I
quiite liked this from the Tory Sopectar magazine
Brexit
voters are not thick, not racist: just poor
By
forcing Britain to quit the EU they have given a bloody nose to an
elite that views them with contempt
2
July, 2016
The
most striking thing about Britain’s break with the EU is this: it’s
the poor wot done it. Council-estate dwellers, Sun readers, people
who didn’t get good GCSE results (which is primarily an indicator
of class, not stupidity): they rose up, they tramped to the polling
station, and they said no to the EU.
It
was like a second peasants’ revolt, though no pitchforks this time.
The statistics are extraordinary. The well-to-do voted Remain, the
down-at-heel demanded to Leave. The Brexiteer/Remainer divide splits
almost perfectly, and beautifully, along class lines. Of local
authorities that have a high number of manufacturing jobs, a whopping
86 per cent voted Leave. Of those bits of Britain with low
manufacturing, only 42 per cent did so. Of local authorities with
average house prices of less than £282,000, 79 per cent voted Leave;
where house prices are above that figure, just 28 per cent did so. Of
the 240 local authorities that have low education levels — i.e.
more than a quarter of adults do not have five A to Cs at GCSE — 83
per cent voted Leave. Then there’s pay, the basic gauge of one’s
place in the pecking order: 77 per cent of local authorities in which
lots of people earn a low wage (of less than £23,000) voted Leave,
compared with only 35 per cent of areas with decent pay packets.
It’s
this stark: if you do physical labour, live in a modest home and have
never darkened the door of a university, you’re far more likely to
have said ‘screw you’ to the EU than the bloke in the leafier
neighbouring borough who has a nicer existence. Of course there are
discrepancies. The 16 local authorities in Scotland that have high
manufacturing levels voted Remain rather than Leave. But for the most
part, class was the deciding factor in the vote. This, for me, is the
most breathtaking fact: of the 50 areas of Britain that have the
highest number of people in social classes D and E — semi-skilled
and unskilled workers and unemployed people — only three voted
Remain. Three. That means 47 very poor areas, in unison, said no to
the thing the establishment insisted they should say yes to.
Let’s
make no bones about this: Britain’s poor and workless have risen
up. And in doing so they didn’t just give the EU and its British
backers the bloodiest of bloody noses. They also brought crashing
down the Blairite myth of a post-class, Third Way Blighty, where the
old ideological divide between rich and poor did not exist, since we
were all supposed to be ‘stakeholders’ in society.
Post-referendum, we know society is still cut in two, not only by
economics but by politics too. This isn’t just about the haves and
have-nots: it’s a war of views. The wealthier sections of society
like it when politics involves detached cosmopolitan institutions and
the poorer people don’t. The less well-off have just asserted their
stake in society and the chattering classes — who peddled all the
nonsense about a ‘stakeholder society’ in the first place —
aren’t happy about it.
This
peasants’ revolt has sent shockwaves through the elite and, like
anthropologists investigating some mysterious tribe, they’re now
frantically trying to work out why it happened. They’ve come up
with two answers — one fuelled by rage, the other by something
worse: pity. The ragers say the plebs voted Leave because they’re a
bit racist and got hoodwinked by the shiny, xenophobic demagoguery of
the likes of Nigel Farage.
This
idea — that the poor are easy prey for demagogues — is the same
claptrap the Chartists had to put up with in the 1840s. Their snooty
critics frequently told them that, since the poor do not have a
‘ripened wisdom’ they are ‘more exposed than any other class…
to be converted to the vicious ends of faction’. Now, the
metropolitan set once again accuse the little people of exactly the
same thing.
Surveys,
however, dent this claim that the anti-EU throng was driven by
disdain for foreigners. In a post-vote ComRes poll, only 34 per cent
of Leave voters cited concern about immigration as their main reason
for voting out (and concern about immigration isn’t necessarily
racism). A majority, 53 per cent, said they rejected the EU because
they think Britain should make its own laws. So this swath of the
country, defamed as a brainless pogrom-in-waiting, was actually
voting for democracy.
Then
came the pitiers. Their diagnosis was a therapeutic one: that the
less well-off suffered a spasm of anger. That they felt so ignored
they decided to lash out crazily, but understandably. Don’t be
sucked in by this seemingly caring, Oprah-esque analysis of the
masses, for it is also a way of demeaning their democratic choice by
treating it as a primal scream rather than a political statement. It
turns a conscious rebellion against the establishment outlook into a
soppy plea for more listening exercises.
But
my take, from talking to numerous Leave voters, is not that they feel
slighted by the political class but that they oppose it. Their
concern isn’t that the elite is ignoring them but rather that it is
interfering too much. They are sick of being castigated for their way
of life. People have a strong sense of being ruled over by
institutions that fundamentally loathe them, or at least consider
them to be in dire need of moral and social correction.
In
Burnt Oak, the tiny working-class suburb in north-west London where I
grew up, it wasn’t hard to find Leave voters, even though the
borough, Barnet, voted Remain by 100,000 to 61,000 votes. All said a
similar thing: ‘They look down on us.’ Everyone I spoke to said
they’d had a gutful of being branded racist simply because they
feel British. To prove that foreigner-bashing isn’t their thing,
many of them point out that they work and socialise with Romanians
(of whom there are huge numbers in Burnt Oak).
They
feel patronised, slandered and distrusted, not ignored. They feel
their working-class culture and attitudes are viewed with contempt.
These are the kind of people looked upon by officialdom as unhealthy
and un-PC, too rowdy at the football, too keen to procreate, too fond
of booze, too sweary: too attached to the idea of England.
This
rebellion wasn’t caused by racism or a paroxysm of infantile anger.
It was considered. The workers spied an opportunity to take the elite
that despises them down a peg or two — and they seized it. They
asserted their power, and in the process, blimey: they changed the
world.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.