everyone with us and doesn’t leave people behind. Only then will we truly reconcile
democracy and globalization. Thank you. (Applause)

Tagged : # # # # # # # # #

100 thoughts on “Why Brexit happened — and what to do next | Alexander Betts”

  1. Two reasons for Brexit
    1. Muslim Immigrants gang raping young British girls
    2. A bloated global bureaucracy telling British people how to run THEIR country

    and this guy's response is you're just racist and/or ignorant if you support Brexit. 😒

  2. As an ex pat I think UK made a big mistake. Without the EU, the UK will dissolve into a remote US state. Look for the 1% – and a middle class lead into slavery.

  3. Democratic referendum is not perfect but it's the highest political achievement in the known human history. It should be respected.

  4. If you're reading this in 2021 To answer your questions . 1. Yes Boris Johnson really was prime Minister. 2. No he was never convicted. 3 No, David Cameron was never seen again. No, Brexit never happened. Yes Scotland eventually got independence and yes a United Ireland is still a possibility. The brexiteers where run out of office

  5. New World Order The Elites. Banksters And Corrupt Politicians .. It all boils down to a few things .. Money. Power over people and Control The Governments The Banks And The Churches ……. Fact Is

    The Poor Borrow. The Rich Steal

  6. Globalization is something to avoid. It will usher in dictatorship on an unprecedented level. We will be herded all in the same direction, with the same ideology and run by dictators looking after number one first, with very little concern for the hardship of the minions. And hardship we will get. The eutopian idea that everybody will benefit has been proven amply by the communistic dictatorships. It is remarkable that young people do not think about this with any degree of seriousness.

  7. Smug people like him in our politics, civil service and media is the reason why Brexit happened. A long overdue peaceful revolution and our weapon of choice is the ballot paper.

  8. Some statements are just completely wrong in this talk. Just think about every sentence he says a little bit and you will recognize some errors. For example: "Every community profits from immigration". A good way to recognize the error is by increasing the numbers in thought. What whould happen if a country lets 51% muslim immigrants in, or 51% of any other non democratic thinking? The Sharia would be introduced, as for example in Iran. And, what happens to the collective intelligence of a community if you pump in 51% people of very low to zero education? The other half would have to transfer a huge amount of their wealth to the less educated people. Depending on whether the lower educated people would be eager to increase their education or not it would decide whether after decades a normalization to a higher standard would be achieved. It's a fact on this planet that reglious communities tend to supress the education of people, probably because they know that educated people see through the lies.

    One other question was never asked by the speaker: Why should a community even take in immigrants in huge numbers and threaten their own well being? One answer is: a) because the profit of the industry will grow (selling goods, transportation, social care…), b) because studies showed that immigrants are strongly voting for left and green parties.

    The speaker is a sociological researcher and thus part of the industry that makes good profit out of immigration. His work will never end as long as there are social problems with immigration. I was not surprised that the whole talk was more of a propaganda than a neutral analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of immigration. You should always keep an eye on whether only one side of the coin is presented or both.

  9. Regions with low level of immigrants = regions with high intolerance. Same phenomenon in Germany. Just goes to show: ignorance breeds intolerance. That is BREXIT in short.

  10. This gentleman should be our polititian. He knows what he talking about and articulates well. Because often our politicians don't even aware of the true fact and mislead general public. So does news media too.

  11. "embrace globalisation …. fear globalisation". He has flown his flag and credentials. TED is usually better than this. Crap episode.

  12. You hate your country and want to throw away our history in one fell swoop. We want our boarders and control but you want to extinguish it all. Why do we need to take on your way on life and you don’t want ours. Pompous, silver spoon self righteous fool. We don’t have to accept your way of thinking and we will resist it.

  13. Liberals are so adorable. They always think that when someone disagrees with them, it's because they didn't understand the question.

  14. Globalization is driven by profit,nothing more. There is no moralistic pilot in this "plan" just corporate greed.
    This guy cares but is gargling the Coolade , cultural diversity starts with the embracing of your own culture then appreciating others. Dig the sentiment though.

