Brexit: The New Bit On The Blog, Like A New Kid On The Block


Last week of June 2016 brought about a tsunami in the Eurozone, people overwhelmed with mixed emotions rallying on the streets, and Brexit became the talk of every hamlet, town, and city. The country which once ruled a bulk of this planet, went through a hullaballoo when one of its member states (well an independent country too) decided to part ways with the union. And now… it was the kingdom itself breaking its relation with the (EU) zone which it founded along with other members.

The principle idea behind the EC/EU zone, at the time of formation, was to create a common market for the members to trade and create a place for growth. Ralph Nader couldn’t have explained it any better, “Free trade agreements are trade agreements that don’t stick to trade…they colonize environmental labor, and consumer issues of grave concern (in terms of health safety, and livelihoods too) to many, many hundreds of millions of people – and they do that by subordinating consumer, environmental, and labor issues to the imperatives and the supremacy of international commerce.”

So why was the Great Britain exiting the EU (Brexit)?

This question has bamboozled not only me, but a lot of people around this world. Some had their personal, and professional interest attached with it while other were just curious to understand where this all will lead to? The stepping stone for this exit was laid long back when the ruling Labour party had a (failed) referendum way back in 1975, subsequently over the years. The lack of public support thereafter meant the UK remained part of the EEC/EU, until recently when the ruling party announced its decision to conduct another referendum.

Taking a step back from the political agenda of several MPs and political parties, I would like to focus on the socio-economic outlook of the country for the last decade or so. Even this might be a humungous task to explain in short. Working in a team is always challenging, more so when some members perform well, perhaps due to the skills and access to resources, while other lag behind. Over the period of time, the ones doing better think of others as a liability, someone feeding off their hard work, whereas the others struggle to cope up with the challenges and start finding ways to be at par, or maybe better, with everyone. With a limit attached to everything, be it the resources, jobs, or facilities, people start migrating to places which can offer them better lifestyle. The influx of people results in an increased competition, and decreased benefits. Every pie has to be shared with more people than earlier. It like reminding us of Darwin’s survival of fittest theory all over again.

If you lack something, you should not be shy of asking for help. In this case, immigration is rather good for the country. It boosts sales, creates a healthy competition, and improves the economic stability. On the flip side, an uncontrolled levels would mean feeling of hatred, and discomfort among locals. Imagine a situation when a lot of people suddenly turn up on your doorstep, more than what you hoped for. Then again, if you are opening doors then let it be free of caste, colour, race, or region. Or, inconceivably, have mechanism to identify the type of people you would need for your growth. Studies have shown that a larger chunk of people, outside of the EU, have been equally responsible for the growth of the UK. But they are the ones having to go through stringent immigration checks, and laws. Protecting your people, your country is one thing, but it should not reflect as being racist, even for a slightest bit.

As Christopher Hitchens wrote in Hitch-22: A Memoir “What is it you most dislike? Stupidity, especially in its nastiest forms of racism and superstition.”