Uk Votes Brexit : Huge Global Political Consequences

In the History of the United States, Democrats were always against Free trade and, Republicans were for Free Trade. However

In recent years, it has been increasingly apparent that European Parliament election turnout is on the decline, with just 35.6% of British citizens casting their vote in 2014. This is remarkably low, especially when viewed alongside other national decisions such as the referendum for Britain to leave the European Union, which received a staggering 72.2% turnout. However, this decline was not

Today the Republican party wants to repeal all free trade agreements. This is in contrast with the majority of the general population, in which 59% believe that free trade agreements are good for our nation and 30% believe that they are bad. The Democrats on the other hand support most of the agreements that are around

1. In the past year, we have seen a militant brand of populism take hold in the American political conversation. Nominees from the two major political parties sung, to varying degrees, the glories of economic protectionism. Trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Trans-Pacitic Partnership came under universal attack throughout the election season. Such assaults vilify the progress of globalism. In the Journal of International Business and

The Democratic Party stood on the platform of controlling globalization and bringing jobs back to America, while Republicans highlighted trade reform that specialized jobs in America. Under Obama, Democrats wanted to challenge countries such as China that are taking U.S. jobs and eliminate subsidies to American-based corporations that would entice manufacturers to stay in the U.S. (9). Republicans under Romney took a stance of increasing American exports through the utilization of trade agreements to remove the government from influencing open markets (9). Both parties agree on the need for trade reform, and neither

The issue of whether or not the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union has been debated heavily over the past decade, with the debate heating up even more from the current European Sovereign Debt Crisis. Recent polls of the UK population showed that around half of the UK’s citizens would vote to pull out of the EU if it went to referendum. However, after all of the economic, political, and social advantages of being a member of the EU are considered, it remains clear that leaving the EU is not in the UK’s best interest. Economically, it does not make sense for the UK

“President Trump, premier Wilders, it’s time to get used to these words” (Bregman, 2016). With these words Bregman expresses his concerns about the overwhelming success of populist politicians worldwide. Disapproval of establishment, fed by a strong dislike of the nihilistic style of governance relying on economic growth as the cure-for-all-ills, is fuelling populism movements. Non-populistic parties seem to have no answer to the rising cynicism of the people, and populists are using this to push often empty agendas of xenophobia. What can explain this rise of populism, and how can politicians counter the rise of populist parties without

The outcome of the Brexit referendum in June last year came as a surprise to a lot of people, though surveys showed that the outcome would be close. It was predicted that ‘Remain' would win with a tight majority, yet, politicians underestimated the resentment British citizens had cultivated against the perceived domination of the European Union. Citizens voted to win back sovereignty, but as the recent negotiations show the United Kingdom has won anything but that. This essay analyses how the EU dominates Britain in the divorce negotiations by employing John Scott's theory of structures of domination. Access to the single market is the main incentive the EU offers Britain for accepting their conditions of the Brexit. This characterises the EU as the

Research has shown that “ideology is an important influence on preferences over a wide range of issues, including free trade (Kucik et al. 2016).” “Divided Government and U.S. Trade Policy: Much Ado About Nothing? (Karol 2000),” has asserted the notion that many scholars have looked over the impact that party affiliation has to trade policy.

For the structure of this paper, I will start out by highlighting some key arguments put forward by Brexiters as they relate to Parliamentary sovereignty. Followed by a comprehensive look at Parliamentary and other types of sovereignty and what they imply, followed by a decision as to whether or not the UK will regain power by canceling its membership to the EU.

This report will look at the benefits and issues surrounding the UKs decision to remain as a member state of the European Union (E.U.). Along with the newly elected conservative government, came the announcement that a nationwide referendum would be held, by the end of 2017, in order to determine the British public’s stance on the issue of EU membership.

As soon as the results of the referendum was called the value of the £ had decreased by the most to the rate it was at 1985, evidently causing one of the biggest economical loss in recent British history. Yet, MP’s have demonstrated immense hard work on trying to argue the cause against leaving the EU.

The article “European Populists Who Aped Brexit and Trump Rethink Their Approach” by Stacy Meichtry, Anton Troianovski and Marcus Walker, supports the idea that globalization is an ideology. However, the populist politicians believed this would be a year that they shook up the establishment, instead, their attacks on the European Union brought election losses. This has caused the populist politicians to rethink their positions. Most of Europe’s far-right politicians believe now that their attempt to align themselves with the antiestablishment uprising behind the U.K.’s vote to exit the EU and Trump’s U.S. presidential victory backfired. A far-right National Front parliamentary candidate Hervé de Lépinau, attacked his own party, saying that making a French exit from the euro part of their platform was an absurdity. While the far-right and populist parties is running high, with the economy gaining steam, some voters say it wouldn’t take much for them to switch their support back.

Literature review: In September 2017 Thomas Sampson from The London School of Economics and Political Science wrote a Literature on Brexit. The title of the literature was Brexit: The Economics of International Disintegration. In this literature review I will briefly summarise the literature wrote by Thomas Sampson.

It is precise that we begin by explaining the meaning of the term “Brexit”; it is a portmanteau of the words “Britain” and “Exit”, which was just one of the terms for the results of the 2016 referendum, the other one was “Bremain” (Britain and remain) which was a lot less promoted and controversial. For the 2016 referendum, 52% of the votes went for Britain leaving the European Union, in a poll with 72% of participation, a total of 33.577.342 votes, 17.410.742 for Brexit and 16.577.342 for Britain staying in the European Union (BBC World, 2016). England voted for Brexit, by 53.4% to 46.6%, as did Wales, with Leave getting 52.5% of the vote and Remain 47.5%. Scotland and Northern Ireland both backed staying in the EU. Scotland backed Remain by 62% to 38%, while 55.8% in Northern Ireland voted Remain and 44.2% Leave (Hunt and Wheeler, 2016).