At the heart of the common sense information surrounding the Brexit vote a few ordinary and uncomfortable points continue to be avoided by the echo-chambered media elite who have retreated to their safe spaces:
♦ First Point – The U.K. was sending Brussels $500 million per week of their wealth to be redistributed to the ‘lesser than’ affiliates. In essence, Classic Fabian/Socialist Economics: From each according to their ability – to each according to their need.
Simultaneously, to the parasitic withdrawal – inbound immigration was putting unsustainable financial strain on the social/societal welfare systems of the host.
♦ Second Point – Inbound, seemingly uncontrolled, mass immigration to the U.K. was twice the level of job creation in the same time period. That reality is unsustainable by any concept of societal economics. Obviously the displaced and impacted workers were/are the residents of the host country.
When you stand back and take a historical look at this EU construct, the Brexit vote is simply a predictable rebuke of the Fabian Socialist school of economics. However, that common sense practical acceptance doesn’t stop the academics born from the school of “World Citizenry” from continuing to look bewildered.
Megan McArdle writes a great column in Bloomberg (exerpt):
[…] The inability of those elites to grapple with the rich world’s populist moment was in full display on social media last night. Journalists and academics seemed to feel that they had not made it sufficiently clear that people who oppose open borders are a bunch of racist rubes who couldn’t count to 20 with their shoes on, and hence will believe any daft thing they’re told. Given how badly this strategy had just failed, this seemed a strange time to be doubling down.
[…] In many ways, members of the global professional class have started to identify more with each other than they have with the fellow residents of their own countries. Witness the emotional meltdown many American journalists have been having over Brexit.
[…] A lot of my professional colleagues seemed to, and the dominant tone framed this as a blow against the enlightened “us” and the beautiful world we are building, struck by a plague of morlocks who had crawled out of their hellish subterranean world to attack our impending utopia.
You could also, I’d argue, see this sentiment in the reaction of global markets, which was grossly out of proportion to the actual economic damage that is likely to be done by Brexit. I mean, yes, the British pound took a pounding, and no surprise. But why did this so roil markets for the Mexican peso? Did traders fear that the impact on the global marmite supply was going to unsettle economies everywhere? (continue reading)
McArdle’s article is directly on target. I strongly encourage everyone to read it.
U.S. Journalists React To The U.K. Referendum Result