Sunderland voters on why they voted for Brexit

Original post by ByEeek

Oh for pettys sake - how does that work. So the rest of the country votes Tory and the north votes Labour. Anyone thinking that we have a democracy in this country is delusional. What with the first-past-the-post system and safe seats, the election each time is only swung by a handful of people. My own vote is worthless.

This vote for the people of Sunderland was presumably a rare opportunity to stand up and be heard. And the OP clearly would prefer they went back into their hole?

But what is the point of voting against the EU which directly funds the NE? That isn't going to help them. That isn't going to stop MPs getting X amount in wages.

Even if they were really cared about an alternative system then they would have voted for AV. Instead, Sunderland, overwhelmingly rejected it.

I suspect if we actually questioned them about their motivations, it would reveal that immigration is the heart of the matter. Nothing more.

Reply 22

looseseal

11

Original post by Supersaps

No, they're not confused. Do you think every Remainer was an eloquent student like yourself?

They feel abandoned by the Labour party and they never had much truck with the Tories.

They feel left behind by Westminster and in an increasingly globalised world that seems to just focus on London.

A vote against the status quo that has served them so poorly over the last 30 years is a logical choice.

Or do you think every Labour voter votes labour because they're super on-board with all their policies? Half of labour voters just hate the Tories.

It's just the way things work. I'm sorry you don't like it. Not everyone can be a middle-class student warrior like yourself. :smile:

I would worry about a lot more than 'Brexit' if you're a left-winger. Labour will not form a government in a generation unless it starts to represent these people again. If you think Brexit is bad...start panicking.

The phrase "cutting of your nose to spite your face" springs to mind.

You may disregard the protestations of remain voters as elitist and lacking in appreciation of the difficulties the working class face but the reality is that leaving the EU is extremely unlikely to help their current situation.

Areas such as Sunderland do actually gain benefits from us being in the EU. Companies such as Nissan (which provides thousands of primary and secondary jobs to the area) wouldn't locate in the UK if we didn't have the same level of access to the single market as we do now. If our decision to leave ends up causing some of these companies to move then what exactly would this "rallying against the status quo" really have accomplished for people in these areas?

It's one thing to be annoyed at "the establishment" and "Westminster" but it's another thing to aim that annoyance at an organisation than has relatively little effect on domestic policies (outside of immigration). As most referendums, the vote ended up being about way more than was actually put on the ballot paper. We essentially had a situation where people were aiming a protest vote in the wrong direction. And this wrong direction has led to us knee-capping our economy at a time when we can barely afford it.

Yes, the EU has several failings but the inability of our government to properly develop areas outside of London is not the fault of Juncker. Through federalising their country, Germany has managed to diversify their economy geographically and ensure profitable industries can set up shop in a range of different regions. This all managed to occur while they were within the EU. The EU didn't stop Thatcher from using the North Sea Oil money to redevelop the North, Wales or South West rather than pumping it into London's financial sector. And the EU didn't cause every subsequent UK government to show that same level of neglect up until this very day.

This is a vote that mattered so much and could literally end up destroying (if not severely hampering) the country in many ways. You may call this elitist but I honestly believe that a lot of people didn't fully appreciate the potential negative effects of the UK leaving the EU. But then again, how could they? It would take a well-trained economist to even begin to try and predict how the UK would perform outside of the EU (whatever that entails). Funnily enough, most of these well-trained economists said that we'd perform poorly - but then again, in the age of experts being the enemy, a vast proportion of people didn't want to heed their warnings.

I think the most galling thing is that the most prominent leave campaigner (Boris) captured ever so succinctly why our troubles as a country have very little to do with the EU but with the failures of successive UK governments. In his 2013 Telegraph column setting out the pros and cons of leaving the EU, one pro was outlined as followed:

We can no longer blame Brussels. This is perhaps the most important point of all. If we left the EU, we would end this sterile debate, and we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by “Bwussels”, but by chronic British short-termism, inadequate management, sloth, low skills, a culture of easy gratification and under-investment in both human and physical capital and infrastructure.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 23

an_atheist

15

Original post by JordanL_

This is absurd. They barely even mentioned the EU. The first person shown begins with "Because Cameron..."

Do these people not know the difference between their own government and the EU? Or do they think saying "I won't hold you accountable and will instead punish the people that have championed my rights for 40 years" is some sort of **** you to the government?

They're absolutely clueless. Everything they talk about is to do with our government. Most of them even talk about Westminster and don't mention the EU. Are they just confused?????

And for every one of these people, there will be several others who voted leave for other reasons. These interviews will have been selected to give a poor representation of Brexit voters.
What game are you trying to play OP?

Reply 24

FredOrJohn

5

Original post by ByEeek

Oh for pettys sake - how does that work. So the rest of the country votes Tory and the north votes Labour. Anyone thinking that we have a democracy in this country is delusional. What with the first-past-the-post system and safe seats, the election each time is only swung by a handful of people. My own vote is worthless.

This vote for the people of Sunderland was presumably a rare opportunity to stand up and be heard. And the OP clearly would prefer they went back into their hole?

Indeed micro nations (such as Iceland) are more democratic simply because you are more likely to meet your MP in the pub...

This is also true in the USA - the average USA state only has 6 million people (1/10th of the UK). The only LONG term viable safe way to have small nations and thus more democracy is within the umbrella of the EU.

All other methods will cause problems with defence.

Reply 25

Original post by DorianGrayism

But what is the point of voting against the EU which directly funds the NE? That isn't going to help them. That isn't going to stop MPs getting X amount in wages.

I was talking to my sister-in-law before the election. She was wavering between in and out. Her argument for voting out was simply that Cameron was telling her to vote in. If you have a load of millionaires telling you, an unemployed nobody, to do something that will favour them, I wonder which you might choose?

