Those who voted Leave in the Brexit referendum believed that they were doing so in order to restore the UK's sovereignty and to end the immigration crisis. The outcome of the vote will actually do very little to achieve these aims.

Nigel Farage of the United Kingdom Independence Party has referred to the referendum that has narrowly seen Britons voting to leave the European Union as marking Britain’s ‘Independence Day’. Brexit was promoted to a significant extent on the premise that the European Union is responsible for Britain’s multiculturalism, and that immigration is threatening the British way of life. There is a certain euphoria resulting from the belief that this signifies the start of a British renascence. There are some serious flaws in these arguments.

Firstly, Britain’s problems with immigration and multiculturalism do not primarily arise from EU membership. According to Britain’s National Office of Statistics: ‘624,000 people immigrated to the UK in the year ending September 2014, a statistically significant increase from 530,000 in the previous 12 months. There were statistically significant increases for immigration of non-EU citizens (up 49,000 to 292,000) and EU (non-British) citizens (up 43,000 to 251,000)’. Most of Britain’s immigrants have never come from the EU. While Britain will see a downturn in immigrants from Spain, Poland, Italy, etc., they will not see any such downturn from African and Asian states resulting from Brexit.

Brexit was promoted on the basis of returning to British independence. What does ‘independence’ actually mean? Independence from whom and for whom? Arguably Britain has not been independent, that is to say the British state has not had sovereign power to make policy based solely on British interests, since the creation of the Bank of England in 1694. Nigel Farage mentioned that Brexit was a vote against the big merchant banks and corporations. It is true enough that these interests wanted Britain to remain in the EU. But how is the power of the financial institutions over the UK going to be diminished an iota by leaving the EU? Britain will still be borrowing from international banks. Britain will still be trading via the world trade system facilitated by the banks. Brexit does not mean that Britain will be issuing its own state credit, or that she will be trading via barter, outside the international financial system. Not even the UKIP has a financial policy which includes banking reform: it is based on tax reform and decreasing overseas aid. Mr Farage even said in his victory speech concerning the Brexit that Britain will be ‘global’. How does such a sentiment square with the ‘independence’ name of his own party? The same situation pertains to the other ‘Eurosceptic’ parties that are now demanding that their nations have a referendum on EU membership. Generally, these parties, so-called ‘Right-wing’, believe in market economies and global trade.

Perhaps there are visions of Britain returning to the old trading preferences of the Commonwealth? This was the ideal of the National Front when it had its heyday in Britain during the 1970s; building a bloc of the White Dominions which would resist international finance. The opportunity for that has long since passed. New Zealand, Australia, and Canada have now succumbed to globalist trading arrangements such as the TTPA, and to free trade with China and other expanding Asian economies which are themselves part of the international financial system.

What of the other major area of ‘independence’, foreign policy? Britain remains in the United Nations Organisation, an international version of the EU’s bureaucracy. Britain is the fifth-largest financial contributor to the UN, providing 5% of the UN’s annual budget and 6.7% of its peacekeeping budget for 2015 (see ‘Assessment of member states’ budgets to the U. N. regular budget for 2015’; and ‘Financing peacekeeping’).

Britain is the fourth-largest contributor to the NATO budget, at 10.5%. Britain is a part of this global military organisation, along with the EU states and many others, for the purpose of maintaining a ‘new world order’ based upon US hegemony. However, of greater importance than the financial contributions to NATO is Britain’s subservience to globalist interests.

In conclusion, Brexit has not achieved anything to establish Britain as a sovereign state, to rescue Britain from the multiculturalist quagmire, or to pursue sovereign policies in economics, finance, and foreign policy. She will be searching for markets within the same globalist system, paying debts to the same international banks, and sending troops according to globalist requirements. There is the added prospect of Scotland withdrawing from the UK to remain attached to the EU. Sinn Fein has also commented that they will demand that Northern Ireland unite with Eire to remain in the EU. In that event, Ulsterman will react, with the prospect of a very bloody civil war. The prospect now is that there will be no UK, for good or ill.

