Brexit!
The British exit from the European Union. It's a thing that's happening – or maybe not. Or maybe the United Kingdom is falling apart. There's a lot going on, so let's talk about Brexit, briefly. First: How'd we get here? In the UK, voters for UKIP—the UK Independence Party—
grew in number over the last few elections. Now, because the United Kingdom uses a terrible
first-past-the-post voting system, UKIP, rather than getting a proportional
number of seats in Parliament, largely drained votes from the Conservative Party. So, in the 2015 election, Conservatives promised to hold
an in-or-out referendum on the EU if they won, presumably to try and sway UKIP voters to their side. The Conservatives did win, in what was, by the way,
the most unrepresentative election in UK history— —thanks again First Past the Post,
click here for more details— and the promised referendum was scheduled. With huge voter turnout, Brexit won 52 to 48. So what happens next? Well, the EU has a law called Article 50
saying countries can exit. Basically it's a "press here to leave" button. But the Conservative Prime Minister who promised
upon Brexit victory to press it immediately, instead resigned immediately,
leaving the UK politically doing nothing. There was talk of a second Brexit— "No-but-seriously-it-might-actually-happen-if-you-vote-for-it-this-one-is-legally-binding-Referendum", or re-electing Parliament. But then the new UK Prime Minister was appointed
and she said that wouldn't happen. Presumably the UK Parliament
now needs to pass a "Yes we are really pressing the Brexit button law", but they seem to be in no rush. Meanwhile the EU wants the UK to get on with it,
but the UK wants to pre-decide all the details of what an independent
UK's relationship with the EU would look like, but the EU doesn't want to talk
until the UK actually leaves. Not surprising because talking before gives negotiating
advantage to the UK, and talking after to the EU, and since the EU can't force the UK to press the button, there's a sort of negotiating stalemate. Finally, because there's really
no procedure for anything, the only correct answer to
"What happens next?" is... "Who knows!" We are standing in a fog with naught
but speculation, so... Speculation time! Acting as a Brexit bookie, I'm putting 15% odds
on the chance of Maximum Brexit occurring, where the UK is a fully independent nation, with total
control over her trade deals and immigration and laws. The UK is to the EU as Brazil is to the EU:
just another country. If that probability seems low, what with
the new pro-Brexit Prime Minister, and with the required going against
the will of the people and all, here's my reasoning why.
Speculation the 1st: The Conservatives didn't want the UK
to really leave the EU. Though they campaigned for the referendum,
they were officially neutral on the issue, and, I suspect, privately against. If you think the Conservatives are
the more business friendly party, the UK leaving the EU would be
bad news for many businesses that prefer larger economic blocs – like banks. Pre-2015 election,
the Conservatives probably thought citizens wouldn't really vote for Brexit,
so they could safely gamble to sway UKIP voters, but again – surprise! – 52 to 48. Even the new prime minister,
who's all "Brexit means Brexit", was against it before she got her current job.
Speculation the 2nd: Some Brexiteers didn't really want to win either.
The Brexit campaign admitted after winning, they have zero plans what to do, which sounds a lot like
"We never planned to win." The leadership of UKIP resigned – an odd choice on
what should be a theoretical crowning moment of glory, and after the Conservative Prime Minister resigned, the
most prominent Brexiteers didn't want to take the job. Funny, that. Also interesting to note:
the referendum was set up to have zero legal power, something all the parties agreed on before hand. It was essentially an opinion poll,
though not at all marketed that way to voters. All this is to speculate the majority of
people in power do not want Brexit to happen. To be clear, while governments could just totally
ignore the vote and still be technically correct, there's no way that doesn't look
horrifically undemocratic. But, while Brexit was sold on the idea
of a stronger independent Britain, the international markets and national
economy have strongly disagreed, and the geography of the vote have indicated
it might not be the whole of Britain leaving. After the vote, Scotland immediately said that
if the UK leaves the EU, Scotland isn't coming. She voted to stay, so she will. If maximum Brexit occurs, I put 97% odds
on Scotland leaving the UK and staying with the EU. Add to that, if Scotland leaves, I give 45% odds
of Northern Ireland leaving as well, rejoining Ireland Ireland. And, crazy as it sounds,
if Scotland and Northern Ireland leave, I'll actually put 5% odds
on London leaving England and becoming an independent city-state in the EU,
which would be kind of awesome, because who doesn't love city-states? This would leave England and Wales on their own, and of course while it's possible they'd do just fine –
there are plenty of comparable independent nations – the international markets have already said
"do not want" to just the UK leaving as a whole, so I wouldn't bet on it being a rosy future, and it's probably not something many Brexit voters
would have picked were it on the referendum. But even ignoring the breakup of the Union,
when thinking about the likelihood of Maximum Brexit, on one side are the majority of people
who voted for it, and on the other side are
the businesses and the politicians, even, I speculate,
many who pretend to be for it. The politics of power here is why
I give such low odds to maximum Brexit, and why I give 30% odds to the second option:
literally, nothing happens. The UK government plays the stalling game forever,
pretending to move forward while doing nothing. This politically tumultuous time becomes
a trivia fact for a future video about how the UK has been in the process
of "leaving" the EU for a hundred years, like when countries sometimes discover
they're technically still at war because there's an old declaration they forgot to annul. It's not a great outcome, because governments and
businesses and people don't like uncertainty, but never underestimate the human ability to
procrastinate on paperwork. Even Miss "Brexit means Brexit"
is also Miss "Mustn't be too hasty" about actually pressing the Article 50 button. But the last option I think is the most likely: 55% odds on a non-Brexit Brexit. The European Union has many asterisks
and layers to her membership. The UK could leave the European Union, slide over into the European Economic Area,
and be technically correct that she's left the EU. Actually, before this whole brouhaha,
the UK had arranged a deal with the EU to become more like an EEA member,
that was dropped once the referendum started, but that deal is lying on a table somewhere...
