What's conspicuous by its absence is a frank discussion of how the ancestors of many non-white Britons first came to be subjects of the British crown. Think Jamaicans, Indians, Kenyans. Because it wasn't when they moved to Britain. It was when Britain invaded their ancestor's countries...
The right-wing press vilifying those communities in Britain and blaming Europe was always a cop out that sidestepped uncomfortable questions about British history. Speaking of uncomfortable questions, lest we forget: Under whose rule the Irish potato famine happened...
Under whose rule First Nations land was stolen in America. Under whose rule many Africans were subjected to transatlantic slave trade. Under whose rule First Nations land was stolen in Canada. Under whose rule Aboriginal land was stolen in Australia. Under whose rule Maori land was stolen in NZ.
The Stolen Generations in Australia, slavery in America, the residential boarding schools in the US and Canada are all a direct consequence of British colonial rule. And that's without going into the long-term impacts of divide and rule tactics in British India or the British Palestine Mandate.
Britain has never fully reckoned with all the violence and bloodshed that continues to happen around the world to this day as a direct result of British colonial rule. So there's a massive disconnect between how the Empire is viewed in Britain, as opposed to how it is seen in many former colonies.
You’ve veered massively from your ‘core Brexit’ post in order to stand on a soap box to berate Britain. Everything you state has been well documented. We all know about it. You’re referencing the past as though that’s how people think in Britain today. It’s not the ‘core reason’for Brexit.
But that is the core of Brexit. Because 'closer ties with the former colonies instead of Europe' only seems like a viable option to someone who's not fully aware of how British colonial rule is viewed by millions of people around the world.
Once again, the xenophobic fears about non-white people in Britain failed to acknowledge how South Asian or African people first came to be British subjects. Because Brexit supporters tend to be people who haven't thought a great deal about the uncomfortable legacies of British colonial rule.
Wow - xenophobia and racism too. Having spoken to many Brexiteers it’s really isn’t xenophobia, or racism (as it is often characterised) but a much more practical view of the problems caused by mass, uncontrolled immigration - very real strains on housing, overcrowding, jobs, NHS etc
No nation the size of the UK can absorb a quarter of a million immigrants year after year for decades without putting strains on society. Those strains were successfully exploited by the leave campaign, which specifically targeted the freedom of all EU citizens to live and work in the UK.
I'd say it's blaming non-white people, many of whom became British subjects as a result of colonialism, for the consequences of 40-odd years of neoliberalism. That's 40-odd years of underinvestment in public goods under Thatcherism, Blairism, austerity, and continuing under Starmer.
You’re asserting that the main reason for Brexit was a desire to have closer ties elsewhere. I’d argue that is incorrect. It was an anticipated result of Brexit and not the core driver of it.