  15. This man is an idealistic, globalist fool. The first mistake he makes is to assume that British people voted for Brexit thinking that it would stop mass immigration.
    No, we did not! We voted Brexit in order to be able to then tell our political leaders enough is enough!
    Stop bringing in millions of low skilled, 3rd world Muslims who refuse to integrate, and hate our way of life, or we shall replace you with politicians who will obey the electorate.
    Secondly, he claims that London and Scotland voted remain because they are more tolerant of immigrants, has he witnessed the marches in London? Scotland is a different case, as, apart from the large cities imigration has not yet had a big impact, although that is now changing rapidly.
    Thirdly, this mans personal experiences of globalisation will have been nothing but positive, the only immigrants he will come across will be high IQ people with a positive attitude towards the UK, who wish to integrate.
    Lastly, the very idea that a small island the size of the UK can continue to take people from huge 3rd world countries, simply because they have failed to make a success of their own lands is unsustainable. When do we say "sorry, we are overcrowded"?
    It is no coincidence that the UK is at the forefront of fighting globalisation, for one simple reason: we are an island, and do not have the space to accommodate unlimited population growth.

  16. Ah yes, another 'Brexit happened due to misinformation and fear tactics' scapegoat. The British people are not idiots who are easily lied to, do not undermine us.

  17. EU is not synonomous with globalisation.

    The british colonists probably spoke of their colonies simply having ambivalence towards empire and fearing empire (which suggests they are wrong to fear empire).

    I'm not offended but this performance by Alexander Betts could be interpreted incredible offensive.

  18. The problem with these types of people is they make assumptions then go on to make statements based on that assumption. He deludes himself into thinking he has undeniable evidence for these assumptions when he reality he only has evidence that suggests public opinion or implies maybe people are thinking XYZ.

    I have not met a single person (even in 2016) that told me they want the UK to be an anti-global country. I heard the exact opposite. They want the UK to be a global, outward-facing country that trades all overthe world (with the EU too). You are just wrong when you assume this was all about fearing globalisation. when I have spoken to leave voters that say they support globalisation but they dont support the EU. (not once throughout this does he mention EU, instead he avoids it and calls it smoething else to try to negate the reality of what the EU is and what is does).

    Never forget most of these types of educated people are dependant on the EU. they get funding, access to equipment, free trips etc. they are closely tied so much of these type of educated people have real tangigle (percieved) losses. thats why they are so incapable of being honest and instead hide behind Bullshit. because if they were honest and said "look, the EU has worked greta for me personally.. look at all this cool stuff i got to do becuase of it" he would also have to admit that most of us are not benefiting from the EU in such a direct way.

    I voted remain but I have enough respect for the refenderum and enough confidence in the courage of my country that I think we should most defiantly leave the EU. I say the same thing on the day of the result and i will say the same thing up until we leave.

    The ONLY route to staying in the EU is for us to leave the EU and then in the following decades join back in. What we have to do is leave UK-EU relations such that future politicians and elected officials can re-join if they so wish and not make it harder on the next generation to work smoothly together. In other words. Get a deal.

  19. I wouldn't mind a 1950's theme park floating in the ocean, at least communities were close and trusted each other back then. life was simple but happy times back then and their was pride and security. look at Britain now, it's a multi cultural abyss knife and drug crime arena.

  20. 7:35 "….for all of us who care about open liberal tolerant societies we urgently need a new vision….". Yes you said it . How about not letting in people that do not care about a liberal tolerant open society. There is a particular section of immigrants who were let in under your liberal tolerant and open vision up and down the country that do not believe in your vision of a liberal, tolerant open society, yet your liberal tolerant and open policies are letting in these very same people in vast numbers. you liberals are sabotaging your own vision and you refuse to see it. the irony is , is that leavers want a more liberal tolerant and open society as much as remainers, but they have the intellect to realise that it must be done controllably and reasonably, not the flood of uncontrolled immigration that the EU has foisted onto Britain and the rest of Europe.

  21. Incredible to hear that this speaker admit that he has spent no more than 4 days of his whole life in the areas of Britain that voted to leave the EU. These are vast areas of Britain, it just goes to show that this speaker and people of his ilk live in a bubble, totally removed from the rest of the country. And we're supposed to trust his political judgement and views ?.

  22. Nationalism became a sort of racism: my country isn't as good as it was and now I am here to blame emigrants.
    British people didn't complain much when globalisation was in their favor like in the colonial era.