(just saying) This would be the most pure compromise,
leaving both sides... unhappy. Nothing Brexit voters actually
cared about would change: Immigration, EU membership fees and binding EU laws,
all this would remain the same. The only thing different would be the UK giving up
all her representatives in the EU Parliament, so she would have zero influence on EU law
she would still have to follow, which is not something pro-EU voters
probably wanted either. But nonetheless, I give the greatest odds
of this happening because nothing would change for businesses,
making them happy, and for politicians it's a face-saving maneuver
to have "listened to the people" and to "leave" while doing neither and possibly avoiding
the breakup of the United Kingdom. Who wants to be prime minister during that? In conclusion: None of these outcomes are clean wins. The first is very probably the end of the United Kingdom, and goes against what seems to be
economic self-interest – but maybe not, who knows? – and the other to go against, like, the idea of democracy. The UK stands at a path that splits into many futures. Maybe the EU burns herself to the ground
due to all her problems, and "Wales-gland" rises from the ashes
a mighty phoenix. Maybe the UK gets the worst of everything;
maybe literally nothing changes. Which leads where? Which is the best?
It's impossible to know. The UK can only stand in the fog,
speculate, and pick a path. Good luck, United Kingdom,
whatever you choose to do. This video is brought to you in part by Squarespace. Do you want to make a website explaining
to the UK government in detail what they need to do about Brexit and why?
Then Squarespace is the place to go. No one lets you build a website faster
and easier than them. You don't need to know how to use
complicated HTML code, you can just use their drag and drop tools
and make it happen. It's what i use to run my websites
and I'm a big fan. They take out all the hard parts of making a website
and just leave the fun parts for you. You can get a 10% discount at Squarespace
when you go to squarespace.com/grey
to let them know that you came from this channel. Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen.
Place your bets.
I put 55% on the British and the Japanese swapping islands.
Just for the record, the EU referendum wasn't binding because binding referendums are unconstitutional in UK law.
Past parliaments can't overrule future ones, so since a referendum result is a past parliament instructing a future one to do a thing, the future parliament technically has the right to completely ignore it. Instead, we have to use the threat of democracy throwing out the government to enforce it instead.
We don't have many things that are 100% unconstitutional, being a country without a written constitution, but that is one of them.
Here is a good video on brexit that doesnt take any sides (that i am aware of) it was done before the referendum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8xdCFwng_k
Let's be realistic here. Even if Northern Ireland were to leave the UK to stay in the EU, it would sooner be an independent nation than join the Republic.
Is the YT comment section full of Americans or do Brexiteers really speak like that?
He didn't even take a side, why was YouTube so angry at him
Man, I know Grey is insanely popular on reddit and it may be considered blasphemous to criticise him, but there are some things he says that irk me or are just plain wrong.
Firstly, his massive beef with FPTP voting system. ok we get it, it's far from perfect, but what is? The advantage of our system which he never mentions in his videos is that more often than not, it creates a majority government. Which is more likely to get stuff done. Also we had a referendum on AV voting and opted to keep the system we had, showing that a) it works for us and b) the degree of democratic significance in it doesn't matter as much to the average British person as it does to some anglophiliac American.
Secondly, theres so many political intracasies he doesn't understand.
I like Greys videos for the most part but I think his tendencies to simplify things lead to factual inaccuracies. Also, he knows a lot about Britain hence all the videos, but sometimes I question if he really understands it.
To be honest I think the 15% total brexit will happen and I only give a very small chance that Scotland leaves the UK.
I also think that the relation between UK and the EU is not going to be good. That's my prediction anyway, who knows what will happen.
Shit, Free City State of London sounds awesome as fuck, but it's unlikely to happen.