How many lefties will vote for Brexit?

[AnotherEffingOrangeRevel]

How many people whose politics generally lean towards the left will vote to leave the EU?

Does it seem to anyone else that EU membership is being increasingly conflated with the left-right dimension (which doesn't capture the debate well at all)? Even if we do define it this way, there are SO many reasons to leave which are consistent with left wing values.

It would be hard to quantify, but there are some very strong left-wing arguments for LEAVE.

My DP is a Marxist type thinker, and hates how the EU has become a vehicle for Neoliberal values, and privatisation.

You can see in the treatment towards Greece how all their national assets were given away to Goldman Sachs, the European Central Bank et al, etc... as soon as Greece threatened to leave under Tsipras.

We can see how the EU is pro TTIP and all of it's dirty cousins, how it is anti NHS and nationalisation, Pro-privatisation and profit creation for the top 1% and really does very very little for the everyday person.

I am somewhat on the fence, but have a tendancy to view the STAY camp with huge cynicism.

I must add The European Central Bank, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, The Goldsmiths, etc all of whom operate the entire EU system from within, are completely unelected and unaccountable, and thus erode democracy.

They certainly keep the illusion of democracy alive whilst operating and manipulating Cental EU process to their own benefit.

I agree with your DP on how the EU has developed, Ophelia, and think it's odd how little these elements of the debate seem to be coming through. The loudest voices for Brexit seem to be very nationalistic and UKIP-ish, when the strongest arguments are actually nothing of the sort.

I will be. I'm a socialist, tending towards the radical. I recognise the economic arguments for staying in (pragmatically, because I am a socialist living in a world where most people want to be capitalist and I respect that) and genuinely believe leaving will create a degree of economic uncertainty and therefore hardship.

However, I believe the EU only functions in the legalistic consensus that came into being at the end of the Cold War - the idea that military power could be replaced by international law. We (the EU) relied on the law to police our borders and treaties to protect our interests. This was delusional - the power of the law was contingent on the military force of the United States and America's willingness to exert it to support the legalistic world order.

Once America discovered it's vulnerability to non-state actors acting beyond international law (terrorists) it ended it's support for the legalistic order in a big, obvious way - the invasion of Iraq. Without force the law is meaningless and the legalistic order is crumbling, with nations like China and Russia scrambling for military might to protect themselves. Smaller states are now gravitating to military centres of power rather than legalistic ones, and traders will rely on these centres of power to protect their interests.

The EU is both product and exemplar of the legalistic order: It cannot reform into a military bloc as it was created to cripple European militarism. The 'soft' power it exerted was only a shadow of American hard power and now the US has other concerns than supporting an organisation that's barely a trading partner and is a potential competitor (trying to regain American interest in European defence is, I suspect, the motivation behind TTIP and expansion into the Ukraine). As time progresses and the legalistic order collapses further the EU will cease to provide any diplomatic benefit and will instead become a vulnerable target; The manipulation of the immigration issue by Turkey is an example of it's increasing impotence. Social pressures from immigration and economic collapse will lead to enormous civil strife. I would not be surprised if, as continued members, we are forced to deploy the army to the continent in a canute like attempt to preserve the peace.

Continued membership will see us trapped into trying to support an organisation that has outlived the global climate in which it could persist; The best hope is to cut loose, accept diminishment of our global role (and attendant economic decline) and hope like hell that when conflict breaks out in Europe we are seen as a neutral, disinterested and pragmatic potential ally for whichever power blocs participate.

Yes, In London we have all been posted these leaflets where the LEAVE side is all about controlling boarders and NHS "Tourist" kind of coming across racist.

The STAY side is all about how staying will reduce the cost of living, create jobs, maintain trade partnerships, help the environment blah blah... I don't believe a word of it. Plus the STAY leaflet is 3x as big as the LEAVE leaflet.

Since joining the EU Most native British birds have become threatened with extinction for starters. The STAY argument is simply all untrue.