  23. I've traveled. I'm educated. I'm liberally minded. My grandfather was German, I have family in Europe. I voted to leave because I didn't want to be part of a political union. I wanted more opportunity economically – globally (read and researched before I voted) – didn't listen to politicians or the media. I wanted freedom from European bureaucracy. We talk about nationalism, Europe is Insular… fact. No different from that of the US or any other major country. When will people / humans stop polarising debate? This topic isn't black and white. I break… along with many others the 'media' 'academic' algorithm.

    Agh the media rhetoric replayed in parrot-fashion. Most remainers are completely wrong in their assumptions and views about leave voters because they all validate their opinion in their biased 'academic' echo chambers and blurt it out and hector everyone in a riotous left-wing justified manner.

    The solution. Simple. Reform the media, politics and practice responsible capitalism.

  24. Dreadful, pure propaganda. Aren't TED Talks supposed to be purely educational?
    If you didn't know the UK, and judged it by what this speaker is saying, you would get a very dark version of us, and a very inaccurate one too!

  25. Brexit is for the strong minded people with a fighting spirit. No one fears globalisation but they do fear dictators and the greedy selfish people who created the opportunity for brexit and thought they could never fail due to us being so miseducated and dumb. We are the source of the education that is packaged and resold to the fearfull.

  26. I have to say, with all sincerity, that he’s talking absolute bollocks. He continuously talks about “globalisation”. That isn’t why 17.4 million Britons voted to leave the European Union. They voted to leave because of rampant and unrestricted immigration. They voted to leave because of unelectibilty of a Central European government. They wanted to leave because they,”as voters”, wanted a say in their future. A centralised European government didn’t do that. Indeed, the European Union leaders actively sniggered and sneered at the average voter in Britain. They are not sneering now. The speaker talks about being tolerant. He’s not.

  27. Brexit isn't about globalisation, my goodness. You are quick to say that perhaps leavers aren't educated or travelled and are scared. This is an incredibly narrow minded Ted talk and I feel disappointed in it, actually. I'm neither pro-leave nor pro-remain, it's clear to me that you are pro-remain and educated, therefore are pitying those with opposing views to yourself? Thinking yourself 'liberal' because you're willing to educate the poor uneducated leavers is laughable. If you sincerely care, collect some qualitative data, speak to people, get out there and reconsider your stance on this.

  28. Your narretiv is not mine and I have 3 degrees from university. You haven't done any thinking at all and you are ideologicly possessed and your view of people that aren't "liberal" are one of the most Prejudicial and ignorant I've heard. You just come across as arrogant!

  29. 'The regions that are most tolerant of immigrants have the highest level of immigrants.' – Well, it has to be so in these regions, doesn't it? One doesn't have a great say in the matter.

  30. Fairly amusing to see someone who fancies themselves as so self aware and "woke" not only miss the mood of his own countrymen initially, but then to hear him wonder how it was that he missed the mood, and arrive at set of conclusion that are just as myopic and distorted by his own world view as the initial miss.

    One is tempted to suggest you cannot acquire a new perspective without first setting aside the lens through which you are interpreting the relevant facts….the very lens which led to the initial error in the first place.

    "Only a bigot who doesn't understand what's in their own best interest would want to leave the EU" – false conclusion #1
    "How did I miss there were so many bigots who don't know what's in their own best interest here in the UK?" – false conclusion #2

    One is tempted to suggest the speaker learned nothing at all despite all the hand wringing and self congratulatory noodling….

  31. By globalisation, does he mean the NWO where the knobs will rule the plebs, or does he mean trading globally. Well , we Brexiteers are all for trade across the world, an open Britain for trade, not a closed eu trade. We also are patriotic,and do not want to be ruled by unelected bureaucrats with no money and no country, only what they syphon from other countries. Wonder what Greece thinks of your talk, or Hungary, or Italy. Why not help the countries like Africa build themselves up , teach them, show them trades, let them be proud of their own country, instead of encouraging them to move. He sounds like he has been on a 'common purpose course' the reason our country is not working as it should.

  32. German self-interest has caused 3 conflicts in the last 150 years. In the last two [1914 and 1939] it was German aggression attempting to dominate Europe which created dreadful suffering for millions. The power Germany failed to get in wars it now protects since a gradual creeping of influence after the Common Market was created has put Germany in a position of dominance and impoverished others eg. Greece and Italy. With our history it comes as no surprise that some in this country might think that being subservient to a group of self-appointed foreigners in Brussels is something to avoid.

