The future belongs with the young. The young believe in international cooperation. They have to live with the decision which is thought to have been made largely by their elders. 

This is how YouGov says that all age-groups voted:

Age:                               Average no of years* to live with the decision:

18-24:     75% Remain                       69

25-49:     56% Remain                       52

50-64:     44% Remain                       31

65+:        39% Remain                       16  

*Life expectancy here is said to range from 88 to 90.

For analysis, see this link:

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/06/how-did-different-demographic-groups-vote-eu-referendum

Last time there was a Brexit, around AD 410, it took the economy over a thousand years to recover.

I do not understand how/why a couple of old people (see Stats above) in a limited geographic area (called England/Wales) can decide for the functioning of a huge geograhic area (called Europe/Scotland...)

I also do not understand that a country that spread its seeds all over the world not that long ago (Canada, Australia, India, Africa, Gibraltar/Commonwealth.....) is not able to think non-egocentric today

Dear all

An old Chinese saying is “Who left the earth is still turning ”. So the difficulty is temporary for both sides.

Some Philosophy:

Darwin must be right? God bless who?

..and without God, just sitting and watching how the others change the world climate?

In the case of any democratic society, there is the potential that divisions can occur to such an extent that large swaths of that society will find unhappy results in regard to their respective sentiments. I experienced, as a child, this same disgruntling situation when my mother would call together my three siblings and myself to settle conflicts of interest with the method of drawing straws, an adaptation of the age-old phenomenon of casting lots. Monarchies, empires, bipartite, and tripartite systems, and other types of governmental unions have not eliminated this uncomfortable dilemma. We do remain creatures of choice in any free or oppressive state. We consider the options on a daily basis and make our decisions based on our willingness or unwillingness to abide by the system we submit ourselves to follow in exchange for the benefits we perceive are ours by having a part in that system. In answer to your question, can Scotland, Ireland, or Gibraltar accommodate those unhappy with the Brexit vote? Will those who could potentially leave be willing to exist with other immigrants who would necessarily be coming as a result of mandates of the EU? Would any of those states be capable of accommodating such a diaspora? I would invite those who are unhappy to attempt a move to my own lovely country where there is ample choice of geographical beauty and social disposition, but alas, we have our own problems and operate, for the most part, under the majority rule system, as well.

Scotland may become independent

 Dear all,

Thank you. We all make different responses to circumstances. This reaching out to the international community on my part, is my instinctive response to the UK's international separationalism and highland sheep-like behaviour [making a lot of barbarous noise, while following the herd into oncoming traffic without thought of the consequences].

I'll attempt to reply individually, until time runs out.

Dear Andrew Wilson,

Yes, the Roman Empire has more than one lesson to teach on every subject, it seems. Your reference to the Sack of Rome [I presume] reminded me of this blog, written fairly hastily perhaps and some months ago, on a subject not given enough attention: 

http://jemahlevans.wix.com/jemahlevans#!Exit-Britannia-Brexit-and-the-Fall-of-Rome/c1q8z/56d592e00cf249e9dfcd62d6

Dear Marcel,

Good points. But in their expansionism, were the British 'leaders of men' not at times being egocentric rather than altruistic in their empire-building? Or is that just my 'post-colonial' view?

Dear Chun Liu,

We hope....

Margaret,

Who would have thought just 15 years ago that the West trend of having fewer children or none at all would be the deciding factor in an all-important vote?

Europe and the UK will survive because they need each other. And truth be told, I believe that once the dust settles and new policies of cooperation are in place, the Brexit people will realize that the status quo really didn't change that much in the everyday lives of British citizens.

Dear Pierlorenzo,

Yes indeed. A petition is afoot to call for another referendum. But democracy here is perhaps so strong that the ill-considered democratic decision made by the populace may well have to stand.

Dear Bruce,

Thanks for your kind invitation - but may we wait till the autumn, to see whether the American electorate is more sane than the English, first?

Dear Mushtaq Ahmad,

Yes, the Scots have now announced that they will hold a referendum to leave the UK.

The saddest of times. And will there be more blows to unity and to global harmony?

There are certain important votes in the U.S. Congress that require a two-thirds majority to pass. While the public vote is a simple majority, perhaps it would be appropriate having a two-thirds majority of the citizens approving extremely important issues.

Dear Margaret et all

The Brexit vote is distressing, particularly given that the vote was so close.  But from what I have seen, implementation is not a fait accompli.  That is going to be a very complex process involving massive and multiple legislative changes, and multiple treaty renegotiations.  The forecast is that this will take at least two years, and much can change in that time.

Already, there has been a heavy economic toll, not just for Britain. If that persists then the negotiations on legislative and treaty changes could well stall, prompting calls for a new referendum or other compromise actions.  And it may prompt reforms in the EU as well.

Looking from outside it seems to me that two factors have been driving this, the terrorist threat and the refugee crisis.  On both issues the European response, and indeed the world response, has been desperately inadequate. And I 'm not advocating the"stop the boats" approach of the Australian government.

It's not my place to tell people what to do.  The issues are far too complex.  But the refugee problems must be fully and strongly addressed at their sources politically, financially, and militarily where necessary.  But the biggest issue that needs to be addressed is the growing social and wealth divide between the haves and have nots, both within countries and globally.

A few days ago I was in LA briefly on my way to a conference.  In central LA I was appalled to se, among the many homeless, a man shuffling down the street dressed only in large black plastic bags.

