Brexit and history

[malylis]

I was just wondering how people thought the outcome of the Brexit vote has been influenced by the anglocentric view of history that is very common in UK nationals.

Lots of the language in the leave campaign was shaped towards that of occupation and dominion, as well as the view that Britain alone had been very successful and had stood bravely alone against the axis powers in 1940.

thoughts?

I think it's even deeper than that. Historically Britain (or England, rather) has always tried to prevent the emergence of a strong continental power that could potentially invade it. It's a deep seated fear because Britain is an island and yet terribly near the continent.
Unfortunately, brexiters successfully positioned the EU as something external to us and not something WE are really building. Remain failed to convey the sense of togetherness (it was always about economics, figures, very little about being in fact European, about something that is US) and therefore it had no chance of success.

The Whig Interpretation embodied in Macauley's History of England runs deep in our cultural DNA. The strange process is the one wherby suspicious foreign imports such as 'Italian Rarebit,' as pizza was originally sold, at some point become naturalised and as British as Chicken Tikka Masala.

It struck me as odd at primary school. The Celtic Britons were "Us" and the Anglo-Saxons the foreign invaders, but then the Anglo-Saxons were "Us" fighting off the foreign vikings, including the French Vikings who established the royal dynasty we were then required to revere.

I definitely agree that the remain argument on economics was poor.

However the leave argument was about subjugation and that isn't the way things worked..

It seems pretty unsurprising, to me, that citizens of any nation likely be taught a version of history that emphasises their own nation's importance. I am sure the same is true for France, Germany, the USA, Russian and just about every other, yet this is only a problem for Britain? (or England rather?) as a previous poster put it?

From the POV of this leave voter I find European history fascinating, though of course I know more about Britain than I do about most other European nations. I was born here, I went to school here, I consume culture here and I've been around long enough that some of the events I can remember as "news" begin to be seen as history themselves.

I do think there is something reactive in the "over there" type sentiment and the phrase "on the continent" being a synonym for "not here" though.

Unfortunately, brexiters successfully positioned the EU as something external to us and not something WE are really building

EU is external as UK is an island.

UK did not form the EU, but applied to become a member in 1961 and was later accepted in 1973.

Remain failed to convey the sense of togetherness (it was always about economics, figures, very little about being in fact European, about something that is US)

Because there is no harmonisation anyway.

Different languages, currency and culture all trying to be one. Never going to happen.

US had the advantage of common language and currency. Even today many EU members do not use the Euro.

Not really, though obviously a few people thought that. Mostly it was on uncontrolled immigration and the lack of accountability in the EU and the financial profligacy noted during the campaign. Not sure of the ratios but heard very little about historical side as outlined.

If you took out the leave supporters who voted on the issue of immigration, remain would have won 80/20.

I'm not sure there was anything remain could have done to change the result, they just didn't have the charismatic leadership of Johnson and Farage.

This is why Cameron was so angry at Johnson, he knew he'd now lose.

Many people know little of WW2 history, ask most people about the Battle of the Bulge and they'd think it was a weight watchers question.

I fail to see why WW2 and Japan is mentioned. Although there is the argument that the Americans dropped the A bombs because they were scared of the Russians getting to Japan first.

By then, we had already had VE day, and also held a long overdue election, where much to the surprise of the upper classes, "Winnie" was booted out, in favour of the much more modest Clement Attlee, who had in fact been Deputy PM during the War, and had been doing much of the day to day domestic administration.

I should also say, that when I was at school, it was too recent to be history - history then stopped at 1914.

Enoch Powell’s speech in 1968 known as the rivers of blood was criticised at the time, but his forecasts came true

It hasn't come true at all. The "black man hasn't the whip hand over the white" nor are there millions of black people living in the country - EP predicted 7m by 2000.

Wages haven't risen in the country as they should off because of v low inflation and employers and govt using the GFA to suppress salaries, as EU is often low skilled, then why haven't skilled wages risen? apparently there is supposed to be significant skills shortages across the UK.
Supply and demand would suggest HCP wages would be sky high - they are in real terms, falling.

Good to know 20thC fox is a reliable source of historical knowledge.

Take a look at

Where does it say 'Foreign born = black or brown"?

I presume that Mystery would have no problem with White American immigrants as indeed our PM would have qualified as.

@Peregrina

The chart does not distinguish between origin or race, but demonstrates the huge influx during the previous labour government. The percentage almost doubled!

Had labour not removed the restrictions, in order to depress wages, there may never have been calls for a referendum?

You are backing a loser on that one Mystery - it's known that the immigration which could have been controlled came from outside the EU, which was entirely within the Govts. hands, no easy blaming of the EU there. However, May could have taken student numbers out of the figures, or commissioned the research which Amber Rudd later did, to show that most students went home once their courses were completed. Immigration numbers cut at a stroke - the question is, why didn't she?

BTW Labour were out of power in 2011. I know that's the leavers lazy option - blame the EU, blame Labour, failing that blame Lib Dems or SNP. Nope the buck for both domestic and Brexit problems now stops with Boris, (or Cummings).
.

Take a look at

David Starkey speaks interestingly on Henry VIII and the first Brexit.

Instead of just spouting 'Take a look at' try telling us what point you are trying to make.

Non EU immigration has been consistently higher than EU immigration - it doesn't tell us the colour of the people's skin - we would need a break down of which countries the immigration came from to hazard a guess at that. Even at the time when Tony Blair underestimated how many E Europeans would want to come the numbers are still significantly higher for non EU, and also keep rising during the Tory years.

In short Mystery, get your minders to do a bit more homework before posting.

I spent my formative years as a child migrant in a bilingual country which, unsurprisingly, focussed on its own history as well as that of its nearest neighbour. Both have a long history of welcoming and assimilating immigrants.

The immigration factor simply didn't have any bearing on my decision to vote Leave, and I have yet to meet another Leave voter for whom it was the main or deciding factor.

Lord Ashcroft did extensive research into the reasons why people voted Leave. Here is an excerpt.

"Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the EU was “the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK”. One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” Just over one in eight (13%) said remaining would mean having no choice “about how the EU expanded its membership or its powers in the years ahead.” Only just over one in twenty (6%) said their main reason was that “when it comes to trade and the economy, the UK would benefit more from being outside the EU than from being part of it.”

I was in the 49%.

So EU immigration peaking once the tories were in power for a good while mystery?

Spiking again recently?

So OK SingingLily, you are part of the 49%. How will you feel when our principle decisions are taken by either China or the USA - neither of which are going to let us be part of their governing bodies any time soon?

"Foreign-Born" = Boris Johnson

Much the same as you, I would imagine, Peregrina. However, the key word must surely be "if" rather than "when".

However, I was responding to OP who wanted to hear thoughts on whether "people thought the outcome of the Brexit vote has been influenced by the anglocentric view of history that is very common in UK nationals."

Clearly in my case, it was not. Even though I am a British-born UK national.