It has been a bit more three weeks now since the referendum that resulted in the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union took place. The Brexit, as it is commonly known, is not effective yet; it will be implemented soon, though since a prime Minister was designated few days ago. On the internet petitions calling for a new referendum coming mainly from British citizens who regret their votes in favour of the Brexit has been circulating since the first hours the referendum results had been released. In Britain, many are those who, a day after the referendum, thought that their vote would have been different had they been more informed about what the EU really is and what it involves.
Let’s be clear and sincere on the issue. Most people who voted against the European Union did so mainly because of immigration. The quite well organised campaign presenting immigration in the United Kingdom as facilitated and empowered by the European Union was undoubtedly decisive in the choice most British made on the voting day. Many are those in Britain who attribute the difficulties they face with in their everyday lives to the presence of immigrants. The lack of border control within the Euro Zone is according to them the reason why immigrants can easily enter the country, take jobs and council houses that should normally be reserved to British first and only.
But what is the veracity and truth of all these ideas of immigration being an inconvenience to the UK? There is no doubt that all this is nothing more than a myth. Concretely speaking it is important to first of all to be reminded that the birth rate of the UK is so low that immigration is a necessity to maintain and ensure the renewal of new generations.
If most politicians in favour of Brexit pointed out the presence of large Eastern European communities to justify scepticism towards the EU, it is also important to underline that due to religious similarities and the colour of their skin, the East European community is, nonetheless, an easy blending community that in no way threatens Britain’s cultural landscape.
Secondly; let us not forget that some members of the Royal family have some East European blood in their veins. The current Queen’s husband -Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh- is to some extent not really West European, given the fact that he was born in Greece from a Greek family and only converted to Anglicanism later so that he could marry Queen Elizabeth II. A more accurate study and analysis of the comments made by Brexiters a few days before the vote reveals that immigration, not from Eastern Europe but clearly from Asia and Africa is what seemed to be the problem for the racists advocating for an exit, so as to better control British borders against immigration.
What these racists, and probably racialists and white supremacists do not understand is that Britain would have never become “Great” and also consequently “Great Britain”, had it not been for its different colonies. What a selfish behaviour it is, indeed, to loot remote countries for centuries and not expect to have the now deprived people coming and knocking at your door!
Had Africa and Asia not been denuded of their wealth for centuries, no massive waves of immigration from Africa towards Western countries would have ever taken place.
Besides, if it appears to be effective, the departure of the United Kingdom from the European Union might undoubtedly announce some new referendums likely to take place in Scotland, Northern Ireland or again Wales. Following the results of the referendum, Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon, made it clear that a new referendum on Scotland’s being part of the United Kingdom was likely to happen after the “No” expressed by England to the EU. No need to say that if that happens, the racists and racialists white supremacists would have succeeded in doing one thing which is through racism making Great Britain a little Britain.