Although Brexit poses serious challenges to Britain’s short-to-medium term economic health, democracy demands that it go ahead.
Others disagree. In Britain, a rising chorus of voices is calling on Prime Minister Theresa May to reverse course and cancel the U.K.’s looming exit from the European Union.
One such voice is that of New York Magazine’s Jonah Shepp, who claims, “The British public has soured on the idea of Brexit, or is at least unsure whether it’s a good idea.” Shepp continues, “It is abundantly clear that the economic effects would be painful to disastrous. Plus, Brexit requires the negotiation and rewriting of countless laws and regulations, while not-Brexit requires no changes at all.”
According to Shepp, this malaise engenders a simple response: “Why not just give up on Brexit?”
Again, it’s important to note that Shepp’s argument is not totally fallacious.
As the Brexit negotiations struggle to advance, it seems increasingly unlikely that Britain will be able to agree to a mutually beneficial deal with its European partners. This concern is also fueled by the fact that E.U. leaders seem determined to punish Britain for leaving their union, and thus deter other nations from making the same mistake.
Nevertheless, Britain cannot cancel Brexit.
To do so would be to betray the most fundamental principle of democracy: political deference to a popular vote. In this case, voters in the June 2016 referendum answered the question: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”
The answer given by the British people to that question was unambiguous; by a margin of nearly 1.3 million votes or 51.9 percent to 48.1 percent, voters said they wanted to leave. Casting their ballots, these voters were offered no caveats or qualifications, they were simply asked whether they wanted to leave or remain in the European Union. A clear majority said leave.
Regardless of the popular pro-remainer claim that leave voters were misled, the vote is done and the die is now cast. Correspondingly, British politicians must now support the rendered verdict of the people. To do otherwise would be to commit a grave affront to British parliamentary democracy and to deplete Britons’ trust in their system of government.
Still, remainers have one point in their favor: Beyond the restoration of British sovereignty, Brexit need not take a specific shape. As Prime Minister May seeks the best possible deal to maximize U.K. interests, she should buck Brexit hardliners who oppose offering concessions to E.U. negotiators. May’s government should also be willing to negotiate on issues such as E.U.-to-U.K. immigration and transitional U.K. financial support for E.U. projects.
That course is the only way to match respect for Britain’s electorate, alongside the pursuit of their better economic future.
