Message in Brexit

As the political elite and the economically privileged are licking their wounds after a shock defeat in the referendum on whether the United Kingdom should remain in the European Union, the country is mired in a plethora of crises. The cataclysm is not only confined to the diplomatic, political and the economic domains but is also finding its roots in the social sphere, whereby class consciousness is becoming an important prism in the viewpoint of the crises. 

A snob expression of the elitist outlook is to brand the electorate, which pushed the UK out of the EU, “stupid” and “apologetic”, and complain that it (electorate) is “captive of its selfishness”. No matter that a large section of the electorate which trounced the “Remain Camp” is dehumanised by being pushed to the periphery of insignificance and oblivion in the wake of economic modernisation and subsequent de-industrialisation over the past three decades. 

It is a manifestation of what John Maynard Keynes described as the “animal spirits” — in his seminal 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money — that led to the outpouring of overwhelming support for the “Remain Camp” from those who are direct and indirect beneficiaries of the process of economic modernisation and financialisation, including in London. But the same argument was not accepted as a natural reaction from those who favoured a British exit from the EU. Economic disempowerment and social marginalisation pushed those left out of the process of modernisation to such an extent that they had to literally punish the establishment and the elite not for any revolutionary purpose but only to be heard. 

And heard they are not with the due respect and sobriety that are expected when a majority of the electorate articulates its message to express anguish and an element of anxiety is palpable, but with such discontent and despair as if it is one of the most regressive things to have happened in 21st century Britain. Whilst the political class is apparently mindful of the electoral missive from the ordinary Britons up and down the country, the apprehensive social elite want to overturn the outcome by pressing for another referendum, as if the process of deciding Britain’s position in Europe is a never-ending one and the “neverendum” will continue as long as the inference is to the liking of the powerful and the privileged. 

It is the same elitist act which floated the idea of dissociating London from the large swathes of England and Wales, branded regressive for supporting Brexit. It is a different matter though that those out to render null and void the democratic expression by the electorate are looked up to as forward looking liberals — comprising writers, journalists, economists, academics, and professionals — who are regularly seen in the elite circuits flashing out new and progressive arguments to ensure the rights of the hardworking ordinary citizens. 

Rather than trying to comprehend why a large section of the electorate has reacted with anger in a country like Britain where there is a general apathy towards casting votes — more than 72 per cent of the voters exercised their franchise during the EU referendum as against a turnout of just over 66 per cent in the 2015 general elections — the commentators are trying to portray the electorate as bereft of the broader understanding of geopolitics and the economy beyond their household needs. 

This disconnect of the social and political elite with the ordinary Britons is indeed a crisis of sorts for Britain. The elitist perception of things are often at odds with those of the ordinary Britons. This can only happen when the elite are completely out of touch with the ordinary, although the liberals always seem to deny that, and the chain of communication to educate the masses and inculcate a sense awareness has gone missing. 

The crisis in the political sphere also emanates from a similar situation. The mainstream political class — be it the Conservatives vouching for compassionate capitalism, or the pro-working class Labour or the progressive Liberals — is completely detached from the world of the ordinary Britons, making it easy for the loonies at the fringe like Nigel Farage of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) to occupy the centre stage. The neo-liberal approach is of running politics as a business with political profiteering being the sole objective. The professionalisation of the trade happens by way of introducing in the party leadership people drawn from a small group of individuals who are more professionalised but rarely enjoy popular support. They tend to work more as political interns and in other advisory capacities to develop their managerial skills before running for elected office. The outgoing Prime Minister David Cameron, former Labour leader Ed Miliband, his brother and former foreign secretary David Miliband and former deputy prime minister and Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg were all political advisers to secretaries of state before becoming MPs. 

According to Dr Peter Allen, a lecturer in British Politics in London University, the “prominence of professional politicians among party frontbenchers may lead to reduced public engagement with democracy”, as they generally come from a small section of the society — mainly from the families with political clout — and with little or no experience about the life of ordinary citizens. To these politicians, politics is more of a technical exercise involving economic management and swaying public opinion with the help of spin doctors, rather than a process of building a support base through mass engagement.

Dr Allen’s research shows the proportion of such professional politicians in British parliament to be at around 15 per cent. And because of their back office experience, they not only occupy positions in the frontbench easily, but also tend to be visible in the mainstream media more than their colleagues who started from the position of a local councillor, if only because of their sustained proximity with lobby journalists. 

As the media and the observers are groping with the reasons behind the serious backlash from the working class and the political leadership in the two main political parties are faced with serious crises, the increasing trend of professionalisation of politics can throw some light in understanding the sustained disengagement of the voters with the political class. The professional politicos are more comfortable with the business class, bureaucrats and the social elite than they are with the ordinary Britons. This may provide the business class and the bureaucrats with a sense of reach to the powerful and the social elite a feeling of empowerment but the electorate is feeling disenfranchised, powerless and left behind. 

The author is a London-based freelance journalist