People deserve better than that, whatever their problems.

Dear Margaret Ward

Thanks for the invitation.

Its just a beginning.......... of a Inducive Wave of "New" Change Shifts for Reorganization & Restructuring of Economic, Social and Power Politics at Europe and Great Britain.

Only the designing forces can tell whats next exactly. It seems to be logical but not "Natural" and it is for some Pre-Estimated reasons.

Being a Scientist and Researcher one main concern is that what will be the future wave regarding Research & Technology and where it will get Twists & Shifts 

Regards,

If none have heard, US news media is reporting that the EU has told the UK not to drag its heels leaving.

James,

For referendums, the principle of 50%+1 is a very important principle to hold to.  Suppose that the law would require a 60% yes vote in order for the ''Yes'' to win.  Then whohever political party that has the power to ask the question would put its the prefer option as the ''no side'' putting the opposing position as the one that has to receive more votes.  This would not be a plus to democracy and that would undermine it and make departure from any statu quo harder than it is already is.  The whole point of holding a referendum is to say we will ask the people to decide.  If the principle of the 50%+1 is change, would mean telling people we will only ascent to your request if it is overwhelmingly for it otherwise forget it.

Now the statu quo is out (maybe)  and so the battle within UK and within EU will begin for what will be the after Brexit situation in the UK and in EU.  There are a lot of possibilities.  Here are only three.

For the no brexit side, one of the best possibility would be for the EU to change in ways that would accomodate the central complaints of the Yes brexit side: uncontroled immigration, burocratic anti-democratic characters of the EU institutions, fisheries, etc.  This request a will of the political elite of Germany and France to accept to open this pandora box.

A second less positive scenario (the stick approach, the one used with Greece after its referendum) would be the hard line on the part of EU in order to prevent further exits and to lauch a climate of economic insecurity and chaos in the UK in such a way that it would provide the political opportunity for the No brexit side to return to power and to lauch a second referendum that would reverse the first one.  

A third scenario would be for EU to make the Brexit transition not too hard and not too easy and establish quickly  an new UK EU relation that would minimize the economic chaos and would economically be very similar to the current situation without the worse irritant ot the EU.  This scenario requests a very quick resolution given that any long period of insecurity will create an economic chaos and this the political/financial elite knows it very well.  

Louis,

All I am saying is that in the US Congress certain weighty legislation, like constitutional amendments, require a two-thirds approval. I am not sure if the British Parliament has similar requirements for some votes. When it comes to public votes on referendums in the US it is a majority vote over 50%. Can we really claim that 50.1 to 49.9 is a majority? Very close voting results in impassioned issues creates all sorts of hard feelings on both sides and often lead to the issue being placed on the ballot at a future date.The 49.9 percent become the disenfranchised, living with results approved by basically one out of two. Decisive results, while not liked by the losers, are still more acceptable than losing by a few percentages. 

Margaret, regarding your waiting until autumn, don't hold your breath!!

A second more convincing referendum required

http://www.msn.com/fr-fr/actualite/monde/%c2%ab-brexit-%c2%bb-une-p%c3%a9tition-pour-demander-un-deuxi%c3%a8me-r%c3%a9f%c3%a9rendum-d%c3%a9passe-les-140-000-signatures/ar-AAhAOLa#image=2

I am pretty sure that if you would as the 'leave voters' alone to vote again that the outcome will defintely be different

Good Evening

1- It 's normal that some members come out when there is disagreement on social objectives. It is part of the well-being and growth.

2- Brexit is the result of a referendum, it is not a monarchical initiative.

3- Better alone than in bad company.

4- Everyone chooses death he likes: Better one day as a lion than a hundred as sheep.

5- The union do the strength, not the union jack.

6- Unfortunately the British have the atomic bomb, a real army, a lot of oil.

In EU remains only France, with the atomic bomb. EU does not have the atomic bomb: France has the atomic bomb ..

Dear American contingent,

Thanks for your insight from across the pond. Yes, the EU has told the UK to leave quickly.

But Scotland needs a referendum first, to leave the UK and stay in Europe.

Dear Margaret,

A historical parallel may be when Romania left the Germany leaded war league in the WW2 and attached to the future winners. It was a sufficiently advantageous action. There was no referendum, certainly. Changing political sides or positions has been a frequent event. Sometimes it is difficult to forecast which side may be ideal.   

Dear Other non-Europeans,

Thank you - and in some cases, thanks to your predecessors for tolerating the British Empire.

I think there's more hysteria over this than it deserves.

First, on the youth vote, that can be viewed in different ways. The way I see it, in matters such as this, the young will likely change their positions as they grow older, and have more at stake. I would not assume that the youth vote will remain unchanged as they grow older and become more invested.

Also, take the example of the US and Canada. Does the US need a pan-American government overlay, such as the EU, to trade with Canada? No. So I wouldn't assume that trade between the UK and the EU will cease. Why should it? Trade exists when it's advantageous to both sides. If it's enforced, it won't work right anyway.

European countries have to become more culturally integrated, before an EU overlay can be robust. I think that individual member country citizens feel they don't have enough say in who is elected to the European government in Brussels, what politicians have a say in their lives.

The other point is, it is inevitable that some member countries will stand more to gain, and others will be required to give more than they gain. It seems clear that many in the UK felt they were giving more than receiving. It's hardly surprising if countries which receive more than they give would feel differently.

