The real message of Brexit (IMO)

[dps]

Referendums are foolish - but even more so in a political climate where there isn't any discernible connection between the "representatives" and the people.

Ironically, though, such a climate is exactly the environment in which people want to have referendums.  If you think your representatives actually represent your interests, your values, and your concerns, referendums don't have that much appeal, because you don't need them to have a voice;  but when large numbers of people don't feel any connection with those who are supposed to represent them, they'll see referendums as means by which to gain a voice.

Of course, commentary by those who agree with the representatives on a given issue that the people at large are too stupid, or too bigoted, or just too busy to be well enough informed to make decisions on their own probably doesn't help increase people's confidence that their representatives truly represent them.

[Berkut]

Referendums are foolish - but even more so in a political climate where there isn't any discernible connection between the "representatives" and the people.

Ironically, though, such a climate is exactly the environment in which people want to have referendums.  If you think your representatives actually represent your interests, your values, and your concerns, referendums don't have that much appeal, because you don't need them to have a voice;  but when large numbers of people don't feel any connection with those who are supposed to represent them, they'll see referendums as means by which to gain a voice.

That is exactly my point.

Referendum's are a pretty terrible way to make policy decisions (hence the reason Western liberal society uses representative government rather than direct democracy) but become incredibly enticing when we have a situation where people stop feeling like they are actually being represented (as we do now).

Maybe I didn't articulate this well, but what I was saying was that this outcome is one of many negative results of a system where the cost of being a politician has become so great that only those who can attract the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy have any chance of raising the funds needed, and they as a whole then respond to the desires of the donors rather than the voters.

[Razgovory]

You're a bot dude.

Bots don't misspell words.

[frunk]

Bots don't misspell words.

They do if they are trying to pretend to be hruman.

[alfred russel]

Maybe I didn't articulate this well, but what I was saying was that this outcome is one of many negative results of a system where the cost of being a politician has become so great that only those who can attract the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy have any chance of raising the funds needed, and they as a whole then respond to the desires of the donors rather than the voters.

The UK has a completely different political financing system and the need to raise funds significantly reduced from the US system. I don't think the US talking points transfer well to the UK system.

[Berkut]

Maybe I didn't articulate this well, but what I was saying was that this outcome is one of many negative results of a system where the cost of being a politician has become so great that only those who can attract the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy have any chance of raising the funds needed, and they as a whole then respond to the desires of the donors rather than the voters.

The UK has a completely different political financing system and the need to raise funds significantly reduced from the US system. I don't think the US talking points transfer well to the UK system.

I would love to hear more about this from a non-US perspective, but that is not at all the message I think I've heard from around the internets - that dis-connect where the voters don't seem to believe that the political establishment represents them anymore seems pretty consistent to me...

[Valmy]

The problem is that nobody can really articulate what the establishment would be doing differently if it did represent them.

If they could well all this would be very straightforward.

[celedhring]

Maybe I didn't articulate this well, but what I was saying was that this outcome is one of many negative results of a system where the cost of being a politician has become so great that only those who can attract the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy have any chance of raising the funds needed, and they as a whole then respond to the desires of the donors rather than the voters.

The UK has a completely different political financing system and the need to raise funds significantly reduced from the US system. I don't think the US talking points transfer well to the UK system.

I would love to hear more about this from a non-US perspective, but that is not at all the message I think I've heard from around the internets - that dis-connect where the voters don't seem to believe that the political establishment represents them anymore seems pretty consistent to me...

In the case of Spain, our campaign finance laws are pretty stringent, and there's little need to raise extra funds. Of course, that doesn't prevent some of our parties (like PP) from being caught in the act of illegal campaign financing, but critique over here is how mainstream parties are a very closed cadre taken over (allegedly) by oligarch interests. For example former politicians regularly end up employed in the boards of big Spanish companies, for hefty salaries. This raises up quite a few eyebrows, and to be honest is a pretty blatant form of post-facto bribe. "Be good to us and there'll be a fat wage for you at the end of it all".

There's also the blatant corruption. The fact every other week some case surfaces of a public official taking money in exchange of political favors to private interests, greatly diminishes the trust of the public in the institutions.

But hey, it's probably not that important, since we just re-elected the same damn fuckers once again. 

[alfred russel]

Maybe I didn't articulate this well, but what I was saying was that this outcome is one of many negative results of a system where the cost of being a politician has become so great that only those who can attract the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy have any chance of raising the funds needed, and they as a whole then respond to the desires of the donors rather than the voters.

The UK has a completely different political financing system and the need to raise funds significantly reduced from the US system. I don't think the US talking points transfer well to the UK system.

