The United Kingdom Leaving the European Union

Introduction

The issue of Brexit has been a particularly divisive one for the British people, with arguments both in support and against it being said all around the nation. As a whole, Britain’s left seems to be much more eager to support the “remain” option, than the leave one, betraying a lack of critical assessment of EU’s nature. This work will argue that Britain will be better off leaving the European Union, including those on the left. There are many potential economic benefits to remaining in the European Union, however they are outweighed by concerns of national sovereignty and authority.

Body

Critiques of the EU as Neoliberal Capitalists’ Union

The European Union, much like many international organizations of today, is built in order to support globalization and the capitalist regime. As a result, its policies, benefits and methods of operation are constructed in a way that supports the free market. The focus on a solely capitalistic angle of development, support for entrepreneurs and businesses instead of working class can all be seen as significant drawbacks of the European Union. Historically, the British left was the party concerned with the rights of the regular people, striving to provide better representation, opportunity and equity into the hands of everyday folk. However, the modern left is far less radical in its approaches, and the attachment to global organizations hinders its potential for radical sweeping change¹. As a result, an argument can be made that EU’s existence as a driver of global capitalism is counteractive to the needs of the working class. Instead of helping workers achieve better conditions, increase access

Benefits of Neoliberal Capitalism in the EU

Seeing the United Kingdom as a capitalist nation, it is possible to find certain benefits in staying with the EU, however. Namely, the freedom movement, trade and certain established policies make it easier for Britain’s economy to grow exponentially. The European Union offers its members a largest single market in the world, connecting economies and presenting unique opportunities for collaboration. The collaborative options enhance market flow, and channel money into the economies of each member-nation.

Legislation regarding fees, and all negotiations between member states are mitigated through the organization. In the state of neoliberal capitalism, opportunities offered by the European Union allow nations to develop outwardly. Furthermore, considerations such as property rights and liberal freedoms of people are protected by European Union². Faced with the prospect of losing the established international connections, many business began leaving the single market, and adjusting to the expected loss of profits³. For corporate entities, the existence of the EU, and UK’s place in it is a guarantee of international business opportunity. If the United Kingdom continues its development within the framework of neoliberal capitalism, it is likely that membership in an international organization would be beneficial.

Disadvantage of Lack of the Sovereignty of State

As mentioned previously, however, the main problem with remaining in the EU is the lack of state sovereignty offered by this arrangement. Sovereignty can be described as the ability of the state to possess supreme authority over its own territory. This includes other nation’s access to a country’s territory, as well as the control of a nation’s citizens outside of it⁴. Most nations existing today value their power within state borders, using both legislation and international agreements to ensure others are unable to interfere. A degree to which a country allows for international entities or other countries to influence its internal policies varies. However, it is inevitable that participation in organizations such as the European Union will interfere with state sovereignty. The need to ensure global connections, integration and expand the global economy inherently limits the ability of a state to oversee itself. Travel agreements and trade, especially work to challenge the sovereignty of countries like the UK. Within the framework of the EU, the main definition of sovereignty, and its practices, are modified in order to accommodate international collaboration. For a country that seeks to ensure its national interest over any other concerns, such a prospect may be unfavorable.

Freedom of Travel and Immigration

Despite the disadvantages outlined in the previous section, the interconnected nature of EU’s members also presents the citizenry with certain benefits. In particular, they are connected to one’s ability to freely move between countries. For regular people, this means more opportunities for travel or vacation, or an ability to visit their extended family. For young adults, ease of movement entails better educational opportunities, as a wider selection of universities and schools are available. Even for people with an already established professional career, the connectivity provided by the EU can entail a number of career benefits. Individuals can find more suitable job opportunities, go on business trips, or be transferred to other corporate branches. Ease of travel is beneficial to the UK government, as it brings new visitors and tourists. Those that are interested in learning the United Kingdom’s architectural, artistic and historical legacy are able to see them with their own eyes, and the government gains monetary benefits in return.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that participation in the EU presents the UK with many benefits, most of which stem from the trade and cooperation opportunities that it provides. Businesses enjoy trade partnerships and an access to a single market, finding profits larger than staying in a domestic market. Organizations are able to offer their services to a larger demographic and seek perpetual expansion, which remains one of the goals of capitalism.

Within the neoliberal framework most nations of today adopt, guarantees of peace, as well as favorable cooperation agreements can be viewed as favorable. However, the UK must consider the influence of EU on its national sovereignty, and the opportunities for social improvement it provides. The need to provide open access to its market and abide by EU legislation limit United Kingdom’s authority over its own territory, and its people. Furthermore, a continuous expansion of business, and a general focus on companies, instead of the people may be detrimental to the working class. EU is not capable of helping the UK people promote their class interests, or allow them to have more power to make their own lives better.

Bibliography

Bishop, M. (2018). Brexit: making the unpolishable sparkle. [online] SPERI.

Brack, N., Coman, R. and Crespy, A. (2019). Sovereignty conflicts in the European Union. Les Cahiers du Cevipol, [online] N° 4(4), pp.3–30.

Tuck, R. (2016). The Left Case for Brexit. [online] Dissent Magazine.

Verovšek, P. (2020). Book review: The Left Case for Brexit: Reflections on the Current Crisis. [online] LSE BREXIT.

Footnotes

1. Tuck, R. (2016). The Left Case for Brexit. [online] Dissent Magazine. Web.
2. Verovšek, P. (2020). Book review: The Left Case for Brexit: Reflections on the Current Crisis. [online] LSE BREXIT. Web.
3. Bishop, M. (2018). Brexit: making the unpolishable sparkle. [online] SPERI. Web.
4. Brack, N., Coman, R. and Crespy, A. (2019). Sovereignty conflicts in the European Union. Les Cahiers du Cevipol, [online] N° 4(4), pp.3–30. Web.