Much is being made of the fact that many people don't know the details of the what constitutes the EU. Maybe, but it is thus in every election. In some magical way, elections seem to work out anyway. Maybe the clueless vote is balanced by the overly positive, but misguided vote.

Dear other Europeans,

Words fail, except that I and 48 per cent of the British population are sorry - it seems so arrogant of 'us'.

With 52% on one side, you simply ignore 48% that have another opinion. Is this kind of decision to stay or to leave really acceptable from an ethical point of view? 

Dear All,

Logically - if logics works in politics – Louis’s first proposition would be the winner: in such a difficult and complicated era as the present one, survival and success of a single country must be uncertain and tough. The future must belong to rightly organised and implemented alliances. EU as the United States of Europe should be something like that. Should be…     

By the way, the e-petition for a second referendum [mentioned by Marcel] has crashed. Indeed, the whole website, run by the UK government, has crashed. [[Over 250,000]] EDIT 3 days later: Nearly 4 million have signed, of whom 100,000 had signed within 3 hours, I think.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/brexit-petition-for-second-eu-referendum-so-popular-the-government-sites-crashing-a7099996.html

It's highly unlikely that the Brexit campaign will back down. However, its leaders have already reneged on some of the temptations that they had offered the public if they voted to leave the EU. 

Dear Margaret:

As I already said in another thread, in my view --which is not the opinion of a European or English citizen, but of an external observer-- this has been a dubious move. However, we should have faith in democracy, that is, in popular decisions – assuming that people was not artificially misled.

Recent experience in my own country suggests that, when political leaders have avoided responding to the popular will, the results were disastrous. Argentina suffered a devastating crisis in late 2001. Following the resignation of the president, people called for political renewal. But the traditional political class, with the support of some groups, decided not to call elections. Appealing to a constitutional procedure, legislative representatives elected a new president for the next two years, in order to complete the term of the resigning president. The consequence was that the renewal agenda has only been recovered 14 years later and the costs have been exorbitant.

This is not the end of the European Union and perhaps people’s decision ends up being a wake-up call to fix some things before it's too late.

Dear Margaret,

It almost feels like traumatic DIVORCE of a couple who were madly in love for many years. Both sides are loosing and the future of kids is uncertain.

Unfortunately the cracks and divisions in our societies are occurring all around the world. As I see it, the more the division and cracks in the social structure the more the chances of war or fighting in the future (hope this prediction is wrong). The natural laws indicate that "TOGETHER WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL". 

best wishes,

Refik

In 1995 Quebec hold a second referendum for separating from Canada and the "No" option wan with 50.58% of the vote.  Now the poll say that only about 35% would vote for separation.  There was two referendums , and the rule for winning were 50% plus 1.  Since then the Canadian federal government changed the rule for winning a referendum that says that the referendum for on separation will required a clear majority , saying that a clear majority is more than 50% +1 but not indicating what this percentage is!  Nobody has a hint what a clear majority is!  Very good recipy for problems.

Dear Margaret

Growth is always associated with division, and division benefits growth. This is true right from the level of the cell to that of Nations.

Take the case of West and East Pakistan. They were one country, physically and sort of mentally separate. There needed to be a war for East Pakistan to become Bangladesh. But the division or Liberation ws ultimately better for both.

Likewise, leaving the EU will give Britain greater identity and opportunity to regain past glory; probably this was a necessity. May be a little belt tightening initially. But I think it is the way.

The youth may have voted differently, may be because they are pampered and have lesser idea of your original identity. Take better care to teach them, if that is possible.

Narayanan

The United Kingdom has made a momentous decision by voting to leave the European Union in a closely-fought and historic referendum. The Brexit side won 52 per cent of the vote in a high-turnout referendum that overturned opinion polls predicting a close contest with Remain retaining a marginal advantage.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/brexit-uk-votes-to-leave-eu/article8768820.ece

Dear Margaret! Dear all! I'll try to concisely sad discuss what happened in the wonderful country. Catastrophic event reflects the patterns in the stories. What are the two foundations of the state? Machiavelli believed that the basis of political behavior is self-interest and violence. Aristotle believed in the divine destiny of human, by virtue of virtues. With the dominance of the state in Machiavelli's theory of society sometimes slipping into fascism. With the dominance of Aristotle's ideas of society developed. I believe that the European Community was formed on the basis of Aristotle's ideas. But now, after the events in the UK, I understand that, in respect of England and the European Community can say the words of Shakespeare "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

Mainz, Germany

Dear Ward

I think the exit vote was a surprise to many. But the sentiment against the E.U. was pretty strong among those who voted to leave--according to what I've seen. My sense of the matter is that the vote is symptomatic, and there are generally deep problems and discontents in the politics of globalization. Trump is another symptom.

A majority of the British voters appear to trust the politicians in London more than the politicians in Brussels and on the continent. That is perhaps no surprise, and it is likely generally true that Europeans trust their own politicians more than they do the arrangements coming from Brussels and the E.U. Maybe a political union of 500 million people is too large to allow needed attention to the details? The vote is certainly a wake-up call to Brussels. The lack of a "European identity" seems to be a deep problem in a word of "identity politics." 