  33. I reject the speaker use of the word "fearful" to describe voters who wanted out. I reject the premise of globalization as a "forward momentum". I reject nationalism spoken about with negative overtones. I reject the idea that staying in the EU or leaving has nothing to do with and will not affect immigration rates. The speaker sounds good and his points are clear however faulted. Sadly…his words are biased and clearly says so and that's fine…he is a globalist.

    Countries, nations and borders do matter my young lefty and your naive to think the hearts of men are all honest and true. We have security at every level of our lives for a reason, because we need it. While I cheer your optimism I jeer at your conceit and ignorance. While proposing to be inclusive and fair only to be a hypocrite and say remainers are backwards to your forwards. The future this speaker talks of with the EU is not my future and it doesn't have to be yours. One cannot rule with heart alone and don't mistake my belief for fear, it would just highlight more ignorance.

  34. This guy is under the impression that every human being has to get along with each other, that we should teach our children about being welcoming to all – and embrace it, Utopian wishes for sure. Reality is that not everyone wants to be integrated, not everyone wants to be forced to be nice to each other – it's simple, not everyone on the planet is nice. Humans are still animals on an evolutionary scale, however clever we believe we are, there are simply not enough clever people, even then, being clever / educated doesn't mean you're nice! Good try 6/10 for effort…

  35. Just an anti-conservative diatribe. He has NO idea `Why Brexit happened` He just knows he didn`t like it.
    Like most of his kind they gather up the things they hate and put it in a box labelled `right wing`. If he didn`t like cats he`d label them conservative.

  36. When the speaker at the beginning says “between the educated and less educated…”, that‘s done for me. He’s assuming the remainers are more “Educated”! How arrogant!

  37. Whilst I try to be open minded enough to read, listen & consider carefully the case for remaining within the E.U., I am of the opinion that you clearly are not open minded at all. I sat through all of your discourse & at the end strongly disagree with most of what you have been saying. I haven’t got all day, so I’ll just address a few points only.
    You suggest or imply that those that voted leave are poorly educated, ignorant, anti-globalist, little Englanders. This not at all the case. I & most of those I have spoken to on the subjects, are not wanting to isolate the UK / England from the rest of the world or Europe in particular. Before the Maastricht Treaty signing in 1992, the UK was happily trading with most of Europe under the umbrella of the EEA, without enduring the politics & subversions of the ruling European political & mega wealthy elite. Open borders & mass immigration from Europe & other parts of the world incur a rapid pace of change & subversion of our own ideologies, culture & beliefs, at far too fast a rate of change.

    Your speech did nothing to address the rampant corruption within the bureaucratic organisation of the EU institutions. It does little to address the wealthy 1% who gain from a massive pool of cheap immigrant labour that drives down wages / salaries within the UK, increases the temporary / GIG economy, yet massively increase the share prices, real estate prices of the rich.

    You suggest that the pro-remain vote is strongest in the areas of large immigrant populations – yes? Maybe you should get of your high horse & take a slow walk along such an area, say along the A11 heading east away from the Tower of London & keep walking 5-10 miles. Spot the white man if you can! The mass immigration evident there would simply not vote to be deported. There are too few of the white indigenous population left to make any impact upon the vote to leave in such areas!

    You speak many times of the lies of the leave campaign & the facts of the pro-globalist / liberal remain campaign. Maybe you should take some time to consider carefully the level of massive bias of the BBC & to a lesser extent other media, also the tight control the EU propaganda machine has over the European media. The deliberate insidious undermining of the leave argument goes on & on & on. Propaganda & untruth & lies, lies & yet more lies. Whilst I would concede that the leave campaign certain told a few ‘porkies’, you close your eyes & ears to the much more subtle ‘porkies’ told by the pro-remain campaign. The majority of the remain voters appear to work or have worked substantially within the public sector or government quangos or local government services or are in some way largely dependent upon government services. Turkeys do not vote for Xmas do they? If such public sector employees were exposed to the necessary drive, hard-work, risk v reward, being paid for actual production & not for just turning up to a job & mouthing off; then they might just appreciate that ever greater measures & influences of an ever greater & more powerful & pervasive ‘Big Brother’ are bad for ordinary people & bad for the UK. I suggest those who read my rant try to read two books at least; 1984 by George Orwell & Adults in the Room by Yanis Varufakis to assist your understanding of the EU institutions & Big Brother. Leave voters by & large, want to decide their own futures, with minimal government interference, minimal taxation, self-determination & freedom.

