[anexprogrammer]

I guess it depends where you live.

In my part of the UK people were overwhelmingly in favour of leave. I wouldn't typically mention I was a remain voter as it was near sure to get me a discussion.

Very few claimed the immigration directly - t'was about jobs, or more precisely the lack of them, therefore immigration.

A good part of the region is not yet out of the 2008 recession, and house price growth is a joke. When you relatively recently had a well paying job with which you supported your family, yet now you're not making ends meet in a temporary delivery driver fake-freelance job, as that's all you can get despite skills, it's hard to see much logic in the "dynamic globalized economy".

Now then, I'd argue that for most in tht position, the social justice, work regulation and regional development funds of the EU would be something to heavily vote for. The EU, though, has always been appalling at making a case for itself - hence distant EU bureaucrats and other tropes.

Sadly, Boris's bullshit of £350m to the NHS and evil EU immigrants taking your jobs touched sore nerves and lead to the leave votes.

Now we get a government that looks like it will lurch heavily to the right, and as far as London and the tories are concerned, the regions can go f* themselves.

Turkeys voting for Christmas perhaps, but I do undertand the reasons why, least round these parts. I'd say the root cause goes all the way back to Thatcher and the loss of local industry, from which many towns have still not recovered.

[Fifer82]

I am not sure what I am saying, but I believe that a lot of the people voting, do not have the intelligence to vote.

I met a couple of neds in Spain recently on the day of the vote, and they were like "Take it back, init, take it back and be great".

I was like "What does that mean though??? Take back what??". "Take it back! We just need to run ourselves".

Despite almost an hours worth of discussion, they were passionate about something which was nothing of value. I would probably put a lot of money on 20% of the vote being people who pick up a newspaper, and copy what the editor says.

This "lets be great again" rubbish was the common theme.

[madaxe_again]

This is the nature of our democracy, however.

One could argue that one has a duty to educate, but you cannot force knowledge and reason upon people who do not wish it.

I saw much of the same on the brexit vote - one that stood out was someone i'd always thought was an intelligent man (he used to run a substantial investment bank), who I found screaming, froth-flecked, in my face about how I was a traitor for not voting for freedom, how I loved evil, how leaving the EU was a vote for freedom. He couldn't elaborate on anything, he could just shout louder. It doesn't matter to him even, he'll be dead soon. One of his sons is a us native with British citizenship working on an eu research grant in Scandinavia. So strong was his irrational hatred he voted to fuck his own son over. Oh, and this guy is your ivy league elite, as were many of the other codgers in the room with the same groundless hate, so there goes the argument of this piece.

The trimp/brexit voters aren't disillusioned youth, aren't the left behind, they're just your usually older traditional values crowd.

That all said, like it or lump it. You are in the same boat as these people, they are people, and they represent the majority of people.

I've spent most of my life trying to be tolerant of incredible stupidity, and I don't know if I'll ever fully succeed, but all you can do is grit your teeth, and keep quiet. You won't change their minds with any rational discourse, only emotional.

[SeanDav]

You know, I have heard this argument used a few times. If you are intelligent, you voted to remain, if you are not intelligent, you voted to leave. So blame lack of intelligence on not getting a vote you wanted, because people that disagree with you must not be intelligent - right?

[madaxe_again]

I'm not sure where you get that from. The leave arguments were emotional, the remain arguments were rational. Emotional arguments always win.

[SeanDav]

Project Fear from the remain side was rational, was it? George Osborne's "punishment budget" was rational, was it? Attempting to delay the release of NI numbers until after the referendum was rational, was it? Instructing the Civil Service to not help Brexit ministers with EU questions was rational, was it?

There are many rational arguments for both leave and remain, it depends on your point of view. There were many emotional arguments from both sides.

[guard-of-terra]

"he voted to fuck his own son over"

Now, that was both emotional and irrational.

[madaxe_again]

So, despite his sons residency and employment both being dependent on the uk's continued membership of the EU, you think this was a rational, kind decision?

[guard-of-terra]

I don't think they're dependent on the UK's membership of the EU that much.

First, there's plenty of people not from EU who participate in European research on European grants. Think Russians in CERN and so on.

Second, secession from EU doesn't mean freedom of travel will be thwarted for scientists. UK was already not on Schengen, so what? At worst they'll have get a visa every few years.

In short, that person might consider that his son will figure it out.

Regarding "kind" - "kind" is irrational. Rational is often not kind and kind is often not rational.

[madaxe_again]

He's at a European university on an EU grant via a British institution. It's hard to see how that would continue.

There was no rationale behind his leave vote other than the EU being the "empire of evil" that we must free ourselves from for freedom. Same applied to everyone else I spoke with that evening.