Opposition to immigration has also been part of the story, and that, again, is felt pretty broadly in Europe--in my experience. Without prejudice to immigrants (Americans after all are chiefly descendant from people who came from somewhere else), and appreciating the contributions that immigrants do in fact make, it appears that ethnic nationalism is on the rise. Its not coming completely out of the blue. There are genuine and deeply felt discontents.

I noticed this morning that a vote of the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday effectively upheld a lower court ruling against the President's policy of delaying the expulsion of around half of the 11 million foreigners in the U.S. without proper papers. The court held, as I understand the matter, that it was not within the power of the President to put aside the existing law. The Supreme Court did not reject the lower court decision. A score or more of the states had taken the federal government to court.

The (Republican) Speaker of the House of Representatives (who is in some ways equivalent to the prime minister in a parliamentary system as the elected leader of the majority in the lower house), called it a victory for the separation of powers and he emphasized that only Congress could make the law. To translate this into more British terms, one might say, he thanked the courts for upholding legislative control of the executive. Trying to regularize some of the immigrants was an important goal of the present administration; but the President, quite obviously, does not get everything his own way.

Its in the American Declaration of Independence that "governments are instituted" and "derive their just powers" from "the consent of the governed." This is a fundamental principle of democracy. I liked how the prime minister went to the public and stated he would resign --and would also help to implement the popular decision. He said that the country needed another leader to carry forward the decision that was made by the voters yesterday. That strikes me as the proper democratic position to take. 

H.G. Callaway

Dear Vladimir,

If you ignore the divine, climate change will impose whatever the political selfish opinions....

Local fishermen in Scotland voted against Europe because Europe imposed Wise limits on overexploitation of the Sea resources....

For me, more useful referendum questions at the European level would be:

Examples

Do you accept that 1% of the European citizens own XX.X % of the resources?

Do you think that all European citizens should have a minimum salary whatever their social/education background?

Do you think that the retirement salary should be the same for all citizens whatever their social/education background?

ETc...

Dear Marcel,

Your proposition regarding the minimum salary is OK depending the opportunities of the country/society in question. As to retirement salary, not social status but correctly measured performance should be considered. Should not?

Dear Louis,

That was a typical political solution. Gaining time, gaining power.

Dear Vladmir,

You must be right, EC was probably formed on a mild, community supporting theory but it is too bureaucratic and there is no way to influence or control the aggressive and cheating member states.  

Dear all,

Thank you for your interesting, informative and/or supportive answers. I hope that you will continue with the discussion and with your own debates.

I will add an update whenever there's news of interest to the Outside World [outside these little islands, that is]. The political manoeuvring and various resignations of economic and other advisers may be of little interest to those not affected by the impact. You will all have observed the immediate economic effects.

The United Kingdom this week is clearly dis-united. Those who do not live here will not be aware of the malignancy and the anger that has been building for a very long time. This anger has now polarised. Even the quieter members of our society have been roused to anger, stirring up even the usually unobtrusive element who do not want to revert to Little Britain being seen as a hub of empire. 

Unfortunately, it is on anger that extremism is based, and it is on anger that it then feeds and breeds. For myself, I hope to retain my trust in Man's better nature.

Evidence of public reaction is that the e-petition for a second referendum [mentioned by Marcel here] will today have been signed by 2 million people in the UK. It has been rising today by 1000 signatures per second.

A second referendum is unlikely to be accepted, in that democracy has spoken. The 'man-in-the-street' is only just becoming aware of consequences that had not been brought to his/her attention before he/she 'voted Out'. Many signed for 'Out' in order to make a statement of dissatisfaction. Many now say that they did not expect 'Brexit' to succeed and regret their part in it.

The petition was triggered by an earlier statement of right-wing Brexit leader, Nigel Farage:

'When a Remain vote was considered likely in May, Nigel Farage suggested he would support a second referendum if his side lost by a narrow margin.

The Ukip leader told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”

He made no mention of the sentiment on Friday, when he triumphantly hailed “independence day” for Britain.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-petition-latest-eu-referendum-rules-change-force-second-vote-poll-government-a7102486.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/25/could-britain-actually-have-a-second-referendum-on-brexit/

Dear Margaret,

One of the problems may be that the opinions of those, who did not gone to vote, are unknown.  One can now see here the imperfectness of democracy.  Often the opinion of majority can be unpleasant for itself. This is called: the torpedo has turned back.    

Dear All,

Regarding the present British memorandum votes, I have no illusions for the future Hungarian memorandums…

Dear Andrew,

Have you meant AD 410, when Alaric, the Vizigoth king sacked Rome, Romans left the British Isles and then the Roman Empire collapsed?

 Dear all and especially András,

In my experience and according to media reports, those who did not 'vote In or Out', felt too unsure - of themselves and of the facts - to do so. 

Leaders on both sides called their opponent a liar. Some openly confessed to telling 'untruths' [usually as 'a mistake'] in order to swing the argument. One leader of the Out movement changed sides, saying that she could no longer support leaflets that she knew to be 'lies'. The public did not seem to hear what she said.

One great cause of political instability is that these people on opposing sides, In and Out, who were accusing each other of lying are MPs who belong to the same political party - the party in power and whose leader, the Prime Minister has tendered his resignation.

Can we blame, for anything here, the young? No. Absolutely, no. In modern Britain, they are mostly better educated in politics, economics, current affairs and environmental issues than is the majority of the older population.  But would I at the age of 18 have been comfortable to vote for people telling lies? No. Would I have voted? I think so... but I have to admit that I might have been made so unsure by all the vociferous anger and downright lies that I might not have voted. Would I have voted for anger, hatred and lies? Definitely not.

