Generally speaking people don’t go out and vote for revolutions.

They rarely take place using the ballot box off the back of a prior manifesto pledge put before an electorate to hold a referendum that is then subsequently endorsed by a sizeable parliamentary majority, as happened in 2015 either.

As I recall an ‘unequivocal’ Paul Mason, whom I’m not indisposed to by the way, was more than a little ambivalent about the EU prior to the vote on Question Time, in spite of his apparent ‘prophetic' utterances elsewhere.

I would like to think his views weren’t informed (on a subconscious level of course) by his own prejudices that all ‘revolts' have to be the exclusive preserve of the working classes in order to be classed as ‘bona fide' or that the outcome of the miners' strike or Arab Spring can both be held up as shining examples of what happens when the downtrodden working classes occasionally get their sh*t together (rather than the abject noble failures they sadly both turned out to be).

Generally speaking most people given the choice, particularly those that are comfortably off, are far likely to vote for a status quo and those with little or nothing to lose, against it.

To demean the outcome of the the referendum on the bases that those who voted ‘the wrong way' didn’t know what they were voting for whereas those who voted ‘the right way' did, and that its success was predicated on unseen dark forces disingenuously unifying disparate, conflicting interests in their ignorance and bigotry is not just simplistic nonsense, it’s patronising in the extreme.