The election of Donald Trump is more abhorrent than Brexit but they share the same ugly principles

In the early hours of the morning after the US presidential election, I woke up and reached for my phone. As I squinted from the glare of the backlight, with some anxiety I instinctively checked the results that were already in and immediately felt a sickening sensation in the pit of my stomach.

It was eerily a feeling of deja vu; exactly the same routine and feeling I had experienced upon seeing the results of the EU referendum.

Donald Trump was not only ahead but it looked like he was going to win. As I hopped between tabs of reliable news outlets and social media, refreshing each page in hope, I accepted that Trump was going to win the election. It was what I thought would happen but badly wanted to be wrong about. Trump was now on 244 electoral college votes while Hillary Clinton was on 215. Trump was en route to victory and it didn’t look like anything would change that.

As Clinton conceded defeat, the atmosphere was akin to when it’d become clear that the UK had voted to leave the EU in a foolish decision that was driven by xenophobia and ignorance. The mood in London (a city that had overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU) was just as subdued as it was following the referendum.

Where Brexit and the election of Trump differed was Brexit arguably wasn’t as bad a result. Not to mention, despite my disdain for many Brexiters, the Trump campaign (and his election) undoubtedly showed the American electorate and society in a much worse light.

Trump can be called many things. Racist, sexist, Islamophobic, homophobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, narcissistic and bigoted all accurately describe the President Elect. Oh, and don’t forget his aspirations as a sexual predator and sexual abuser. On the latter, I don’t know how else you can describe a man who brags about his desire when meeting a beautiful woman to “grab ‘em by the pussy”.

One conspicuous omission from the above is ‘liar’. I’m sure Trump has told his fair share of lies and I’m sure many of his obnoxious policies will quickly prove to be too outlandish and impractical to implement, which might lead some to call him deceitful. But when it came to his campaign, Trump told Americans exactly what his plans were with his trademark candidness.

I also think Trump had the chutzpah to actually intend to implement his policies before realising or being advised that they’d be impossible. And enough of the electorate nevertheless voted for him to become President. If he finds a way to build a wall to keep Mexicans out, and manages to get Mexico to pay for it, it can’t be claimed that he didn’t tell you so.

Essentially, Trump supporters went further with the extent of the hate that they were knowingly willing to support via their voting of a candidate who actually intended to follow through on all the hateful utterances he spewed throughout his campaign. That says a lot about American society when a candidate running on that platform can win a presidential election.

America has long been disdainfully perceived globally as a nation of supreme ignorance and electing Donald Trump has only reinforced that view. It’s a perception many Americans aren’t aware of but I think many of those who didn’t vote for Trump are now realising this for themselves.

In the UK we’re still in political limbo over our exit of the EU and I’m still not convinced a hard Brexit at least will happen (especially with the recent court ruling that the government does need to consult Parliament before triggering Article 50). But for Americans, there’s little uncertainty around Trump assuming the presidency of the United States.

Returning to the UK, there is much that unites Brexit and the election of Trump in the ugly principles they’re both underpinned by. Political apathy and distrust of politicians is at an all-time high and understandably so. Governments and politicians are seen as the friends of big business, the ‘1%’ and each other while the public accept the narrative without scope for redress. With both the EU referendum and the US presidential election, sections of the respective electorate sought to give the establishment a kicking.

When Brexiters voted to leave the EU, they wanted to send a message. They wanted to tell the establishment and the career politicians that they wanted to see them with a bloody nose. Most Brexiters didn’t know what the EU did and I suspect many still don’t. Conversely, voting to remain in the EU was what the government wanted them to vote for and if the EU was worth their vote, what had it done for them? This was the emotionally driven and flawed logic of many people that voted to leave. They’d had enough and this was their chance to stick it to the politicians in Westminster and Brussels.