Mainz, Germany

Dear Ward & contributors,

I've been noticing in today's news reports that there has been much reaction to the vote in the financial markets. This strikes me as significant. I was aware, before the vote that the media sources close to the London financial markets were opposed to Britain's exit from the E.U. This surprised me at first, since the same sources have so often been very critical and competitive toward the continent and the E.U., but the "remain" positions held up over some months. The degree of market reaction, after the vote, and the way its negative development is concentrated in big finance suggest that some folks were not putting all their cards on the table before the vote. It is worth recalling that a very large portion of the U.K. economy is concentrated in finance. Perhaps they thought they could always sway the media as needed?

I would pay little attention to the UK Independence party and its spokesman. The decision to hold the referendum was made within the leadership and by the government controlled by Conservative party. Many people in the U.K. and abroad think that holding the referendum was a mistake. But I doubt that there will be another referendum any time soon. The government is apparently prepared to deal with the problems arising. Might they eventually reduce the role of big finance?

My view was that the U.K. would have done well to vote to stay and work out the problems and conflicts. I think the U.K. needs Europe and Europe also needs the U.K. Where there is a will there is a way.

I think the intention of the out vote was to preserve British sovereignty. The U.K. has wanted the common market but no part of political union. Once that is accepted, then reasonable decisions within the E.U. should be capable of making arrangements mutually beneficial. The old nationalistic enmities benefited no one. I think the E.U. would do well not to drive too hard a bargain, though there is some temptation to teach a lesson.

The U.K., I think, never wanted to "belong" to Europe politically. There is some sense of rejection here on the continent. Everyone needs to face the realities and work out acceptable agreements.

There will always be an England, as the saying goes. There will always be a Scotland, too. Once things calm down a bit ways and means will be found--or, that's the way I see the matter.

H.G. Callaway

H.G.,

Investors and the market are difficult to predict when it comes to expected events. I do not know how many times the US stock market has went into a downward spiral at the announcement of poorer than forecasted earnings by a major company or plans to increase interest rates by the Fed even when that outcome had been predicted a week in advance.

What I know is that it is extremely likely that some elements of the market would have reacted negatively to a vote to stay in the EU. Often the reactions by a few can fuel a panic that grips the market. We have seen it in the US where a giant corporation reported stronger than predicted earnings and the market dropped because some investors where hedging their bets that the company would fail to meet their forecast!

Mainz, Germany

Dear Green,

I don't see any reason to disagree with anything you say in the posting immediately above. It requires a good deal of context to make any judgement at all about what markets are doing or what they are reacting to in a given situation. But all of that is really neither here nor there.

My hypothesis is that the concentration of negative effects regarding financial firms is a sign that the financial markets had expected the opposite result. If they had expected the result that actually came to pass, then it would have been discounted before hand, and the reaction would not have been so strong. Note the focused reaction in the markets. If you doubt of this idea, then you might either dispute the concentration of negative effects for finance firms, or you might propose a better explanation --and show that it is better in relation to the available evidence. 

It is not my view that markets are always quite ration. Still, it is true that big finance has a great deal of weight and power in the British economy. This is a chief reason why the British never joined the Euro. This might have moved the chief financial markets of Europe to Frankfurt--where the European Central Bank is located. Maybe big finance has too much power in London for the comfort of the government?

H.G. Callaway

H.G.,

All I was noting was that markets can be "irrational" and in several cases in the US the DOW has dropped over 400 points on good news. This often is fueled by investors who bet the other way, then try to divest before they lose too much money. I do not think that is what is happening now, but if the vote had been to stay, there could have been volatility of the markets in that decision also.

It seems that the tabloid-reading populace has started to understand Brexit - and begun to realise what they voted for.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/the-mail-has-explained-what-brexit-means-and-its-readers-seem-shocked--Z1772TI4aNW?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

It will all pass?! Meanwhile half of the UK is distraught. Scotland wants to leave us. Professors, senior academics, scientists and researchers are deeply disturbed. The economy is flailing - and the Chancellor of the Exchequer appears to have disappeared, not seen since before the Referendum. The Brexit leaders appear to have no idea how to run the dismantlement of the UK from the EU. David Cameron will leave office shortly, and wants nothing to do with Brexit and his own Brexit MPs. Boris Johnson, as co-leader of Brexit, expects to be Prime Minister soon, but has never held higher office than Mayor of London, let alone be leader of a dis-United Kingdom. Oxford and Cambridge professors amongst others are today talking of chaos.

And no, I am not being emotional. Nor am I exaggerating.

What a good time for Donald Trump, visiting the UK.

May I humbly suggest that it would be a good time for us all to pray that our futures will be manageable, peaceful, and full of wisdom.

Dear Margaret, you are asking for parallels.  This is one on SIngapore that decided to leave Malaysia, and progressed on in a just and fair society that is a success story. Yes, the younger generation favor Bremain, while their parents might choose Brexit.  I believe that the PM did what a gentleman would do, and I respect his action.  If only ALL POLITICIANS were genuine gentlemen.

