The United Kingdom shocked the world in the summer of 2016 when they decided to leave the European Union, commonly known as Brexit. This event could be a sign of democratic erosion. Recent studies have shown that over the course of the last several decades democratic erosion has become more prevalent. Democratic erosion in such a traditional powerhouse state could have big implications on all democracies, if they aren’t immune to it then weaker democracies seem almost destined to go through democratic erosion. In this post I plan to demonstrate that Brexit is a step towards populism and polarization, which will naturally lead to democratic erosion.
I will start by explaining the events that lead to the eventual Brexit event. On June 23, 2016 a referendum was held to decide whether that United Kingdom should leave the European Union. 30 million people voted and leave won by 51.9 percent to 48.1 percent. The European Union is a club of 28 European Countries. These countries formed this group after World War II and are given special privileges like a free trade market between the countries.[i] They have their own currency and Parliament that the United Kingdom does not use. One of the major issues that lead to Brexit is immigration.
Immigration appears in the form of the Schengen Agreement. The Schengen Agreement is an agreement between 22 members of the European Union to remove border checks that way European citizens can move freely in Europe. The United Kingdom is not a part of the agreement and requires everyone that is not a countryman of the United Kingdom to go through costumes.[ii] The United Kingdom has gotten stricter in the past couples of years with the Syrian refugee crises and the acceptance of some of the poorer European countries into the European Union. These two events are not the only reason for the United Kingdom leaving the European Union, but it has become one of the faces of Brexit.
Populism is a natural indicator for democratic erosion because it pulls at the very foundation of what democracies are made of. One part of what makes a democracy a democracy is the natural freedoms that are given to its citizens. When populist movements show up they can lead to radical leaders that can change these rights of people in the country. These right changes can lead to less freedoms in the country and therefore democratic erosion. Populism towards the right side of the spectrum is generally considered to be more accepted because world players can still have economic liberalization.[iii] UKIP is politically right, but it gets fuzzy when it comes to the economic side of things. This may be why Brexit was received with such negative responses by other nations.
This ant immigration sentiment is a sign that populism is appearing in the United Kingdom. Populism creates an us versus them mentality and that is exactly what UKIP used to fuel their campaign in the United Kingdom to have Brexit occur. UKIP created two separate versions of this separatist view. One is the United Kingdom versus the European Union, which was caused through the exclusion of them in the Schengen Agreement and their difference in currency. This was a natural barrier that left the United Kingdom feeling as if they were only partially apart of the Union. The other version was one of nationalism. The United Kingdom’s citizens versus immigrants. UKIP believed that immigrants were ruining the national identity of their Kingdom. All together this form of politics begins to look a lot like populism which is a natural indicator of democratic erosion.
Polarization is also an indicator that a democracy is eroding. Polarization is the natural split between groups based on their interests and opinions. Polarization is especially devastating in a two-party system with a legend amount of veto players.[iv] The United Kingdom has two main parties in the Labor party and the Conservative party. These two parties are naturally polarized based on them being on opposite sides of the political spectrum. UKIP however was a third party that had been gaining support. The polarization between the two main parties lead to them being able to suit to the needs of the people and political gridlock. This allowed for UKIP to rally a populist movement to pass the agenda of Brexit. If populism allows for democratic erosion and polarization makes populism possible, then polarization also lead to democratic erosion.
Brexit is an alarming sign that democratic erosion is occurring in the United Kingdom. The rise of UKIP was based off a populist movement that was based off nationalism and immigration. This populism leads to the insecurity in the rights of citizens and therefore questions the power of the democracy. This populism is only made possible through polarization. The inability for the United Kingdom’s two main parties to appeal to the citizens through action and legislation caused a crack to form in the people’s trust of democracy. This crack was filled with the populist movement of Brexit. If one of the world’s premier powerhouses can fall to democratic erosion, then there should be a major concern in other countries about democratic stability. Hopefully these other countries can learn through the United Kingdom’s mistakes and keep polarization and populism out of their countries.
Work Cited
[i] Cox, Nicky. “This Is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 26 Sept. 2017, www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to-explain-to-your-child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html.
[ii] “Schengen: Controversial EU Free Movement Deal Explained.” BBC News, BBC, 24 Apr. 2016, www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-13194723.
[iii] Weyland, Kurt. “The Threat from the Populist Left.” Journal of Democracy, vol. 24, no. 3, 2013, pp. 18–32., doi:10.1353/jod.2013.0045.
[iv] Sunstein, Cass R. Going to Extremes: How like Minds Unite and Divide. Oxford University Press, 2011.
You provide interesting insight into the underlying themes motivating the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, but I am failing to understand why this necessarily implies democratic erosion is occurring. Though the decision is largely unpopular in the global community, you said yourself that “30 million people voted and leave won by 51.9 percent to 48.1 percent.” What is democracy if not embracing the will of the governed? Anti-immigration sentiments, though potentially problematic in a variety of areas, does not seem like evidence of democratic erosion to me. I also am struggling to understand which rights of the UK citizens are being threatened here. If anything, wouldn’t it be more threatening to see the UK stay in the EU, in spite of the referendum?
I think you did an excellent job at identifying two key aspects of Brexit that are commonly linked with democratic erosion, populism and polarization, and I agree that they were foundational in the UK’s decision to leave the EU. However, I question your claim that populism and polarization “will naturally lead to democratic erosion.” I think in some cases, it definitely does lead to democratic erosion. For example, I wrote about the Kenyan presidential election where both candidates were populists, and this resulted in a rigged, unfair election where groups were so polarized that it turned to extreme violence. While in this case, you can see how populism and polarization did lead to tangible democratic erosion, I would argue that in the case of Brexit, it didn’t immediately point to signs of democracy being undermined or eroded. However, Brexit was fairly recent, and only time will tell the fate of the UK’s democracy.
Before deciding what country to write about I came across an article about the Brexit and at the time didn’t see it as a case of democratic erosion. However, after reading your very analytical post it is clear why it is in fact a case of democratic erosion. The UK is one of the oldest and most prominent examples of democracy so it is unfortunate that it’s democratic values are being threatened. Nevertheless, I believe if the nation’s people were to take a step back and realize what you do, that populism is just a few steps away from erosion, then the UK’s democratic ideals might just stand a chance.
I think it is very interesting that Britain decided to leave the EU. Making a decision based on a 3% difference in voting will result in much controversy. I agree that immigration has “become the face” of Brexit. The EU and the UK’s political agendas on immigration are not compatible, which resulted in the UK leaving. It will be interesting to see how this will impact the UK’s economy in the future, as this happened recently. I also liked how you related Brexit to populism. It is an interesting take that I think you adequately supported.