The reason why opinion has not shifted on Brexit

Hi All,

After the 2016 referendum, the pro- remain side didn't stop and agree to accept the decision of the voters . In fact from the day after the referendum they've been doing everything and anything they can to stop Brexit even after the vote . The media, save one or two papers, has been relentless in its attack upon Brexit. Recently and similar  of the referendum, we've had project fear mark II, this time Airbus. We could loose thousands of jobs we are told.

Yet quite consistently the opinion polls, given margin of error, have show us to be as split as we were before and after the referendum 50-50. In other words whatever latest attempts to block or undermine Brexit, it is having no effect whatsoever on the way people would vote in second referendum. This is the real question to ask : why is it that none of this negativity is having any effect ?

The  answer I think is threefold.

Firstly people have become far less deferential to authority. Years ago the BBC was the respected Oxbridge educational media which was seen to be impartial. Today it is seen by the right as a bastion of left -liberalism. To the far left it is a bastion of right wing toryism. People don't need the BBC for news. As far as the papers are concerned, they've always been partisan. The difference is that in the past newspapers would, whatever their political biases , do some incredibly good investigative journalism holding corporates, politicians and others to account. Nowadays this old school journalism is long gone. It is hyper partisanship with little attempt at analysis nowadays and any investigations are of the scandalous personal type, which have little impact on wider government affairs or politics. One final point to consider is that people don't need the papers either. They can use Twitter, Blogs and other electronic media to get and inform each other of views. Therefore the old press and its influence, while still potent, is no where near as strong as even 20 years ago.

Secondly. I think the whole project fear of job looses, in this case airbus, makes little difference to people as we've been immune to such threats and accept it as part of our economic life . Since the Thatcher revolution of 1979 onwards, no government has given a guarantee of full employment or directing businesses, let alone saving businesses by nationalisation. For years industry has been hollowed out and manufacturing jobs relocated to cheaper and less regulated countries. The only industry protected is that of the banks, but even those giants were forced to restructure when they were bailed out.  But in short why would people - except those involved- actually care about airbus job looses. Way back in time Britain allowed its coal, ship building, steel and car industry (before being bought by German and Japanese concerns, but even now it employs far less people than 40 years ago)  go to the wall . Carillion employed over 60,000 people. That went bust. The steel industry in Wales has practically gone under. BHS 11,000 jobs . I'm sure if we made a list we'd see a lot of business that has gone to the wall or relocated. It's a function of capitalism and one which we now culturally accept. Only in the instances of mass unemployment were there are millions and millions on the dole - which lasts for 6 months- would that culture change. I hope that remainers don't want to see that or make that happen to prove a point.

Thirdly the Brexit debate is in effect a proxy of the state of our nation. It is not as remainers suggest that half of the country has become xenophobic nationalists, but that of who has benefited and who has not benefited from the changes of globalisation. In short if you looked at a map of Britain you will see that those areas that have benefited from the EU voted remain and those who have not done well out of globalisation even in terms of community (uncontrolled immigration ) or jobs voted to leave. There is no point in threatening people will massive job looses if you are either unemployed yourself or are employed but on the minimum wage (thanks to the polish guy who can undercut wages)  you simply aren't going to care . It is one of the great travesties that so much of the Kingdom has been left wanting, while other parts have thrived.  Even immigration -in which the liberal left accuse you of being a bigot or a racist - is an exhibit of this: those who benefit from globalisation, large corporations and the middle class that supports them, plus the public sector which has also had a renassiance with the regualtions and need for diversity officers, cannot see the damage it does to communities which don't feel culturally enriched. Those who benefit from globalisation not only get cheap, non unionised labour for their businesses, but also personally. The Pole or Spanish nanny, the African cleaner that can be given extremely low wages because labour is vast and easy to obtain.  By contrast those communities who were already poor, but working, have found themselves out of a job, on the dole and have had their own community destabilised. The great irony is that the very party they vote for created this mess. But that party and their supporters brand their own traditional votes with the racist smear, because they cannot , simply cannot understand or appreciate what globalisation has done to their own working class base.

To conclude we are no longer one nation, but as Benjamin  Disraeli noted two nations. In order to fix this we need to go back to Disraeli's concept of 'one nation' conservatism ( I don't mean the leftist version that people made it into during the 1960s onward) which sought to preserve (conserve) the best parts of Britain, but to change the worst aspects by pragmatic reform. In short governing for the whole nation , rather than big business, banks, trade unions and other interest groups which seem to weld and enormous amount of influence over public policy, regardless of who is in power. This is needed - a vision is needed- especially given Brexit and the challenge from the left by Jeremy Corbyn. People have mentioned the rise of the populist right. There's also been, under the radar, the rise of the populist left: Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal , Britain and even in America. I read this morning that some long term incumbent centralist democrat was defeated by a  young populist left candidate in New York.  To rise to this challenge the centre -right needs to regroup and relearn what it was that made Disraeli and then later his successors electable and popular. It is worth noting that as more British people obtained the franchise, the more conservative governments were elected.