[anexprogrammer]

There's always been a percentage who would vote for, shall we say, simplistic reasons. They're the group least likely to actually go and vote I believe.

But some kid latching onto the oft used soundbite of "take back control" (from whom, why?) is little different to "I vote Labour because my dad always did", or "I voted Blair because he has a nice smile" (someone actually said that to me after the 97 election).

I just consider it background noise, and might be perhaps 20% of all votes.

What was different is that they managed to get a good turnout, and in cases where it wasn't about jobs/EU migration it was about London overlords telling them what to do whilst simultaneously neglecting them (take back control).

The messages resonated perfectly with their life experiences.

Unfortunately the irony of giving the UK govt a good kicking via an EU Brexit vote that will remove more benefits than problems for them will be lost on them.

[jamespo]

You can look more recently than that, the failed austerity experiment contributed to these conditions

[anexprogrammer]

Both really.

For places like Middlesborough or Burnley they're a shadow of their former 80s selves. Austerity there is just a case of rubbing salt into the still open wound.

[tonyedgecombe]

Early in my career I regularly visited towns like Middlesborough and Burnley, installing IT systems. There was a lot of unskilled and semi-skilled work available at those businesses that has either been shipped out to China or automated away.

Those jobs aren't coming back, whether we are in the EU or not.

[anexprogrammer]

No they're not.

But you have to consider recent history to understand life for people there. It's not just "stupid bloody Northerners voting for Brexit" because they don't understand the world has moved on.

Many once prosperous, vibrant, manufacturing towns were decimated under Thatcher. The councils didn't have two brass Farthings to rub together (both from the loss of business and also ever increasing centralism, especially of funding). The regional redevelopment agencies (as I think they were called) managed to create a few call centre jobs and poorly draft some folks' CVs. Heseltine wanted properly funded development agencies, similar to the old New Town corporations, with enough power to make decisions and achieve things, Howe (I think) didn't want to spend the brass. If memory serves, Heseltine was able to make some significant difference in Liverpool (mainly because of the recent Toxteth riots) and Manchester. He wanted to cover all the affected towns but wasn't permitted both from a financial point of view, and it was interventionist which went against the religion of Thatcherism/Reaganism.

Then came large, poorly integrated, immigrant communities, actively placed there by one government or another (I forget if it was mostly Tory or Labour). There was tension, mainly stemming from the pre-existing lack of opportunity. Little wonder there were race riots in some of these towns a decade later.

Then came New Labour, full of promises. No regional redevelopment, so sorely needed for well over a decade. More London-centric than even the Tories which defied belief. More large infrastructure projects, but none within 100 miles. If London wanted the tube rails gold plated you'd believe it was more likely to be approved than development spending in Sheffield or Truro.

Children of the eighties grew up with no working parent as role-model. Opportunities heavily curtailed from lack of money, be that nutritionally, books in the house, or ability to go to university. It's little wonder many became disaffected and disenfranchised.

The three bed family semi might sell for £80k or £120k, if it sells, but want to relocate to MK or London or anywhere with some life chances? Can't even afford a shared shed in such places, let alone relocate a family. Hell, the differentials got so large they can't even afford to relocat to Manchester or Leeds

So along come the blatant lies of Johnson and Farage: "Take back control of your lives", "£350m a week on the NHS", "xx,000 immigrants a year taking your jobs". It was an easy sell after 30 years of bull in the media about stupid EU regulations, straight bananas, EU super state and what have you.

As another commenter insightfully pointed out receiving EU redevelopment funds is a reliable indicator of neglect by successive governments. That those places most heavily voted leave is ironic, but a reliable indicator of how neglected they feel by all in power for the last 40 years.

There's no point pointing out they were backing not just the wrong horse, but the wrong race. Tell that to Farage and co selling a vision they neither cared about or had any intention of delivering. Look at their surprise the morning after when they won. Not a damn lying one of them even smiled. About time the ASA covered political messages too.

[monk_e_boy]

This is it exactly. Staying (and therefore nothing changing) was a really bad option for millions of people.

Brexit was change. And maybe, just maybe it would be a change for good. Staying and project fear did not offer hope.

[mpweiher]

To change the things that are controlled by the UK government, you need to vote for a different UK government.

> Brexit was change

"I don't like my car, therefore I am changing pants"

Huh?

[tonyedgecombe]

I'm not sure, the left wants to offer more welfare, the right crappy minimum wage jobs and the populists offer pie in the sky. I don't think any of them have a real solution.

[monk_e_boy]

There was a thing called [left-exit] that a lot of us voted for. There was also a good [green-exit] argument which made a lot of sense. Just because these are both almost hopeless...

[tankenmate]

And yet without a goal and a plan voting for Brexit is just as bad.

Hope is not a strategy. Luck is not a factor. Fear is not an option. -- James Cameron