Essay on Causes of Brexit Crisis

Obtaining the basis for cultural identification and commonality is amongst the biggest concerns facing the 21st century. From France to Australia, the U.S. to the Britain, the Western world is fighting off an identity crisis: strategies for creating a common social bond, cultural core that moves past the political liberalism and global economy. The European Union (EU) is a politico-economic marriage involving 28 countries. The European Economic Community and European Coal and Steel community founded the EU. The establishment of the EU was marked in 1993 following the signing of the Maastricht Treaty. The objective of forming the EU was to create a unified market, which would foster free movement of services, capital, people, and goods from one member state to another. Some of the citizens of the EU community have been disgruntled by the lack of identity that was brought about by the free movement of people within the EU member states. The Brexit referendum, therefore, served as the final attempt to revitalize or reintroduce the old organization of national identity

The controversy over what being British means has taken center stage in the United Kingdom (UK) politics for the past ten years. In 2005, the Home Office established a Life in the Britain citizenship test that any person wishing to immigrate to the UK had to pass. In 2008, it occurred to the government committee that there existed a diminution in British identity; to facilitate community integration, the committee recommended an American-way pledge of commitment that was to be recited in public learning institutions. Six years later, the The Trojan Horse Affair that took place in Birmingham pushed David Cameron, the then-Prime Minister, swore promised to encourage faith in UK values as the central curriculum in all schools (Galeeva, 2016). The following year, the Constitutional Reform Committee organized a competition, involving all members of the public, to draft a preamble to the British Constitution. By doing this, the Committee believed that the preamble could foster community integration as well as express shared values.

All the efforts that Britain has made; a loyalty oath, citizenship, a preamble, and a core curriculum, all attempt to create a special character to be celebrated and shared. Nonetheless, it is still hard for one to outline what it entails to have British values at heart or whether it is legal for one to force it down on immigrants (Glencross, 2016). Britain could be equated to a country that is undergoing a transformative journey of reclaiming its lost identity and glory.

Huge population immigration to and within the EU are the primary concern to self-identity of European democracies. Massive migration has elicited cultural anxiety (Goodwin, M & Heath, 2016a). The Brexit was informed by the sole fear of the Other (according to the public polls conducted to find out the reasons for Brexit indicated that sovereignty and migration were the two primary concerns). The rise of minority rights and multiculturalism in conjunction to the influx of migrants and refugees has challenged the self-governing supposition that the majority can manage its affairs. In Europe, majority groups have disintegrated, size or population numbers matter, specifically in a self-governing state, and their culture demands to be protected. Ethnic and national identities in the case of the UK are related: individuals from ethnic minorities commonly categorize themselves as British only.' On the contrary, white respondents commonly identify themselves as English only' (Natcen Social Research, 2014).

National identities by ethnicity British only English only Other UK

White 14% 64% 17%

Indian 58% 12% 5%

Pakistani 63% 15% 6%

Bangladeshi 71% 8% 5%

Black African 43% 10% 6%

Black Caribbean 55% 26% 7%

Source: A portrait of modern Britain, Policy Exchange, 2014, p34 (Census 2011)

The charts below indicate that English local governments that had bigger proportions of individuals who identified themselves as British only , according to the Census carried out in 2011) had a higher likelihood of record lower interest to Leave. On the contrary, English local governments that had bigger percentage of individuals who categorized themselves as English only had a higher likelihood of voting for Leave.

Source: Electoral Commission, EU Referendum results; Census 2011, available from Nomi

Source: Electoral Commission, EU Referendum results; Census 2011, available from NomisThe population in Britain cannot be only classified as white and black. Approximately 13% of the entire population of the British residents were born outside the country. Similarly, 37% of the London population are foreign-born, and this segment does not encompass non-white generations (second and third), British citizens. Besides, 1.2 million British citizens reside and work in other member states of the EU, whereas two million EU citizens reside and work in the UK. Although some UK citizens are receptive to the globalized world, in addition to the free movement of people and commodities within the EU, a bigger section of British people fear that the increasing blend of cultures is to be blamed for the loss of British identity, as well as acceding to Brussels on any matter concerned with immigration as an erosion of national sovereignty.

Lord Ashcroft polling indicated that Remain and Leave voters took antagonizing viewpoints on the appeal of issues such as immigration, multiculturalism, feminism, liberalism, and the internet (Ashcroft 2016). Likewise, in a recent article published by Eric Kaufmann suggested that personal values concerned with order and transparency help inform Brexit votes. This introduces the debate on what degree ethnic and national identities in liaison with other factors like socioeconomic and education background have a correlation to these values if this correlation is stronger for certain identities compared to others (Ashcroft 2016).

No efforts have been made by the EU to address the issue of migration. This is clearly indicated by the fact that there lacks an EU policy that controls immigration. The absence of a distinct EU immigration guideline creates about a scenario where an individual with the hope of acquiring British citizenship can do so in a more permissive member country, such as Sweden (Ashcroft 2016). Alternatively, he or she can acquire citizenship that is sold in Europe, and then move shift to a country with a stricter regime like Britain. In consequent, there arises some form of for shopping in that an individual can opt to buy citizenship from a state with the least lenient requirements then relocate to the one that has the strictest requirements.

The other reason national identity is contested in Europe because of the EU. In the early period of the EU, the issue of Union citizenship was not viewed as being revolutionary. However, with the creation of the EU nationality by in 1992 following the creation of the Maastricht Treaty, a majority of the citizens viewed their EU nationality as a minimalist issue that had the objective to increase labor mobility as well as foster economic interests; however, the EU has grown to be a supranational kind of authority. It has embraced Directives, which have transformed national identity into a weaker conception; the difference between permanent residents and EU citizens has become blurred. Moreover, the European courts have lessened the power of EU on nationality concepts. The submission of sovereignty guidelines for the acknowledgments of honesties in Strasbourg was unprecedented.

The Europeanization of EU states serves, accidentally, as a demise of the nation-state, as well as elicits a kind of sovereignty, majority sovereignty. Brexit, in other words, is a Yes-vote intended for the nation-state. It is tantamount to a cultural defense policy that aims at protecting the UK from what many citizens believe is a consistent degradation of its sovereignty and national culture. That is the biggest impediment to the EU, how it can change the nationality of the Member States and EU jurisdiction to safeguard the center of their legal identity. At least four EU states have a big percentage of residents who want to exit the union. Although this large group of individuals is not entirely against the EU, their determination to exit is guided by the concept of self-determination and nation-state.

The exit of Britain from the European Union poses a problem to the West; can the Brexit be both transparent and international and, simultaneously, maintain a national core, which the underlying issues? In a more straightforward manner, Brexit invites the UK to check the major transformation, which concepts of nation-state and self-determination are experiencing now.

Globalization, immigration, and Europeanization are not monstrosities, and national identity is not one of them. In the absence of a national core, societies are disintegrating more than ever before, steering off the course, and declining. The Treaty of Lisbon outlines a clause that stipulates that the EU endeavor to uphold the egalitarianism of Member States together with their national identities that are existent in their main structures, constitutional and political. In essence, Brexit is a push by the national governments in liaison with the EU to come up with strategies for executing the clause.

A state creates its elements to remain as a state, with full autonomy, to safeguard its identity as a state. When in a union, states endeavor to have the complete sovereign power to confirm and reaffirm its presence at all times, besides no global organization has the mandate to stop a state from exercising its free will. Moreover, the state has not a duty to justify its inherent actions against others (Geraghty, 2017). The decision by the larger majority of Britain citizens to exit from the European Union is somehow justified. Faced with the transformation those results from globalization on the economy as well as the demand to enjoy full national identity. Therefore, Britain was forced to establish sovereign internal measures, which allow the country, guide its elements, which is intended to allow it to regain its autonomy to continue implementing this discretion and the powerful force of all people. The British government now have every right to conduct the execution and use of Brexit within its jurisdiction. The UK government can alter constitutional measures to safeguard its existence as a state. Issues such as customary law should not deter Britain from actualizing the Brexit move. The decision was reached and seems it will be fruitful for all people that reside within the boundary (Goodwin, M & Heath, 2016b).

The Brexit crisis is highly driven by the identity issues and altitudes to perceived authoritarianism. The UK government should go ahead to implement this process and regain control of its national identity. When this is done, the cultural erosion that is brought about by issues concerning immigration will be no more. The fact that does not exist an EU policy that controls immigration is an enough reason for Brexit. The absence of a distinct EU immigration guideline creates about a scenario where an individual with the hope of acquiring British citizenship can do so in a more permissive member country. Ultimately, the UK government could not implement measures to control immigration while still under the umbrella of the EU because a person could buy citizenship from a state that has permissive requirements, and inconsequent, obtain a clear passage to the UK. Moreover, the move by the government to introduce the sense of nationalism through efforts such as having a loyalty oath, citizenship, a preamble, and a core curriculum is well intended and will eventually attain their objectives. Nonetheless, since the population...