Voters in communities that’d had the heart ripped out of their local economies by recessions and a lack of investment saw the government and the EU as the cause of their woes and they understandably directed their anger at politicians. This was no different from US cities with declining industries where the working class had decided enough was enough. No more empty promises from politicians followed by a term of neglect. They were ready to reject the status quo of politicians and unfortunately for Clinton, she represented that.

Trump on the other hand, with his brash demeanour, populist rhetoric and cheap shots that provided a mouthpiece for all the insults the working class wanted to hurl at the politicians they felt had let them down, was the antithesis of the political class. He might have come from money, and was very much part of the establishment, but his sentiments didn’t carry the Washington narrative.

He was everything traditional politicians weren’t. And while that included being hugely unqualified for the job, voting for him meant a change from the status quo and an opportunity to give the political class a drubbing. Just as the Brexiters had had enough and were showing it via the ballot, Trump supporters were doing exactly the same.

Their vitriol was at a level where even if the consequence was an unqualified buffoon leading their country, thus compounding the disdain and derision of America, it was a chance they were willing to take. While I shared some of the reservations many Americans had over Clinton (and would have preferred Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party candidate) it’s nonetheless a big statement when you can’t beat Donald Trump. This was the extent of the failure that the political class had effected.

"You don't like immigrants? Me too! Let's be friends!"

The same could be said for the Brexiters who were willing to damage the British economy and similarly make the UK a laughing stock on the world stage (although they were were too insular and high on misplaced jingoism to realise that). Anything associated with xenophobic morons like Nigel Farage et al should be an overwhelming loser yet it wasn’t the case. What an L we took in the EU referendum indeed.

While there needs to be some empathy for the aforementioned groups (more so to understand how politicians and society facilitated this mess), the undertones of prejudice and hatred that led to the respective results are harder to understand.

I’ve always maintained that not everyone who voted for Brexit is a racist but every racist voted for Brexit. And the same can be said for Trump supporters. The Leave campaign in the UK was driven by an undeniable xenophobia. The logic was that immigrants were clearly taking our jobs (jobs that many Britons don’t want to do) and they had to go. Although beyond xenophobia, this was about racism.

British born ethnic minorities like me were just as unwelcome even though the UK was our home where we were educated, work and contribute to society. For many Leave supporters, Brexit was their way of telling us to ‘go home’ (even those of us who were born here). They even managed to get some ethnic minorities like Tory MP Preeti Patel to get in on the act. If we do get shipped off to who-knows-where, she’ll presumably be on the last boat to leave but she won’t be so smug then.

It was no different in America. With every group that Trump offended, I was incredulous that he managed to maintain, if not grow, his support. Yet every time he managed to insult a minority group, it was perceived as a willingness to champion the white, working class male. Many had come to feel disenfranchised and resented what their country had become with ‘unnecessary legislation giving minorities equal rights’. Consequently, many repaid Trump in votes.

Add that to the group of voters who held a deep rooted disdain and distrust for politicians, and those who held some prejudice for at least one minority group, and that’s a lot of votes.

Those groups certainly aren’t mutually exclusive and if you represented them in a venn diagram, there’d be a sizeable number in the intersection; something that knowingly or otherwise helped Trump to the White House.

Trump promised to ‘make America great again’ but what he really meant, as supported by much of his rhetoric throughout his campaign, was he wanted to make America white again. And that resonated with many racist voters. The EU referendum and the presidential election showed that race relations in particular hadn’t really improved. Rather the racists didn’t have anyone speaking out for them.

With the likes of Farage, Trump et al championing the sentiments of the downtrodden racist, and doing so in the mainstream, they made it OK to be open about one’s racism. No longer did their views need to be caveated with “some of my best friends are black/Muslim/[insert minority group here]” and like the Death Eaters in Harry Potter following Voldemort’s resurgence, they weren’t going to hide their true identities or their views.

Following the EU referendum, there were reports of racist and religiously motivated attacks by people who felt emboldened by the result. And the same has happened following the election of Trump with hate crimes effectively being committed in the name of the President Elect.