"On 9 August 1965, Singapore separated from Malaysia to become an independent and sovereign state.[1] The separation was the result of deep political and economic differences between the ruling parties of Singapore and Malaysia,[2] which created communal tensions that resulted in racial riots in July and September 1964.[3] At a press conference announcing the separation, then Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew was overcome by emotions and broke down. Singapore’s union with Malaysia had lasted for less than 23 months."

http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/dc1efe7a-8159-40b2-9244-cdb078755013

While it is gratifying to see the general concern here about Brexit, this is long after the horse has bolted the stable. See my question posted on Mar 26 which highlighted all these dangers:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Will_Brexit_be_a_bloody_mess

Yes, Anthony, I'm sorry I didn't see your question earlier, but.. we have to do something positive now. Even changing thought on an individual level. And even by refusing to let Anger - or indeed Bigotry - govern us.

If extremism based on populism gains power, as seems likely, fascism or civil war are being mentioned as possibilities.

Those outside the UK are not feeling the nasty mood in this country. That in itself is producing an opposing call - for social revolution, with the parenthesis '[preferably peaceful]'.

Margaret,

good relationship is between Russia and other members of CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States), former Soviet Republics: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Azerbajan...

Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's First Minister has told the BBC that Holyrood could try to block the UK's exit from the EU. Half of the UK would thank her. But many would escalate the xenophobic hatred of The Other, to include the Scots. 

English MPs opposing Brexit had already talked of forcing a parliamentary vote at Westminster.

Chaos, meanwhile. 

The opposition Party, Labour, has MPs turning on their leader Jeremy Corbyn and demanding his resignation.

Thanks, Olga. Right now we need unity with Scotland, let alone with our European friends. Unity of feeling within England seems out of the question. There is a huge divide. There may be a backlash against intellectuals, academics and thinkers.

Margaret, all crises have the ends, and this crisis will finish sooner or later, too. The problems can take place only if Scotland separate itself from other part of the country and turn into a toy in the hands of external forces (Scotland as a member of the UK and Scotland as a member of the EU are slightly different state structures).  

Dear John,

I agree with you but I am not sure whether praying without faith and trust will help.

Dear Anthony,

Hopefully, you must have exaggerated the dangers.  

Dear Margaret,

Blaming cannot help. One should wait, think and try the approximately best solution. Sober mind, calm and no emotions are needed. Certainly, it is easy to say things like that. One used to say even the attic is full with good propositions of others.

Scotlan is physically and institutionally connected with England. More than half of millena of construction.  It is not going to go in smoke because some nationalists are a bit exalted.

I'm not sure about that. The Romans found the northern tribes difficult, if not impossible, to control because of their fierce independence.

Animal Behaviour start to express:

http://www.msn.com/fr-fr/actualite/monde/apr%c3%a8s-le-brexit-la-parole-raciste-se-lib%c3%a8re-en-grande-bretagne-o%c3%b9-les-agressions-se-multiplient/ar-AAhE3OP?ocid=spartandhp

Brexit: a large-scale social experiment without replication? 

Dear Marcel,

Interesting article. One raised the question whether the English language remains official language of EU? Good question… Il est temps de commencer apprendre le Francais et l’Allemand. N’est-ce –pas?

Dear James,

That fierceness was long time ago. They became meanwhile rather smart traders.

James,

Yes they were quite different 2000 years ago, but not that much in the last 500 years.  They speak the same language, have built a british empire accross the world together and they basically think the same or at least it what it look like for an outsider like me.

English is certainly not the official EU language but rather one of many. Now that only about 5m Europeans in the EU will have this mother tongue, perhaps French and German will hope to become more prominent as de facto working languages; more broadly  Spanish is a world language (as is English ), so expect more internal jealousies ....  EU officials have to be trilingual. but not the MEPs.

See eg my now dated article 'Language competition in European Community Institutions', 2003.   On verra... mal sehen!

http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2016/06/27/97001-20160627FILWWW00196-la-pologne-veut-un-nouveau-referendum-en-grande-bretagne.php

Interesting that I am seeing reports that Brexit passed because the younger generation did not turn out for the election in sufficient numbers while at least 81% of people over 45 did vote.

Dear Margaret,

Indeed there are parallels - historically, politically, educationally, at societal level and philosophically but I am not sure about the metaphysical thoughts after such exit.

Historically,

My country - Singapore is the best example you are seeking for. Our exit from Peninsula Malaysia since 1965 was a very sad and lonely separation. We were worst off as we had nothing literally including natural resources unlike UK. We only have natural beings alias good thinking people who are visionaries, shakers and movers. That what made us now one of the four respectable little "dragons" in Asia (Vogel, 1992).

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/1992-03-01/four-little-dragons-spread-industrialization-east-asia

Politically,

We used to be dominantly a one political party country. Down the two decades, it has started to change to a multi-party country. But it does not stop us from moving forward in every aspects be it in trade, economy and defence. But your country need a very strong and straight person who could shape the country beyond money and politics. It only takes one charismatic, mover and shaker true politician to steer UK into a strong and prosperous country as it should be - being the leader of the Commonwealth countries.

Universities,

We are world-ranked 26th and 55th for our very own National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University respectively (The World University Ranking, n.d.).

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2016/world-ranking#!/page/1/length/25/sort_by/rank_label/sort_order/asc/cols/rank_only

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2016/world-ranking#!/page/2/length/25/sort_by/rank_label/sort_order/asc/cols/rank_only

In Asia, we both rank 1st and 2nd for both universities again respectively.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2016/regional-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank_label/sort_order/asc/cols/rank_only

That is why, separate politics from the universities or education ministry because the twain will never meet. The same goes with the professionals like lecturers, researchers, students and the politicians - both would need to sacrifice one for the other because they could not be multi-tasked easily. Though it could not be stopped totally.