The only thing I worry about is the Global "withdraw effect" like HQ's leaving and Investors backing out. BUT This may not happen.

Most British birds are not threatened with extinction. Some are yes but certainly far from all.

Some populations have increased massively.

The best protection birds have comes from European legislation.

The reasons for the decline of some species is complicated but what is certain is that our membership of the eu is not the reason for declines.

Seriously, if the leave argument has things so wrong about birds it really doesn't say much about its knowledge in general.

BTW I'm left of centre. I will be voting to stay.

tilder The point is how the Stay camp are saying they protect such species which is obviously bollocks.

They protect profits for Big Corpa, not wildlife.

The EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Has done more to harm indigenous wildlife than to protect it.

The Wildlife Trust believes major reform of CAP is needed to protect species in danger.

Article here

Membership of the EU is undeniably linked to the decline.

I work in environmental protection. I can categorically say that the biggest and best protection for our habitats and species including birds is European legislation.

The problem with birds and farming is birds and farming. Not eu membership and birds. It's the eu that is enabling improvements to the issue.

Google the Birds Directive and Habitats Directive

My Dad works in environmental protection and can categorically say the opposite of that. The EU are enabling ridiculous constraints on protection of wildlife.

Please could you reference that (my dad says isn't really going to cut it).

The CAP was aimed at farming not birds or the environment. So aimed at increasing productivity, yields etc.

As environmental awareness has increased over time, so has environmental protection. There are so many ways that farmers are encouraged to adopt methods that benefit the environment. Many of these (including the financing) come from Europe.

Am sure that wildlife trust would like farmers to promote wildlife more. Just that farmers have a difficult job farming. They can't do everything although things are improving.

I'm sure you can find the references yourself seeing as you claim it to be your profession.

Also have a look at this
www.environmenteuref.blogspot.co.uk/p/the-report.html?m=1

I'm right leaning and will be voting to leave. Interesting that my left leaning friends want to stay.

The problem I have is finding references that say 'the eu is bad for the environment' or similar.

I can post references all day that demonstrate how positive being in the eu is for the environment

Yes I find that interesting too kinky.

I am a lefty and will vote OUT.

So many reasons.

EU reps are a power hungry elite club.
Germany and France are the bosses.
Decreasing democracy.
EU are handling the refuge crisis in an utterly appalling, unintelligent and inefficient and hypocritical way. The failing of the EU is evident in EU leaders' inability to handle this humanitarian, political, social and economic crisis. Europe is less stable than it was 10 years ago and will continue to destablilse over the next couple of decades. I loved the idea of the EU and shengen makes a lot of sense in terms of cross-country movement between Belgium, France, Germany, Denmark, Scandi. But it hasn't quite worked out so I will vote OUT.

I agree with you, BlueRocks. The EU is a massive vehicle for further concentrating power and money on the unelected rich and powerful.

MephistophelesApprentice's post is fantastically interesting, thank you.

Yes, thank you Mephistopheles.

Mephistopheles's you put it well.

I do think there would be economic repercussions short-term and because of that I have had my first wobbles this week.

I will vote out on the day though I think.

I'm a lefty voting 'in'.

The choice we're being offered is not to leave the EU and build a new, socially and environmentally responsible UK, that will handle things like the refugee crisis in a sensible way, though, is it.

Look at our government - do you really think they're champing at the bit to introduce new environmental protections as soon as we quit the EU?

Do you really think they're going to say, oh no, we don't want private companies in the NHS so we're going to reject TTIP?

I don't think any of the situations you have mentioned will be improved by leaving the EU, essentially.

I believe that if you cannot get rid of the people making the rules you are in a dictatorship and we must fight to remedy this

If we fail we shall do it under our own steam with people we voted in

I don't want ever closer union I am already in a union and it's all the uk England , irland ,Scotland Wales

They had some hope if it were the Scandinavian counties , us , France and Germany

But there is no way turkey meet any of the tests and in fact Greece should have been allowed to fail