In the days after the presidential election, social media has been rife with posts documenting such attacks. Journalist Shaun King has received countless reports of these and his Facebook page paints a picture of the extent of just how emboldened Trump supporters feel following his election. To return to the Harry Potter analogy, the Trump supporters have their Voldemort and they’re extremely roused as he prepares to enter the Ministry of Magic.

Historians have long referenced the ‘special relationship’ in articulating the connection shared between America and the UK. Culturally and politically, that’s long been the case. Furthermore, the EU referendum and the presidential election have shown they share more than that in an ugly yet and strong undercurrent of prejudice.

On the possibility of the triggering of Article 50 being blocked or a soft Brexit, and in what seems like a veiled threat combined with a blatant attempt at stoking existing divisions in the UK, Nigel Farage said it could result in “political anger the like of which we have never seen in this country”. With the tensions exposed in the UK, he could be right and America could be facing the same scenario. Heated anti-Trump protests have already taken place and I expect there will be more.

Both countries have shown not only how divided they are but how fragile their facades of tolerance are when given the opportunity to deviate from this without reproach. However, more worryingly is how little they’ve seemingly progressed from a history that can be characterised by generations of abject prejudice. On reflection, perhaps we didn’t move as far away from it as we once thought.

I thought Brexit wouldn’t happen and was heading for the long grass (but now I’m not so sure)

After the referendum on Britain’s membership in the EU, I felt anger and disappointment at the ignorance, insularity and xenophobia that led to the result. For the first time in my adult life, I also felt ashamed to be British; to share an identity with those who were prompted to vote leave based on the aforementioned. My beef isn’t with those whose rationale (albeit not shared by me) to vote leave was based on what they they thought was best for the country rather than the above.

While my anger didn’t subside (and actually grew with reports of racist attacks by people who felt emboldened by the result) in the following days, I increasingly thought that Brexit wouldn’t happen. I even referenced it in my analysis of the referendum and what it said about British society. As the lies of the leave campaign quickly emerged (such as the £350 million a week that they claimed post Brexit would be diverted to the NHS), the number of so-called ‘Bregretters’ (leave voters who subsequently regretted their decision to vote leave) grew. And with such a narrow result, an identical referendum a week later would have resulted in a reversed decision.

The unprecedented complexities of leaving the EU began to become obvious along with the negative impact on British society and the British economy. Since the referendum, Britain has edged closer to an Enoch Powell wet dream and it’s palpable. Sterling has also slumped following the referendum and only recently a ‘flash crash’ saw it fall 6% to $1.1841. On the day of the referendum, it was $1.50. The Bank of England will be investigating the cause but I suspect they’re wasting their time or in denial. If it wasn’t already clear, Brexit isn’t deemed good for business and it isn’t deemed good for the economy either. Overall, Brexit isn’t good for Britain.

I had thought the acceptance and realisation of this amongst politicians and within public opinion would strengthen the argument for why Brexit would be abandoned. After all, the referendum wasn’t legally binding. Alternatively, I thought a Brexit in name only might be pursued. Such a route would placate the Brexiters with a departure from the EU but pragmatism would nonetheless retain access to the single market with the ‘compromise’ (as idiots would see it) of freedom of movement and labour coming with it. Basically a soft Brexit that for all intents and purposes represented the status quo albeit with a few tweaks that the government could claim were a victory for those racists who voted “to get their country back from immigrants”.

I couldn’t see how leaving the single market and unraveling decades of legislation would be something that the government would run with. It’d be a mammoth task; the extent of which would very quickly become apparent. Furthermore, given such a significant decision, I couldn’t envisage parliament not getting a vote on the decision to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and certainly what any post-Brexit Britain would look like. At that point, I expected parliamentarians to reject a Brexit with the knowledge of just how bad it would be for Britain and public opinion to support their decision.

