The Reality Behind British Perceptions of Punishment from the EU Post-Brexit

Post-Brexit, a common narrative in the United Kingdom is that the European Union (EU) is intentionally punishing the UK for its decision to leave. This article aims to explore the underlying reasons for this perception, examining both the historical context and the current reality of the situation.

Understanding the Diversity of British Attitudes

It's important to recognize that there isn't a uniform British attitude towards the aftermath of Brexit. Some individuals believe that the disadvantages of being outside of the EU are some form of punishment because they cannot face the reality that leaving the EU was always going to lead to issues. However, this belief is held by a minority of the population. The majority of Britons who voted in 2016 either didn't vote or now recognize that post-Brexit realities are simply a reflection of the repercussions of leaving the Union.

The Role of Media and Propaganda

Many believe that this perception is fueled by the media, particularly the right-wing and fascist sections. They spread propaganda and lies, which contribute to the misunderstanding and misinformation surrounding the EU and Brexit. It is crucial to distinguish between factual information and media distortions in order to form a clear understanding of the situation.

The Reality of EU Post-Brexit Policies

Despite the media portrayals, the EU does not take punitive measures but rather prioritizes bureaucracy and administrative processes. The notion that the EU intentionally punishes the UK is both naive and disingenuous. The EU's response to the UK's status post-Brexit includes the requirement for third-country status, which has naturally resulted in the loss of certain advantages.

Historical Context and Pre-Brexit Relations

Before Brexit, the UK enjoyed certain privileges and benefits that are no longer accessible. For example, during the pre-Brexit era, the lack of checks on certain goods like oranges led to issues such as horsemeat labeled as beef and cars with higher pollutants. The EU deliberately contrived tests, such as those applied to Dyson vacuum cleaners, to keep certain UK products from competing effectively.

Failure to See Mutual Benefits

There was a misconception that the EU would not want a mutual benefit agreement post-Brexit, but this was clearly not the case. The EU's actions, both in words and deeds, highlighted a lack of willingness to negotiate a fair and beneficial trade agreement. Currently, there is evidence of other countries seeking mutual agreements without such punitive measures. A logical conclusion is that both sides can find common ground and negotiate mutually beneficial trade terms.

The Impact of Bureaucracy and Common Sense

The ongoing border checks and bureaucratic procedures in the UK-EU trade relationship serve more as a reflection of the current situation than a sign of punishment. For instance, the checks on oranges can be more streamlined by recognizing that other EU countries already comply with rules meant for France. The example of Canada and the US offers a practical alternative, where trust and mutual verification systems can significantly reduce delays and increase efficiency.

Conclusion

While it is true that there were justifications for the belief that the EU was treating the UK as a punished nation, these justifications have largely evaporated. The current reality is a mutual suicide pact, characterized by an overly complex and bureaucratic system that neither benefits the EU nor the UK. It is time for both sides to focus on pragmatic solutions and mutual benefit, rather than continuing with outdated and harmful practices.

It is crucial to focus on facts and logic rather than misplaced forms of patriotism or privilege. The true reality is that the UK no longer needs to be punished for Brexit, as the current situation is self-inflicted. A more sensible approach, rooted in mutual trust and cooperation, is the way forward.