-
It's quite easy to come to the view people were bullshitted. Leave campaign leaflet pack of fucking lies. Turkey. Lie. 350 million bus. Bullshit. Campaigns are not held to any standards, they were in no position to suggest this was an official promise but as it's a suggestion if people did fall for it "it was a suggestion"
But then after that there's an issue:
1 - Not all leavers bought the bull (lexit didn't go with official leave, neither did flexit)
2 - People only admit they accepted a lie if you give them a chance
3 - People disagree over definitions. Platitudes like "the EU is corrupt / undemocratic" quite frankly make me eyeroll though depending on the definition of said terms they are not untrue. But if person A uses definition A and B definition B...
4 - Group thinking, encouraged by a all or nothing vote referendum
5 - Nobody likes to admit they were wrong. I was wrong on EU and fishing, it does seem a bad policy.I'd hope though that there is common ground to be found. But on what... Article 50 court case? Yeah some leavers thought it was good. But then what, are they worried about the economy or not...So many things were promised, and there are so many motivations it's a long conversation with anyone if you want to make it fair.
You are reading a single comment by @JWestland and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
JWestland
boristrump
I've just finished this and also the first part of a long blog post on his Whitehall experiences: https://dominiccummings.wordpress.com/2014/10/30/the-hollow-men-ii-some-reflections-on-westminster-and-whitehall-dysfunction/
I've found both incredibly interesting and thought provoking. In particular his statements on behavior and focused results based action.
@dancing james - to bring it round to your question(s), I don't know. But the best starting point would be to set clear objectives and look at where previous approaches have failed/succeed. For example I think the objectives of fighting bigotry and preventing Brexit are separate and require different solutions.
I'd also like to pick up on the phrasing of;
this is an idea that is often aired (me inc.). I wonder if this isn't just our own rationalisation of how other people could come to a different view than ours, formed by our bias. It also smacks of the sort of condensation so many are apparently sick of.
How have we come to the view that people were either confused or deceived?
Perhaps it's thinking of leave voters in these terms which makes us remainers unable to engage them properly.