Why I’m ready to vote for Brexit

This post is dedicated to Andrea, Artur, and Alice, who have entertained my change of views since I voted to remain in Westminster without trying too hard to reel me in.

First, the world needs Britain to reconcile the best from America and Europe.

It’s easy to see how closely in sync the United Kingdom is with the United States (both took those names in the 17th century). Thatcher and Reagon (both conservatives), Blair and Clinton (Third Way politics), even Brexit and Trump were perfectly coordinated times in their histories (Americans sadly had no other channel to voice their America-first priorities). At the same time it is hard to overstate how fundamentally European Britain is (and I find its Latin name more befitting in the context of its European identity). Given its deep ties both ways — this duality between the United Kingdom and Great Britain — it’s not clear to me why it should be embedded firmly in one camp.

There’s many things great about the American and European models. America is the most productive and innovative of all economies and has a rich history of promoting equality between the races, openness to migrants, and individualism. Europe certainly gets it more right when it comes to social democratic values, with publicly funded education and healthcare, a better safety net, and preference for an equal society. Each model also has its downsides: Europe is more entrenched, set in its views, heavy-handed, but simultaneously, more likely to stand up for what it believes right. America is a bit of a bully, a place rife with inequalities and low protections, but maybe has discovered a thing or two about what the future is going to look like. Caught in between these two camps, Britain has the good fortune of demarcating the border between them.

It is not true, as I have heard a few times, that Europe is more liberal than America in every way possible. It is also not obvious that one model is more secure than the other. With a relatively small population, Europe managed to produce the greatest conflicts the world has seen, and the greatest destruction one set of people have suffered in the 20th century. America, with its war on communism, war on drugs, war on terrorism, has produced enough conflict since then. Personally I’m happy to do away with the menace of guns, climate change denial, and the offshore financial system, fronts which Europe has made more progress on. But a century from now, perhaps Americans will be better off given their right to carry weapons and defend themselves against external and internal threats. When that happens, and this is an extreme example, I want Britain to be in a position to adopt the American way if it needs to.

Where the European Union has failed in my opinion is in recognizing the diversity that lies outside. Its nations seem to be converging on their own organization models instead of trying new ones. Whether they are too consumed in their own conflicts to look outward, or this is a deliberate result of the Integration Project, somehow Europe’s great internal diversity seems contained. Britain exerted a pull in a different direction, but largely failed to make a difference.

I want Britain to be able to explore the best of the American and European models until it can resolve that one way of doing something is better. It is the right size to be able to think about navigating a balance between the two poles. It should maximally utilize its position to be a testbed of ideas and a conduit between these two great civilizations. With partners like Canada and Israel perhaps, it should set its ambitions on resolving every such point of difference between America and Europe. And that isn’t possible if it cedes sovereignty bit by bit exclusively to the European Union.

Second, Brexit is an opportunity for the European Union.

The EU is facing its greatest set of challenges from external actors: Russia can apparently cut European internet lines and has never been more assertive in the cyber/social space. China is knocking on the doors of Eastern Europe, willing to fund its infrastructure, and hoping to buy its loyalty. Syria, Palestine, Turkey, and the Middle East at large are increasingly large headaches for the EU. In the face of these threats, it makes great sense for the EU to maintain an alternative set of alliances under a proxy like Britain to engage these parties differently. It would also present Western Europe a fallback if the East did want to align more closely with Russia+China under One Road One Belt.

Economically, increased competition from regulatory divergence in Europe could be a productively gain for the whole continent. When I say competition I don’t mean an arms race or a race to the regulatory bottom. The EU and the US have enough gravity to keep the UK out of an aggressive slide of that sort.