I wasn’t even sure if Brexit would get that get that far. Even leave campaigners such as Boris Johnson called for an unhurried exit as they realised what a palaver they had foisted upon the country. I thought there was a good chance that Brexit would be kicked into the long grass with the Brexiters blindly high on their somewhat Pyrrhic victory for long enough to not realise that we were still actually in the EU but merely with more overt and comforting xenophobia to distract them from reality.

I still think any of the above scenarios that don’t see a ‘hard’ Brexit could happen. Alas, I increasingly feel less confident about it and primarily for one reason - Theresa May and her now loyal following of prejudiced and equally ignorant right wing Tories.

"... and then I told François he could take access to the single market and stick it where the sun doesn't shine!"

I’ve never been a fan of Theresa May. As Home Secretary, I thought many of her policies and rhetoric had undertones of racism. She oversaw the vans carrying billboards telling immigrants to ‘go home’. Stop and Search operations aimed at illegal immigrants were also not only reminiscent of the 80s where non-whites were subject to aggressive racial profiling that led to racial tensions, a generation of distrust for the police (that hasn’t really disappeared) and race riots. So for May to become Prime Minister at a time when racial tensions in the UK had been exacerbated by the leave campaign, and latterly the referendum result, didn’t bode well.

"here's a racist policy I made earlier..."

May’s first soundbite as Prime Minister was “Brexit means Brexit”. It was an expected attempt at portraying herself as a leader who had listened to the people and would follow their wishes without any ambiguity. Yet even so, most leaders following a referendum of this nature would have voiced similar sentiments.

As May settled into her role, there were signs that perhaps she really did mean Brexit means Brexit. But there were also indicators that Brexit wasn’t happening anytime soon When David Davis, Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, told Parliament his details for what Brexit would look like he outlined…. well, nothing. He even gave us the clarity that Brexit “means leaving the European Union”. Thanks for that Dave.

Meanwhile, increased reporting of post referendum xenophobic crimes continued and there was a tangible sense that anti-immigrant and racist sentiments no longer had to be kept behind closed doors. Following Team GB’s success at the Rio Olympics, Heather Wheeler MP felt it was OK to celebrate the efforts of the now defunct British Empire as Britain’s own success. When you consider the Empire was essentially the legacy of slavery and brutal colonisation by Britain, Wheeler’s tweet can only be considered as racist, stupid or both.

The referendum result had made it fine to say you didn’t like immigrants, regardless of if they were from within the EU or beyond, and you got the sense that such views were the oil of the Brexit train that until recently, hadn’t really built up speed.

That was until the Tory Party Conference, an event that was akin to the Nazi’s annual Nuremberg rally post 1933 when the Nazis had become the only legal party in Germany and therefore felt untouchable and high on power. The similarities with the Nazis are also extended to the racist undertones of every major speech. Poet, author and commentator Michael Rosen even wrote an apt poem, ‘I was listening to a pogrom on the radio today’ that brilliantly captured the essence of the Tory Party Conference. The Tories were embracing their tag as the ‘nasty party’ and anti-immigration champions and they were doing it with pride and absolute hubris; the latter being what I fear the most is leading us to a hard Brexit.

"Yes, that really is my name..."

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt told of a reduction in foreign doctors and May reiterated this in telling the conference that foreign doctors would be allowed to stay “until further numbers (of home-grown doctors) are trained”. The arrogance beggars belief that it’s suggested foreign doctors are doing us a favour by working here. Home Secretary Amber Rudd gave a deeply inflammatory speech in which she announced a policy where UK businesses would need to publish the number of foreign staff they employ and added that foreign workers should not be able to “take the jobs that British people should do”. Rudd’s speech was likened to Mein Kampf which is probably the line that the Tories are going for. What a time to be alive in Tory Britain.