Societal level,

Singapore is known to be a very tolerant society from time immemorial. Only from 2008 when a global economic disaster loomed, a surge of foreign talent (FT) was recruited to fill up the gap that the local could "not" fill. The disparity in wage, QOL and perks created such tart rebuke among the locals. This is shown on the slant in political votes. Above all, the society started to move away from the FTs - not completely though. But the boon is, the Singaporeans become more closer than they used to ethnically be. And till date, such harmony is a beauty unknown before.

Philosophically,

If this little natural resources-deficit red dot can overcome such dreadful separation and succeed despite still surrounded by the "bigger and biggest brother", UK should not be afraid of treading the same path knowing that the leader of the pack should lead, if not walk beside the little "dragons" and retrieve the past and present glory of being headed by a strong and revered Queen and future great leader(s).

Be strong, Margaret and all our UK friends. The waves will stop but the ripples will always be there. It is up to you, your present and future generations to shape the world of your own with and now without your partner - in UK's case, the EU.

Only then, all your problems would be weaned if not removed totally. I hope to hear the great news from you soon.

Best regards - Mariam Ahmad

James,

If someone do not cast his vote ,  the referendum process is automatically not taking them into account and this is their own doing.  If I decided to sit on my ass and decide to not cast my vote, then why should my preference or interest be taken into account?  Not voting is a vote for non existence and so be it.

Louis,

Oh, I agree. I am wondering now if all of those non-voters suddenly have realized their mistake and are crying out for another referendum so that they can do what they should have done the first time, vote.

:~)

Dear Marcel,

Thanks for the Figaro article. By the way, I prefer your own style.   

Dear all,

You must excuse me if I do not enter into debates at present. When I posed the question, I had not anticipated the disturbed and disturbing mood of the country this week.

For instance, those talking of Scotland and England as the same country have not felt the long-increasing division between the extremes of the so-called Little Englanders and the Scottish Nationalists. 

Nor have they felt the nasty mood prevalent in England in recent times.I won't give it further power by elucidating here.

As for whose fault anything was, that really is not the issue now. It is how to unite a country divided by a great chasm in thinking - a chasm greater than the question of the EU.

Margaret,

Pardon us. Here it is a discussion to many, but you are living it. Not being in the UK, there is no way we can truly comprehend.

I have permission to post this edition of reflections by one of your fellow academics, a university lecturer, local government officer, and historian - a quiet person. And a family member. .

Dear Friends

Having spent the last few days alternating between great sorrow and anger, I felt I needed to put down some of my thoughts about what seems to me the terrible decision to leave the EU.

I grew up in a London still scarred by wartime bombsites. I still remember in 1961, when I was nine, my Father explaining what the news of the building of the Berlin Wall meant. But meanwhile, the creation of the EEC represented a movement to do things differently, to integrate peoples and states to counter the gross nationalism of the pre-war period, to devise a better way to share a continent. After much dithering and time, the UK and others also joined and the institution evolved. Another memory I have from that time is of a German woman who volunteered with us for a while, observing that coming to England from Germany then was like coming to a third world country, a bit harsh but showing how far we had been left behind. And who can forget that magical, joyous, almost unbelievable evening in 1989 when the power of freedom forced the authorities to open the Berlin Wall? Since those days, I have had the opportunity and privilege to work with European partners on different projects and it has been great; immensely rewarding both individually and to my community and theirs. Our shared experiences build understanding, making connections not building walls, spreading peace not antagonism.

Europe has a different view from Britain. It has suffered enough from nationalism over the last century. There are communities that have been in half a dozen different countries in that time. They haven’t moved, the borders have. We in the UK should be looking for ways to diminish borders not enlarge them. However, the UK has voted, by the slimmest of majorities, to do just that. It seems to me to be reminiscent of the German plebiscites of the thirties which led to the rise of Nazism. I believe, that whatever is said to the contrary, there has been a strong, dark streak of the poison of racism and xenophobia in this decision. It is instructive to observe that the world leaders who favoured/supported Brexit were Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-Un with Donald Trump thrown in for good measure.

Apparently, the vote was to get back control. Control of what, something we always had and never had lost? How can we get back something we have always had? We are part of Europe and have had as much influence and involvement in decision making as any other country. In any relationship, be it marriage, business, family, international treaty or whatever, you sacrifice a little independence, a little self-will, to build a better whole. And that is what the EU has done over the last half century. It is building a better greater vision of nationhood and humanity. Just being called ‘Great Britain’ (with the ‘Great’ inevitably intoned in a stentorian Churchillian voice) does not make us great. What makes us great is what we accomplish for the betterment of the world and that can be so much greater in partnership with like-minded friends. We are no better or more clever than the people in the other nations of Europe or the world just because we are Brits. They are, in fact, just like us.

This has been a momentous and historic event which will impact Europe and UK for decades to come. Will it take the UK back to the 1930’s whilst Europe forges on into the future? It is not over yet and I for one do not know what will happen and how it will turn out. The ‘winners’ have to recognise that it was a very tight vote. The country is potentially fractured from top to bottom.