For the sake of some savings in relation to the EU budget by limiting the intake of fellow European immigrants, Britain has not gained anything for her independence or for her cultural integrity. What has been achieved is to give Britons the illusion of freedom and revival.

Revolution from Above

In Revolution from Above, Dr. Bolton demonstrates that the supposed rivalry between Marxist-inspired movements and capitalism has always been an illusion. Marxism, Communism and liberalism have been and continue to be exploited by the forces of international capitalism to further their global agenda, despite their surface disagreements. Dr. Bolton shows that the ultimate goal of […]

Additional images:

Product Thumbnail Product Thumbnail Product Thumbnail

Price: $27.00

Buy Now

About The Author

Profile photo of Kerry Bolton

Kerry Bolton holds doctorates in Historical Theology and Theology; Ph.D. (Hist. Th.), Th.D. as well as in other areas. He is a contributing writer for The Foreign Policy Journal, and a Fellow of the Academy of Social and Political Research in Greece. His papers and articles have been published by both scholarly and popular media, including the International Journal of Social Economics; Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies; Geopolitika; World Affairs; India Quarterly; and The Initiate: Journal of Traditional Studies. His work has been translated into Russian, Vietnamese, Italian, Czech, Latvian, Farsi and French. Arktos has published his book, Revolution from Above: Manufacturing ‘Dissent’ in the New World Order, which is about the secret collusion between the forces of Communism and Wall Street during the years when it was supposed that they were bitter rivals.

  • Stone

    While it’s true that the most immediate practical achievements do not amount to much, I think Brexit had a great symbolic value for nationalist movements everywhere.

    Britons may not yet be ready or free to address the real issues (racial displacement, subservience to the globalist interests etc), however, they have shown the world that the native people of a country can resist the unrelenting propaganda efforts of the establishment, overcoming years or decades of manipulation, insults and aggressions of every kind, and have their voice heard.

    In itself, this result doesn’t solve anything; but it IS inspiring, and encouraging. And morale is a huge factor in any war.

    Brexit is not what most of us would wish it to be; but there is reason to hope it will be the butterfly that flaps its wings at just the right time to cause a hurricane within the next 10 years.

  • Cobbett

    I voted Leave because I detest the EU…but no, we’ll be no more independent in real terms than if we were in the EU.

  • You are right the vote will change little. This article from the UK Financial Times indicates that some are already working out how to minimise even that little change: It will be very interesting to see what happens when our people realise that nothing they voted to get will happen. Certainly an education for them!

  • MartinA

    What has changed is that now the english can hold their rulers accountable. Brexit has removed one layer of complexity. Preferably Scotland will leave the UK and further uncomplicate things. Normal people do not have the time nor the inclination to untangle the web of complexity in which todays rulers hide themselves. Anything that decreases complexity is a good change. The English did a very good thing with Brexit!

  • Laguna Beach Fogey

    Perhaps, but it’s a start.


    Very good article and with well built analysis.
    What we see now unfolding in Britain is a potical cataclysm where the Parties are re-organizing themselves. Labour is ousting (trying too neverthless) Corbyn and the hard Left for the sake to establish a new RightLabour a la Tony Blair.
    The Tory gathers around “stayers” and will eventually form a Pact with RightLabour and Liberals to minimize the influence from UKIP. The Brexit forefronters will not have any success in the Establishment.

    I am not even sure if they ever will leave EU.

    If the british people voted for the stop of massimmigration of illiterate Africans and Arabs they will be disappointed. Grooming, mass-rape and gang violence will continue in Britain and elsewhere in Europe.

    But Brexit is more than Immigration and stupid regulations.
    There is so much more on stake.
    So in the end the Referendum have just acomplished that the Globalists, the Hidden Hand and the Bilderbergers close their ranks and will act behind the curtains from now.
    They have got a hefty warning from the people – in the future people will have no right to vote on issues of strategic importance.