May herself, not wanting to be outshone by her Tory peers, was the showstopper in essentially indicating a hard Brexit with her dismissing any compromise on freedom of movement in exchange for access to the single market. Even with the Tories’ beloved backers of the financial services sector standing to lose money and jobs with such a move, May is seemingly willing to cut off her nose to spite her face. Despite my disdain for the attitudes and some characters within the square mile, they may be one of the few groups that can effectively lobby to save us from a hard Brexit.

Other unlikely saviors may come from Tory MPs who are urging May not to relinquish Britain’s access to the single market. The more a hard Brexit becomes May’s target, the more pressure she can expect from all MPs and the public in providing a parliamentary vote on Brexit but also transparency in the process which both May and Davis have told MPs they should not expect to be forthcoming. Indeed, even to invoke Article 50 without a parliamentary vote would not be in the spirit of British democracy.

EU leaders aren’t going to let Britain play the big man of Europe on this occasion and if anything, they’ll look to punish us. François Holland has said that “there must be a price” to deter other EU members seeking to leave the EU while retaining the benefits and it’s likely the EU will make Britain pay that price dearly. I don’t blame them but Theresa May and her rabble rousers are seemingly too arrogant to avoid that happening.

I still think there is a good chance that Brexit won’t happen or at least not a hard Brexit that causes a fundamental shift. Although at present no one is facilitating that. This could be the fight that the Labour Party needs to galvanise itself and just as May referred to the referendum as a “quiet revolution”, the stance of the right could be what the rest of British society needs to actually revolt against what is happening. MPs too need to hold May to account as if Brexit happens with no say from Parliament, it really will be a mockery of British democracy and an even bigger consequence for the future of Britain.

The EU referendum result was deeper than how the UK perceives the EU

During the EU referendum campaign, and in the aftermath of the result, it’s clear that the referendum was deeper than just views on our relationship with the EU. It was about the attitudes of the UK electorate and just how divided we are as a country. The leave vote wasn’t driven by a well articulated campaign that promoted awareness of the EU as a supranational body and how it might not benefit us. Nor was it driven by a plan for how life outside of the EU would look, particularly when juxtaposed with the status quo. Instead, it was driven by ignorance, insularity, xenophobia and undertones of prejudice. That is the crux of how we ended with the electorate voting to leave the EU.

The EU isn’t a perfect institution and it’s a fairly convoluted and bureaucratic one at that. Moreover, many people can’t claim to fully understand it and I would include myself in that statement. Though headline arguments in favour of EU membership such as economic benefits, cultural and historic ties to Europe (the EU was formed in an effort to foster stronger ties post world war 2 in a bid to prevent Europe going to war again), freedom of movement, free movement of labour and EU laws that protect human rights, employment rights and quality of life (which I would struggle to trust a Tory government to preserve) were solid arguments in favour of remaining in the EU. In opposition, the leave campaign’s objective arguments to refute the above were predicated on.... well, nothing. Casual racism doesn’t count.

What exactly did you win? A gloomy economic outlook for the UK and the promotion of xenophobia? Huzzah!

It is important to remember that not everyone who voted to leave is racist. But anyone who’s racist certainly voted to leave. Furthermore, many people who voted leave had reasons that despite not shared by me, had rationale that was void of any prejudice and what they felt, rightly or wrongly, was best for the country. Nevertheless, such views were in a minority, even within the leave campaign and the utterances of politicians who supported a Brexit.

I'm not holding a grudge against anyone who voted differently from me and decided to vote to leave the EU because they felt it was genuinely the best option for the country and based on a well reasoned argument. I am, however, holding a grudge against anyone who voted leave based on xenophobia, selfishness and any opinion they based on something they read in The Sun.

Immigration has been a major driver toward Euroscepticism as an enlarged EU inevitably means further non-British EU citizens in the UK. The UK has traditionally been seen as an attractive location to live and work and many EU citizens come here to do just that. In doing so, they contribute to the economy and work in sectors where there’s a clear demand. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be a job for them. They assimilate British culture and contribute economically, culturally and socially to the UK.

Conversely, while we can’t pretend that there aren’t some EU citizens who are attracted to the UK due to it having a more generous and accessible welfare system than their own, they are not in the majority. Yet the right wing media and politicians have fed us with this via racist and politically motivated drivel that many people lap up as the manna for their prejudice. These are British people. Though prior to the referendum, and in contemporary history, they had not made their sentiments so clear and on such a prominent platform that would show how divided the UK is.

Oh wait, is Boris Johnson not part of the establishment you wanted to give a kicking?

Many voting leave saw the EU referendum as a vote on immigration. Think immigrants (regardless of if they’re from within the EU) are taking our jobs, welfare and social housing whilst showing our country no respect? Then vote leave! This is what many perceived the referendum to be asking them and what the leave campaign peddled. In an age of the internet, where one can research essentially anything, I doubt many people sought to find out what the pros and cons of EU membership actually were. Rather they relied on propaganda that even a day after the result has been shown to be a lie. Furthermore, they wanted to give the establishment a kicking (forgetting that Boris Johnson et al are part of the establishment), say no to immigrants and ‘regain control of our country’. All utterly stupid and unfounded reasons, particularly when made with such consequences.

On the issue of immigration, it will remain a contentious subject whether in or out of the EU. Nonetheless, the fact is economic migrants make a huge and necessary contribution to our economy and workforce. Nor will our borders now close as the UK gradually becomes a homogenous white nation again. That’s something ethnic minorities campaigning to leave the EU like Tory MP Preeti Patel (whose parents are Gujarati Ugandans) were blind to as the desire of many leave voters. When they say they want immigrants out Preeti, even though we were born here they mean you and I too.

"What have I done?..."

Politicians have failed to generate a sensible and pragmatic debate on immigration, preferring to use it as a political hot potato. No wonder a section of the electorate felt this was their way to add their voice and frustrations to a dialogue that hasn’t really started. The problem is, they chose to do it at the least practical time. Immigration was the leave campaign’s trump card and they knew it. Dress it with some propaganda and spurious arguments, while targeting ignorant and largely uneducated people, and they probably won’t even question why they should do anything but vote leave. And 51.9% of them didn’t. Not to mention, not once did the leave campaign include a plan before or after the referendum to set out life after a potential Brexit. Indeed, Boris Johnson’s rhetoric encouraging an unhurried exit, and his demeanor during the post result press conference, was that of a man not only without a plan but also with the realisation of ‘what the ---- have I done?’ As Del Boy would say, what a plonker.

"What a plonker!"

For the first time in my adult life, I am ashamed to be British; a significant statement as a British born, second generation West Indian, who nonetheless encapsulates Britishness as part of my identity. I am ashamed to share an identity with cretins who hold the views that prompted them to vote leave. Idiots who see right wing tabloids like The Sun and the likes of Nigel Farage, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson, who have all resorted to undertones of racism throughout this campaign, as credible sources of information upon which to base their decisions. I’m ashamed to live in and be born in a country where such feelings exist to such an extent.

Like many non-Americans around the world, I’ve long perceived America as a nation comprising some superb ignorance and insularity. Their abysmal and disheartening lack of gun control against a backdrop of a countless horrific gun related tragedies and Donald Trump becoming a presidential candidate supports that view of American society and the American people. Britain hasn’t quite experienced such levels of poor judgement (although we have allowed Boris Johnson to position himself as the potential next Prime Minister so perhaps we have after all) but with the referendum vote to leave the EU, we now have our own watershed moment in contemporary British history that illustrates the obtuseness and stupidity in our society. Indeed, Britain isn’t far behind in sharing some of the attitudes that the rest of world mocks America for. As an American friend rightly commented, this is truly a case of ‘like father like son’.