    PS. Yanis Varufakis wants the UK to remain in the UK as a sacrificial ally of Greece to reform the EU from within. I do not believe the EU to be reform-able (most regrettably).
    .

  38. I'm horrified at the number of people who thumbed down this talk. He says "these ideas are very tentative". Please stop bagging on people who try to find a solution. Your xenophobia is too sad for words.

  39. I'm from coventry and I voted with almost everyone I know to leave the only people I know who didn't is my 84yr old mum who said unity will stop a threat from russia and a muslim pal who was ordered by his family to vote remain we all have are views we voted leave and we still would vote leave we are not fooled by tales of doom this will not work as for racism in coventry blacks stab blacks this seems the latest fashion here

  40. I’m a Londoner debt slave & Pro Brexit! Unheard of amounts of benefits given to Invaders for over 2 decades yet we have our own British Citizens living/dieing on the streets, low salaries being paid by companies, rent sky high & buying your own property is a Fable. This is a Clown Land, working class paying taxes so Invaders can out breed the actual native British Citizens. This is not a secular society as Liberals or invaders would brainwash you to blindly believe. Crime rates at all time highs, violence towards authorities all time high these are serious times which require serious action by the People. The liberal mindset is like a mental health issue that has gone unrecognised for far too long.

  41. Mr Betts is a narrow minded twit of the first order. He completely fails to understand the Leave viewpoint, and assumes that he is coming from a superior place. He is not. As far as superior education of the young is concerned, I have seen what modern non-STEM degrees look like, and in my day we used to call them school projects.

  42. This guy is promoting the loss of culture of countries and a over flow of unemployed refugees , loss of jobs , lower income
    and higher crimes . THE COUNTRIES THAT DONT ALLOW REFUGEES ARE MORE far more profitable and better managed.

  43. There is NOT a consensus among international relations scholars that globalization leads to peace… that's just the argument from ONE of the international relations theories (called liberalism). The most prominent theory of IR (called realism) explicitly argues that globalization doesn't lead to peace… please do your research.

  44. I think he missed the point that the government of the UK is corrupt and Brexit was devised by the wealthiest 1% to the detriment of the UK as a whole.

  45. Did this guy just basicly say us Brexiteers are uneducated?
    Im fully aware what Globalism is, i dont want, i dont like it and i will not accept it.

  46. Like most Remainers and all Neo-socialists, this guy is ignorant of those who are different to him, who hold different views. Like most Remainers and all Neo-socialists he believes his views are the only correct view and the only one that should be applied to society.

    This is evil. He wants to build your prison, a prison from which you can never escape

  47. Funny how he implied those who voted leave were just uneducated and dont know what's best, maybe he shouldve asked those people why instead of assuming their thick…

  48. Yet another Remoaner telling people who voted leave, why they voted and what Brexit means… sigh… biggest load of crap I have heard in a while posing as educated and intelligence.

  49. Open borders lets terrorists ,activists, freely intergrate with good law abiding people ,you are the ignorant one if you have closed your eyes and turned your back of all the innocent people murdered.

  50. Brexit Is A Big Deal. Build You Own Sat Nav System Galileo Is Closed To The British Government. Have A Nice Day.

  51. Why don't these lefties expend their time trying to change places like saudia arabia and iran which are so intolerant instead of trying to change my country which is amongst the most progressive and tolerant in human history. Sure where far from perfect but it beats risking turning our country into an islamic country.
    Imigration I think is good for a country both economically and socially but they must be absorbed to keep a society cohesive and united.
    Don't tolerate the intolerable.
    Good luck I hope you're families are happy and safe.

  52. Funny how we either love globalisation or we fear it forgets that people just disagree with it and want to keep their national identity

  53. Crazy Globalist ! Talking about global unity but enjoying the high western standard. A complete hypocrite idiot !
    Go and leave in Africa for 1 dollar a month and that talk about fraternity !

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *