Something like this abstract,

Janetgas I actually wrote about my Brexit stance in an own dedicated article, which takes up this point “ So much of the Brexit stuff has been alarmingly reductive and very “us and them”. Sad really.

I am saying in that article it is wrong to assume that 17 million people have all been singlehandedly fooled to leave, while believe that 16 million people were all rational to stay. I am not faulting the 17 million leavers, nor am I faulting the 16 million stayers; because as a matter of fact, I know that reasons and priorities differ, and so does the time spend to make political decisions vary. How can you demand from over 30million people to make an informed decision, when they do not get all the time, information and facts to consider? It is a politicians job to find the best solution for people. It’s a politicians job to find the best compromise to handle complex solutions, as it is the Bus drivers job to fucking drive the bus.

I do not fault the people for being misled by dirty campains and political powerplays, in one way or the other, I fault the dirty campains. I fault politicans that do not stick to facts, I fault politicians that willfully lie for their own gain, I fault the media for sensationalism instead of critically searching for the truth. I am damn sure that a poor single mum having to work 2 jobs cannot and should not be blamed if she votes for leaving, when all she hears in the few minutes she gets for herself everyday is: “We lost control of or borders. Immigrants are waiting at our door to take your job. Your kids are gonna have it bad and are endangered.” Nor do I fault the people who believe in themselves, who are genuine thinking that change has to happen, and leaving the EU might improve their lives, while staying means to keep the “bad” status quo. But I fault politicians and media creating a climate of dualism, you are either for or against us; instead of trying to foster an environment that allows for rational decision making based on facts.

Some arguments to stay were as wrong and inaccurate as most arguments for leave; but there were decent arguments for leaving and a good panel of arguments for staying that went unnoticed, never to be discussed, because it all boiled down to: “Us vs. them”.

That is bad governance, trying to segregate people instead of uniting them, and using this gamble to gain political power in the process.

Like what you read? Give Philipp Markolin a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.