So where does it leave me? On the one hand, I fear that a malignant divisive force has been unleashed in the land. On the other hand, I try to hold to those words of St Paul where he says, ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.’ (Galatians 3: 28)

S. W. Ward

Mariam Ahmad has provided the BEST INPUTS citing the example of Singapore. India faces the problem of Kashmir but refrendem is not being allowed. 

For a balanced view from the US, I looked to the CS Monitor. 

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2016/0627/Brexit-aftershock-a-broad-challenge-to-British-politics-democracy-video

Dispassionate, yes. The mood here, at best, is volatile. In England, at least, the hate-crimes against those perceived as non-British continue to escalate. Official records are being kept - but it's not the statistics that matter, it's the rampant xenophobia that should concern us all.

"Singapore is the best example you are seeking for. Our exit from Peninsula Malaysia since 1965 was a very sad and lonely separation. We were worst off as we had nothing literally including natural resources unlike UK. We only have natural beings alias good thinking people who are visionaries, shakers and movers"

Maybe so, if the UK were to remain a unitary whole, but I think its disintegration is now inevitable.   Scotland is bound to want independence, with probably N Ireland to follow.  Every historical precedent suggests that such a prolonged and complex disentanglement cannot be done non-violently.

"Dear Anthony,

Hopefully, you must have exaggerated the dangers."

Maybe so, time will tell.  No violence so far, but megachaos.  But note that my original question in March ignored the destabilising effect of Brexit on Europe.  Nor did I anticipate that there would be a lame duck government in England for months, that the Prime Minister would resign and the Leader of the Opposition would be on 'life support', will no prospect that any future replacement leaders acceptable to MPs will also be endorsed by the wider party members.  The Brexit leaders are hiding their heads in shame, trying desperately (I hope!) to come up with a plan.  Even UKIP, with one MP, is powerless. 

***************************************************************

Addendum:  I had completely forgotten the assassination of a Remain MP!

Mainz, Germany

Dear all,

What keeps coming to mind is the idea that "globalization eats everything." On some views, now, even a country as historically and monumentally stable as the U.K.? 

I have seen it argued that continual globalization simply introduces too many stresses and strains for established politics to be able to cope. Or, another way to put the point is that the political capability of any polity is limited. On sees something of the point in recognizing all the theatrics, funny business and historical tragedies of politics. Capitalism unlimited, on the other hand is a relentless process of "creative destruction" to use the traditional phrase. It begins to look as though politics always fails to keep up with needed remedies for the "destruction" involved. 

We may admire the monuments and architectural gems produced by the "Gilded Age"--the last great period of world economic globalization 100 years back or so, but would we be seriously willing to go back and do it again? Witness the great, tragic breakdown of European and world politics in the first half of the 20th century. 

The process of globalization, its means, politics, institutions and proponents need a little cross examination with a skeptical eye. Otherwise, keep calm and keep going.

H.G. Callaway

http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2016/06/28/97001-20160628FILWWW00150-brexit-le-parlement-europeen-reclame-l-activation-immediate-de-la-procedure-de-retrait.php

"This is how YouGov says that all age-groups voted...                              

18-24:     75% Remain 

25-49:     56% Remain                  

50-64:     44% Remain                      

65+:        39% Remain  "

*******************************************                    

This is a striking and curious difference.   There is no dose effect for EU exposure, in that those areas of the UK most exposed to the supposed deleterious effects of EU membership (eg immigration) were more likely to vote remain.  However, there was a strong (and causal?) dose effect in that those most exposed for the longest time to the lies, misrepresentation and wilful ignorance of the popular press about the EU overwhelmingly voted Out.

Dear Anthony - and all,

Please note that it was not I who felt that you, Anthony, must have exaggerated the dangers.

Anyway, agreeing with what Anthony says here, no violence reported as yet, other than the 'British supremacist' terrorist assassination of the MP for Batley - and current reports of numerous incidents of minor intimidation, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour.

The situation is at best volatile. We can only trust that it will calm down. Calls for a second referendum have now been signed by [nearing] 4 million people. A second referendum, differently worded, is currently being broached as possible - but such a move may escalate public outrage from the 52% who said 'Out' - and we may then expect violence from the Far Right.

 "It is instructive to observe that the world leaders who supported Brexit were Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-Un with Donald Trump thrown in for good measure."

Whenever the Remain campaign suggested any deleterious effects of Brexit, most of which have already happened, it was accused of Project Fear.  However, it also disseminated some questionable "facts".   I cannot believe Putin was stupid enough to support Brexit, so can we have chapter and verse for this?

Mainz, Germany

Dear Lambrechts,

Here's a quick English translation of the report you posted:

The European Parliament on Tuesday asked the United Kingdom to enable "immediately" the EU withdrawal clause provided for in the Lisbon Treaty, "to avoid everyone uncertainty that would be damaging and protecting the integrity of the Union".

In a resolution adopted by 395 votes for and 200 votes against , MEPs also stress that " the will expressed by the people ( British ) must be fully and scrupulously respected."

---End quotation

Its seems the continental Europeans want a quick resolution, though the British are in no hurry and want the next PM to do the negotiations.

H.G. Callaway

H.G.,

That last age of globalization was on the backs of the subjugated peoples of the countries that were "colonized" or "administered", like India, Somalilia, Iraq, and Libya. Unfortunately, many of those countries are now the ones we have so much trouble with or that reject democracy.