What follows is my personal view.
The EU Referendum poll has been done the result is final and those on the losing side are bound to feel aggrieved. That is democracy.
It appears that many people are conflating Europe with the EU Project. To me they are quite separate.
Europe = countries within the EU project plus the other countries outside the EU project, including the UK. All of these countries have distinctive cultures, peoples, languages, geographies, foods etc. I would have added wines & beers but as I no longer drink any alcohol they are irrelevant. Long may those unique qualities exist as it makes traveling so interesting. European countries should continue to trade and within reason allow freedom of movement between them.
EU Project = The political project (the Commission, the Parliament, the Courts etc) based in Brussels, Strasbourg and elsewhere that has political, legal and fiscal harmonisation as its core raison d'etre.
My decision to leave the EU Project was based on 80% dislike of the EU Project telling us what we can and can't do and 20% on economics. For me, and many others, Brexit is about leaving the EU Project not about leaving Europe, which is only 20 miles away.
Immigration had nothing to do with my decision. I am in a secure well paid and very interesting job that allows me to travel extensively around the world. I love the idea of multiculturalism and have students from over 50 countries scattered across every continent (except Antarctica) on my 2nd year undergraduate Finance course with whom I have many interesting and varied discussions. For all of my friends immigration is seen as a huge benefit to the UK and many friends run large businesses that depend on immigrants for their language skills and knowledge of the business systems and networks in their countries to help open doors to trade. Though for many other people who may be poorly educated and low paid to lose their jobs to cheaper East European labour I can see that immigration would be an issue. Our generous welfare system and relatively high minimum wage and thriving "black market" all without identity papers is clearly a massive magnet to people from elsewhere. A points based system that allows freedom of movement if one has the appropriate skills seems a pretty good pragmatic solution to dealing with uncontrolled immigration. We have been prevented from implementing such by the EU Project. Maybe we should also introduce identity cards for access to all public services. Though I think that would go down like a lead balloon with many Brits having given them up after WW2.
I have visited and worked in over 120 countries including many in South America, Africa, Australasia, Middle East, Russia and the Far East as well as all but one European country (Latvia). I was toting them up during the opening ceremony of the Olympics in London in 2012, and lost count after 122. Clearly I have been to far more countries than exist in Europe. Nowhere that I have been, outside of Europe, is there any sort of project that says a dominant power can dictate laws and terms of existence to the other countries. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was set up to eliminate barriers to trade and investment between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) with around fifteen members - its aims include accelerating economic growth, social progress and socio-cultural evolution among its members, alongside protection of regional stability as well as providing a mechanism for member countries to resolve differences peacefully. There is also a trade agreement in South America but its acronym and name escapes me at the moment. None of the countries within these organisations has abrogated their laws or fiscal systems to a dominant country or project. Would the USA abrogate its law making to Mexico? Would Australia give up the AUS$ for the Yuan? It is silly to even ask the questions. Clearly if countries want to trade they have to ensure their products meet the requirements of the country they want to trade with but they have not turned their law making over to another country. And the use of a common currency, e.g. US$, might facilitiate trade. But no other country, apart from Zimbabwe that I'm aware of, has given up their own currency. Even Zimbabwe has adopted a basket of currencies. Trade and free movement between these groups is pretty easy and long may those continue. That is what we want. All of the countries outside of Europe look at the EU Project as being one of the most bizarre aspects of Europe and can't understand why we would give up our sovereignty to Germany.
Britain has always had a tetchy relationship with the EU. We joined a Common Market in 1973. By the way de Gaulle was right - we should never have joined, but we did. Since then our relationship has been one of trying to maintain our distinctive being and not be subjected to political, legal and fiscal union. We had no say over the Maastricht or Lisbon Treaties. This referendum was the first time in over 40 years that the people of the UK have had a chance to have a say in the matter and it doesn't surprise me that there was this backlash. A little history is required. Since Magna Carta in 1215 the UK has had a charter of liberty and political rights. This was supplemented by parliamentary democracy from about 1720 when Walpole became our first Prime Minister and power was removed from the Monarch. Sweden also set up a parliamentary system about the same time. This is quite unlike a presidential system shared by most of our European counterparts who, for much of the time, suffered under one form of dictatorship or another. So our histories are totally different and this largely informs the reasons why the UK has always been EU sceptic and perhaps why European countries have embraced political and fiscal union.
But the EU project has failed. It has caused massive unemployment to the youth across Europe, particularly Southern Europe. The Euro has been a disaster especially for the weaker countries. Germany, in particularly, has just shifted all of its debt to poor countries like Greece who are unable to pay it back because they don't produce anything much worthwhile. The whole project has been driven by Germany and to a lesser extent France into the ground. Even the EU commissioners are beginning to realise this but they seem totally focussed on the original goals and despite many attempts by the UK to alter course they do not want to listen. Perhaps it will take a Frexit to finally get them to change their minds. But a Brexit or a Frexit or any other country exit is not to be feared. It is an opportunity to improve a failed system.
If the young feel so aggrieved why didn't they vote? Apparently the turnout amongst the young was abysmally low compared to other demographics, though I can't find the concrete proof of this. However, amongst my own students, who are of voting age and elligible to vote, i.e. not overseas students, the level of interest in this referendum was 10% could be bothered, based on a sample of over 300. The other 90% were not interested or didn't want to understand or engage despite my many efforts to enthuse them of the arguments from both sides. This is from students at one of the top universities in Europe.
Other countries within the EU Project, who are even more sceptical than the UK, have also realised this and hence the reason EU scepticism is on the rise across Europe. So it will not surprise me if other countries don't follow the UK out of the EU Project. EU scepticism is not about racism it is about regaining control and have the ability for each country to make their own laws that suit their particular circumstances.
So to all the young people Brexit is not about removing ourselves from the global community. Far from it. It is about re-engaging with the global community, regaining our sovereignty and trading with the whole world not just the other 27 European countries. Trade will bring wealth and jobs. What is there to fear in that?