The divisions that long existed in the UK are now more conspicuous than they have been in recent time. Those who voted to leave voted on the sentiments that UKIP, a racist party, have campaigned on since their creation. Let it sink in that half the electorate share UKIP’s views. Just as progressive Americans and progressive states such as New York and New Jersey, live alongside those who get their information from Fox News, we have become a nation so polarised that we are a country of two narratives.

I am angry, sickened and disillusioned with the result and those who voted to leave with little regard for the consequence but more so what their decision represented. In a hilarious but on point video (NSFW) that captures the sentiments of most people who voted to remain in the EU, Rants N Bants articulates what most of us are thinking; we don’t want to be associated with a nation that possesses such attitudes. Albeit in some jest, many are even calling for London to breakaway from the rest of the UK. Scotland and Northern Ireland (who both largely voted to remain), have also already highlighted the tensions the referendum result has raised for their respective inclusion in the UK. The leave vote was also heavily supported by older electors with little regard for subsequent generations’ futures. Selfishness and insularity has played a big part in this referendum.

"I went one referendum too far..."

For now, we are still in the EU. No amount of celebrations from Nigel Farage can change that. It’s also not likely to be a hurried exit for the UK as there isn’t a plan and the government will need and want to stall as long as possible. David Cameron announcing his decision to step down in the wake of the referendum result adds a leadership battle in the Conservative party that will further divert attention from a hasty Brexit. Good, bad or indifferent, no one knows what happens next. What we do know is sterling has taken a kicking after the result, Moody’s has cut the UK’s credit outlook to negative and the EU is not looking for an amicable separation. The leave campaign wanted isolation and to move away from the status quo and now it seems like they’ve got it.

However, while somewhat fanciful, I’m not entirely convinced that an exit from the EU will happen, at least not with the separation envisaged by the leave campaign.

Firstly, the referendum result is not legally binding. It’s essentially a gauge of public support for an issue. And despite the support being in favour of leaving the EU, it was with 51.9% of the vote. Support, yes, overwhelming, no. Secondly, to put the wheels of a Brexit in motion, article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty will need to be invoked which Cameron intends to leave for his successor. Some would argue that setting that in motion would also warrant agreement from the UK Parliament rather than merely going on the referendum result for such a significant issue. Yet most MPs support remaining in the EU. Therefore particularly given the narrow margin for the vote to leave, they may decide to go against the referendum result in any vote in Parliament and not vote in favour of doing so.

For the UK Parliament to go against the referendum result, it’d set a huge and dangerous precedent and undermine the referendum as a democratic process. Although amidst the referendum result having an immediate and adverse impact on the British economy, and a tangible sense of regret amongst many leave voters who either voted to leave as a protest or were taken in by propaganda that’s since been found to be a lie, it would give MPs voting against leaving some credence as being in the public interest.

A petition calling for a further referendum already has in excess of 2 million signatures at the time of writing and David Lammy MP has called for Parliament to ignore the referendum. People are rightly not ready or willing to accept the result and Parliament may not either given how quickly it’s become apparent what a bad decision it actually is. That could result in legal action via judicial review from the leave campaign and it would all get quite messy which is one thing that seems fairly likely regardless of what happens.

The referendum result has exposed how divided the UK is and how much ignorance, xenophobia and selfishness there is within the country alongside the inclusivity that it must be stressed does exist throughout the UK. With my London-centric perspective, perhaps it’s just less than I previously gave the country credit for. Attitudes that have perhaps been suppressed since the first wave of post war immigration apparently never really disappeared and generations later, it has to be questioned if these attitudes are simply inherent to some sections of British society.

Whether or not we proceed with a Brexit, our relationship with the EU is altered forever. We have rejected strong relations with the EU, and all that it brought us, as the UK has cut off its nose to spite its face. Posturing via the ballot box might have seemed a good idea for the leave voters at the time. But they’ve created a mess that no matter to what extent it can be resolved, has damaged our relationship with the EU and each other and created a perception of the UK as a country that comprises many of the attitudes we’ve long criticised other nations for holding.