I voted remain because it was in my interest. I'm alright Jack. But I completely sympathise with many of the people like those in Sunderland who voted leave on issues of disillusionment.

Reply 26

Original post by ByEeek

I was talking to my sister-in-law before the election. She was wavering between in and out. Her argument for voting out was simply that Cameron was telling her to vote in. If you have a load of millionaires telling you, an unemployed nobody, to do something that will favour them, I wonder which you might choose?

I voted remain because it was in my interest. I'm alright Jack. But I completely sympathise with many of the people like those in Sunderland who voted leave on issues of disillusionment.

Sorry but you should have told your sister that she was being stupid.

The NE is only going to get worse now.

Reply 27

Original post by DorianGrayism

Sorry but you should have told your sister that she was being stupid.

The NE is only going to get worse now.

Why? Are you saying some opinions are invalid?

Have a listen to this fantastic rant. I think it sums up how I feel about this issue perfectly.

https://www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/936993456423548/?pnref=story

My mate was talking about the same thing. He came up with a brilliant phrase which describes the sort of politics you are voicing i.e. one that vilifies people you deem to be stupid. He calls it Elitist Liberalism. The idea that everyone is free to vote as they choose, as long as it is the right way.

Reply 28

Original post by ByEeek

Why? Are you saying some opinions are invalid?

Have a listen to this fantastic rant. I think it sums up how I feel about this issue perfectly.

https://www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/936993456423548/?pnref=story

My mate was talking about the same thing. He came up with a brilliant phrase which describes the sort of politics you are voicing i.e. one that vilifies people you deem to be stupid. He calls it Elitist Liberalism. The idea that everyone is free to vote as they choose, as long as it is the right way.

No. I didn't say it was invalid.

She can dislike Cameron for valid reasons. ( IE Cuts and etc)

I said it was stupid to use that dislike of Cameron and the "elites" as a reason to vote against the EU.

Is it going to get better now? No. There will be a recession and cuts will effect the NE the worst anyway.

Reply 29

Original post by DorianGrayism

She can dislike Cameron for valid reasons. ( IE Cuts and etc)

So there are valid reasons for having an opinion and invalid ones? Who decides which are valid and which are not?

As said in the video - If you have nothing, why would you vote for stability which effectively keeps you in the nothing zone? At least with uncertainty, there is a chance things might change in your favour? Do you not ask yourself the question "Why do these people have those opinions?"

I am very uneasy with the idea that there are valid and invalid opinions though. To state someone's opinion is invalid shuts down the argument. You lose the argument simply because you are unwilling to engage.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 30

Jee1

11

The tabloids always blamed the EU for the failure of our governments to improve the situations in the north east. They have also used immigrants as a scapegoat for their failure to provide adequate funding in the North East. My council is a Labour council and they've had big funding cuts in the past 6 years. To the point where we'd receive letters from the council explaining how they have to put up council tax because the government have further cut their money.
To survive we have to join the EEA, and accept free movement of people, without having any say on EU policies. So we had a good deal and decided to leave because people didn't understand why they were voting leave.
They could have asked themselves how life was good before the Tories got to power before 2010 because there were no bedroom tax, no council tax required from low income earner, Vat was low, no benefit sanctions , ill people didn't have to jump through hoops to get benefits whereas now someone who has cancer is found fit for work, no Zero hours contracts.

The EU also provides regional support funding to the poorest areas in the country, areas where the Tory government wouldn't give a s**** about. They also provide training funds for the unemployed and I swear who will help these people, because I doubt our government will care unless we choose and vote for a socialist government

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 31

username1204031

OP

14

Original post by ByEeek

So there are valid reasons for having an opinion and invalid ones? Who decides which are valid and which are not?

As said in the video - If you have nothing, why would you vote for stability which effectively keeps you in the nothing zone? At least with uncertainty, there is a chance things might change in your favour? Do you not ask yourself the question "Why do these people have those opinions?"

I am very uneasy with the idea that there are valid and invalid opinions though. To state someone's opinion is invalid shuts down the argument. You lose the argument simply because you are unwilling to engage.

Because none of these people have nothing. They'd have nothing if welfare, the NHS, education and so on were stripped away from them and food and fuel became unaffordable. They thought they had nothing to lose, but they absolutely did.

Reply 32

Original post by ByEeek

So there are valid reasons for having an opinion and invalid ones? Who decides which are valid and which are not?

As said in the video - If you have nothing, why would you vote for stability which effectively keeps you in the nothing zone? At least with uncertainty, there is a chance things might change in your favour? Do you not ask yourself the question "Why do these people have those opinions?"

I am very uneasy with the idea that there are valid and invalid opinions though. To state someone's opinion is invalid shuts down the argument. You lose the argument simply because you are unwilling to engage.

No. I didn't say the reason was invalid. It has nothing to do with being valid or invalid or whatever.

I said it was stupid to vote on the basis of the opinion, regardless of it's validity.

Therefore, whether Cameron and etc have screwed the North should not have a bearing on whether you wish to remain in the EU.

By the way, it is ridiculous to state that they have nothing and therefore they should vote for something that will make their position worse. I would agree with the video that you posted that it was the Remain camp's fault for not communicating those points clearly/.

Reply 33

welshiee

1

The EU is pro corporatism and exploitation of labour, low tariffs and increased regulation has been used to increase their wealth contributing to increased inequality across the whole of Europe. Why do you think Thatcher was pro-EU? Do you think she would have been pro-EU if it was in the interests of the common person? You have to be living in on another planet if you think that. The people who did care about the working class back then, Tony Benn, etc. were Eurosceptics. Come on ffs, you only need to look at who funded the remain campaign to see that it is not in the interests of the common person.

Reply 34