Addressing the Status Quo
Boston, 2017
Michael Bloomberg sat on a white cushioned chair addressing the small audience at a technology convention. The billionaire businessman looked at ease, microphone in hand and a smile dancing across his face as he talked to the Boston crowd. Naturally, the topic of conversation moved on to Brexit. Bloomberg told his audience:
“I did say that I thought [Brexit] was the single stupidest thing any country has ever done but then we Trumped it … it is really hard to understand why a country that was doing so well wanted to ruin it.”
The audience laughed and Bloomberg went on to share further opinions surrounding the matter before moving on to the next topic.
Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t?
Despite coming a year after the referendum result, Bloomberg’s words echoed a sentiment felt by many. How could a country that was doing so well choose to deliberately shoot itself in the foot? Why had Britain chosen to leave the European Union in a move that would seemingly cost the country economically?
Herein lies the problem that Michael Bloomberg and many thousands of others systematically failed to understand (I include myself in that number). The status quo was simply not good enough for a majority of the population.
There was a genuine feeling that those “doing so well” were not the majority, but a small group at the top, dubbed ‘the elites’. Under the Conservative government, the wealth gap continued to grow. The richest 10% of households held 45% of all wealth, while the poorest 50% owned just 8.7%.
Conditions under the status quo where not beneficial to a large portion of society.
This sentiment of deep anger towards the establishment should have come as a surprise to no-one. Jeremy Corbyn rapidly rose to power through the grassroots support of the Momentum movement. He promised a fairer society, sweeping changes and powerful policies that incentivised not just the young but also those who felt left behind by the system. He promised to change the Status Quo.
He weaponised a portion of society that felt ignored and neglected by the elites who ran the country.
Weaponising resentment
When the Brexit referendum campaigning began, the blueprints for running a succesful campaign built on resentment towards the elites and the status quo was already in place. The strategy was simple:
- Focus on finding those people who were unhappy with the system. Find those who felt neglected and left behind.
- Weaponise their resentment. This could be in the form of xenophobia, a sense of patriotism, anger against the elites. It could also be in the form of hope, for change, for a fairer system, for representation of their core principles. It doesn’t matter as long as it challenges the status quo.
For many who voted to leave the European Union, the economic argument presented by the Remain campaign simply did not matter because the current Status Quo it was already failing them. To fail to understand this will be the continual undoing of those who seek to run the country.
Craig Oliver witnessed this first hand. As Special Advisor to David Cameron throughout his tenure as Prime Minister, Oliver oversaw large portions of the official Remain campaign. Writing retrospectively in his book ‘Unleashing Demons’ he recounts:
“All the way through [the campaign] we have held to one core belief: telling people they will be poorer if they leave the EU trumps controlling immigration [as their priority]…none of us are quite sure of that any more”.
Conclusions
Bloomberg ended his segment on Brexit by turning to his Boston audience and saying:
“In my view the old deal was better than anything else, so why would you want to do it?”
The answer is simple. Bloomberg’s view, that of a well educated, well traveled multi-billionaire is not reflective of the wider view. His views represent those who benefited from the status quo.
To diminish those who voted Leave as being stupid racists who don’t care about their economic future is to be both wrong and lazy. The status quo was benefitting a smaller and smaller segment of society; arguing for its preservation was never going to work.