Third, Brexit is good for Britain, even beyond the duel between Anglo and Eurocentric views which it stands to benefit from:

1. Brexit is compelling those already invested in Britain to speak out on its behalf so they can protect their stakes, from the Prime Minister of Japan to the CEO of Goldman Sachs. They are also invested in making a success out of Brexit. Those on the EU side who stand to profit from an unsuccessful/hard Brexit (e.g. Deutsche Borse and other EU financial firms that can gain business), on the other hand, are a much smaller voice.
2. Trading off in favor of those who want to leave now leaves us all more equal and in a better position to reclaim lost benefits.
   The majority of those who want to remain end up framing the debate narrowly: they see it as the simple question of maintaining British and EU citizens’ rights to live, work, and do business seamlessly on either side of the Channel. They are likely to disregard the diverse issues that turned people in favor of Brexit in the 40+ years since the UK joined the EU. They also fail to see that the burden of changing the status quo requires more comprehensive thought than the impetus to maintain it; and it is after considering the downsides of leaving that Brexiters made up their minds. As a result, Remainers end up optimizing for themselves without trying to reconcile the people who have been left behind by EU forces: e.g. British fishermen, London cabbies, and others hurt by tech companies (e.g. Uber and Apple) which don’t have to pay taxes on market share they capture in the UK.
   So as a society the question to resolve is: whom should we leave worse off — those already hurt by EU forces or the cosmopolitan ‘elites’ that benefit from them? My two cents: it is easier to make sure we don’t leave the cosmopolitan eurocentric population worse off. Primarily this requires guaranteeing EU citizens their status in the UK. Generally there is always potential to increase the mutual recognition of rights of citizens between two countries, but it will become increasingly difficult for Britain to overturn any economic forces sapping it. So it should stand up for itself while it can.
3. Britain can overcome most of the serious downsides of leaving the EU. Its agencies can collaborate more closely with the FDA and the SEC. It can establish free movement with Australia, Canada, and potentially even the US. It can import the unskilled and skilled labor it needs from around the world. It can set up scholarships to attract the best EU students while simultaneously raising fees for non-scholarship EU students to parity with foreign students.
4. Industrial strategy: In an increasingly specialized world, it is more important than ever to employ a portfolio strategy and converge on the winners. I’m perfectly satisfied with the idea of rallying around artificial intelligence, automotive manufacturing, construction, and the life sciences for now and free-trading with the world.
5. Brexit negotiations are going better than expected: By putting on a show of incoherence, and dragging the EU on its demands, Britain hardened the EU stance and cemented their demands. It then moved swiftly to satisfy those it could most easily i.e. the Brexit bill. I don’t see the EU raising their demands beyond 100 billion gross, an Irish border solution, and a guarantee for EU citizens in the UK. The UK, on the other hand, can demand more than just market access for its financial firms. And it still has enormous leverage in the migration and trade deficits it racked up with the EU in the years leading up to Brexit to get more of what it wants.
6. Conditions just couldn’t be better: Germany has issues forming a new government. The Irish government nearly just collapsed. Scotland cannot afford to hold another independence referedum. There isn’t even slack (i.e. a surplus) on the American side of the UK-US relationship, after Trump’s attacks on May. And Mr Corbyn is keeping the Conservative party united despite its great span of views. The UK stands to gain leverage over all its partners in this environment.
7. Brexit has the potential to reinvigorate Britain. The fall in the value of the pound is good for exports, provided we don’t lose market access. Outreach efforts including those by the mayor of London have been nothing short of impressive. And nearly all marketing is good marketing, even if it only spells doom in headlines worldwide.

A final point all parties need to remember is that nothing that happens at any stage of Brexit is irreversible. That is the foundation of my optimism to break away and explore new ground.

Postscript

I’ve seen the RAND Corp report which walks through a variety of post-Brexit scenarios and claims that Britain will be economically worse off in 10 years in each case. I want to read it before I comment. Prima facie I expect any economic analysis narrowly dealing only with the question of GDP will fail to account for the myriad strategic objectives that Brexit hopes to serve. I’m not taking a position against ‘expert’ opinions, but very often expert models tend to be fitted to very specific data, scenarios, and objectives. Normal people on the other hand are capable of aggregating a wide field of opinions and optimizing over a wide range of objectives. I believe in democracy and the intelligence of the masses ultimately.