I would love to hear more about this from a non-US perspective, but that is not at all the message I think I've heard from around the internets - that dis-connect where the voters don't seem to believe that the political establishment represents them anymore seems pretty consistent to me...

The UK has strict spending limits on campaigns. That the political establishment is still disconnnected from the voters does not mean that, as you posted, "this outcome is one of many negative results of a system where the cost of being a politician has become so great that only those who can attract the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy have any chance of raising the funds needed, and they as a whole then respond to the desires of the donors rather than the voters."

[Berkut]

Shrug, you are focusing on the detail rather than the message, which perhaps is my fault in that I provided the detail that is relevant close to me, but my point is that Brexit, and Trump, and Sanders, and all these movements are part and parcel of the same thing - a "Fuck You" from voters to the establishment. A message that there are a lot of people out there willing to make change, even radical change, for it's own sake, since the status quo seems rather hopeless.

Change is needed, and the establishment won't give us the change that is needed, so fuck it - we will just make ANY change, and damn the consequences.

[Valmy]

Shrug, you are focusing on the detail rather than the message, which perhaps is my fault in that I provided the detail that is relevant close to me, but my point is that Brexit, and Trump, and Sanders, and all these movements are part and parcel of the same thing - a "Fuck You" from voters to the establishment. A message that there are a lot of people out there willing to make change, even radical change, for it's own sake, since the status quo seems rather hopeless.

Change is needed, and the establishment won't give us the change that is needed, so fuck it - we will just make ANY change, and damn the consequences.

Yes. But what changes are needed? If we could even get a few sane people to agree on that it wouldn't take too long to get the establishment on board. They do like to continue being the establishment and all.

Random rage combined with vagueness is mostly what we have.

[celedhring]

Shrug, you are focusing on the detail rather than the message, which perhaps is my fault in that I provided the detail that is relevant close to me, but my point is that Brexit, and Trump, and Sanders, and all these movements are part and parcel of the same thing - a "Fuck You" from voters to the establishment. A message that there are a lot of people out there willing to make change, even radical change, for it's own sake, since the status quo seems rather hopeless.

Change is needed, and the establishment won't give us the change that is needed, so fuck it - we will just make ANY change, and damn the consequences.

I can certainly agree with that general sentiment. I just don't think campaign finance plays that much of a part - at least in Europe.

I think that, in general, our politicians have taken popular support for granted. Austerity in Spain, for example, has done a lot of damage and it was very naive to consider that there wouldn't be a reaction to it, and the tone-deaf way it has been implemented has made things even worse. There are lots of people over here with very little to lose now, that believe that politicians don't give a fuck about the "little people" anymore, and that are willing to try anything.

Incidentally our local politicians also doubled down on the "We do these nasty things because Europe" message.

[celedhring]

Shrug, you are focusing on the detail rather than the message, which perhaps is my fault in that I provided the detail that is relevant close to me, but my point is that Brexit, and Trump, and Sanders, and all these movements are part and parcel of the same thing - a "Fuck You" from voters to the establishment. A message that there are a lot of people out there willing to make change, even radical change, for it's own sake, since the status quo seems rather hopeless.

Change is needed, and the establishment won't give us the change that is needed, so fuck it - we will just make ANY change, and damn the consequences.

Yes. But what changes are needed? If we could even get a few sane people to agree on that it wouldn't take too long to get the establishment on board. They do like to continue being the establishment and all.

Random rage combined with vagueness is mostly what we have.

That's why I elect politicians, to solve problems. 

I guess that if you could magically solve the middle-class crunch most of these would go away.

[OttoVonBismarck]

British parties do hold fundraisers and such to raise party funds, but it's a different beast than in the United States. I think remnants of the class system and the greater power that elites in Britain have always had are part of the anti-establishment anger.

How many guys who have worked on docks, in mines, or in factories are in Parliament at the moment? A lot of politicians are from traditional upper middle class backgrounds, and many of the ones who are not have spent essentially their entire adult lives working inside the party. I think that just like in America a "normal guy" running for election and winning a seat is pretty damn rare.

In America money is one of the biggest reasons for this, since our system of primaries is a lot more democratic, but a lot of the whole "political elite culture" is present here too. People who get support from state level party organizations to run for a House seat are generally connected--often through going to an Ivy League school, frequently having a J.D. and having worked for a connected law firm or done a prestigious clerkship or etc.

[DGuller]

Random rage combined with vagueness is mostly what we have.

Ding ding ding.  I think a lot of people are just plain dissatisfied, with no reason to pin it on, and are looking for reasons after the fact.