Content Warning: This article includes discussions of bigotry, suffering and violence.

This article was written in order to allow me to share my viewpoints regarding ‘Brexit’, and to provide exposure to perspectives that may differ from those that are more commonly shared. It is entirely composed of my own opinion and should not be interpreted as an absolute source of truth, the perspective of every Anarchist, or even the perspective of Anarchists in general. This article is undoubtedly biased by my opinion, but you have my personal assurances that I have made conscious efforts to avoid unintentionally spreading misinformation. I hope that this article will provide some interesting perspectives or arguments that may be of benefit to you in forming your own, unique opinions, and I encourage you to perform your own research on the subject outside of this article in order to better develop your understanding of the issue.

‘Brexit’ is the term used to describe the United Kingdom’s planned withdrawal from the European Union, a political and economic union of mostly European member-states. Some prior knowledge of Brexit and related subjects will be required to understand the events, terminology, individuals and organisations that will be used and referenced throughout this article; I have included resources for the attainment of such knowledge in the ‘Sources and Resources’ section of the article. A prior understanding of Anarchism would also be beneficial, but I have made an attempt to minimise the necessity of such understanding in order to ensure that this article is accessible to people, who do not necessarily have, or have had, any significant exposure to Anarchist beliefs, perspectives or movements. In this article, I intend to first express my concerns regarding different issues that Brexit, and the campaigns surrounding it, have presented, and continue to present, and shall conclude with my more personal opinions surrounding these issues, as well as how I think that such issues should be addressed alongside the issue of Brexit itself.

I will first address one of the chief viewpoints that have been expressed by some Anarchists, as well as a few people with other political ideologies. This viewpoint holds that Brexit is an opportunity to undermine and reduce the authority of the European Union, and to provide the British people with a greater degree of influence over their own governance. I do not believe that Brexit will be sufficiently effective in undermining the state authority of the European Union and other related organisations to justify the adverse effects that will impact the people; a departure from the European Union does not represent any real escape from bureaucracy, and, although I understand the argument that the people of the United Kingdom may be better able to influence the British, as opposed to European, parliament, the power to make social decisions and regulations, and the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence to defend such decisions and regulations will still be held by a powerful minority; Brexit does not represent a distribution of power to the people, but rather the transport of some degree of power from Brussels to London. It could also be argued that the withdrawal from the European Union would not actually significantly reduce its control over British politics; if the United Kingdom is to remain an important trading-partner with the European Union, it will likely have to concede to many of their demands. This can be seen, at the time of writing, in the current negotiations, as Theresa May’s Government has been forced to pursue and negotiate the creation of a backstop to the Irish border by the European Union, despite the fact that the majority of the British Parliament rejects such a backstop and largely voted against Theresa May’s negotiated deal with the EU, defeating it with 230 votes, as a result of it. Theresa May, at the time of writing, has now stated that she will try to negotiate a deal that changes the backstop to be more acceptable to the British Parliament, but members of the European Union are insisting that such a deal is impossible, and many within the British Parliament state that such changes would be inefficient, and that a total removal of the backstop from the deal is required. Even if the UK somehow avoids the influence of the union, it may not actually cause any significant change in the nature of the laws and policies that it adopts; although the United Kingdom is, indeed, the most outvoted Member State in the European Council, it has voted in favour of 97% of the European laws that were adopted during the past 12 years.

My chief concern regarding the United Kingdom’s planned withdrawal from the European Union is how the adverse economic effects will impact the people of the United Kingdom. Some people may claim that the reduction in migration that would be made possible by Brexit would result in a benefit to the United Kingdom’s economy and people as the result of the decrease of competition between native and migrant workers, and a decrease in the expenditure upon benefits for immigrants. Both of these supposed benefits are unfounded, and I believe that they can be directly attributed to the nationalistic tendencies that have been prevalent amongst those campaigning in favour of Brexit, as I will discuss later; the ‘Migration Advisory Committee’ has conclude that immigration has only a minimal impact on the employment and earnings of British workers, and the research by the ‘University College London’ concluded that European immigrants paid more in taxes than they received in benefits, positively contributing to the economy. As an anarchist, I care little about how businesses and capitalists will be adversely impacted by the economic issues of Brexit, but I am heavily concerned about how such issues may impact the well-being and living-standards of people, irrespective of their nationality. The value of the Pound Sterling, the currency of the United Kingdom, has already suffered devaluations in response to events relating to Brexit, perhaps most notably in response to the results of the General Referendum, as a result of which the Pound Sterling reached a minimum value of $1.32, which was its lowest value in 30 years. These devaluations, which are usually partly mitigated after a brief period of time, occur when investors divest their funding from the United Kingdom as the result of their fears that such funding will become unprofitable, and have been occurring frequently throughout the Brexit negotiations as the decisions of the British Government and Parliament detracted from the investor’s faith in the future profitability of their investments due to the potential financial insecurity of Brexit. As a result of these devaluations, the value of the Pound Sterling decreased by 5% against the US Dollar during the period of 2016-2018. The decreased value of the United Kingdom’s currency has already made it more expensive for the people within the nation to purchase goods, notably imported food, making it more difficult for the people to maintain their well-being; British pensioners living abroad have particularly suffered as their pension has decreased in value more significantly relative to the goods that are available to them. These threats to the well-being of British people are exacerbated by the potential shortages of food and medication that the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union could incur. I fear that many people will be forced into a lower standard of living, or other distressing situations, as the prices of imported food have been predicted to have the potential to rise by as much as 22%. The ‘Food Research Consortium’ has criticised the Government for failing to pay proper attention to the threats to British food-security, and has encouraged it to publish research surrounding the issue, to create a strategy to protect food-security, and to clarify its position regarding its migration policy; migrants compose 20% of the British agricultural labour force, and 95% of the work force working for members of the British Summer Fruits Association, and, if their position within the UK is not secured, this could have a large, adverse impact on the food-security of the United Kingdom. Migration is an important issue that I will discuss in its own right, but it should be noted here that the increase of the United Kingdom’s production of its own food, a suggested alleviation for the increased price of imported food, would be made much more difficult in the absence of migrant workers. British Supermarkets have warned that their supplies may be completely disrupted by Brexit, causing further difficulties for people to obtain food; however, as some people have pointed out, the disruption to supermarket supplies can be attributed to the Supermarkets’ own prioritisation of profitable, cheap supplies over sustainable, beneficial and secure supplies. Many people in the United Kingdom are worried about the potential difficulties in acquiring food, and have begun to stockpile it; this includes care organisations, who have felt the need to do so in order to secure the well-being of their patients. Some businesses have begun to exploit these worries, selling ‘Brexit Boxes’, crates of non-perishable food, for £290. A large portion of the food contained within these boxes may be nutritionally harmful due to their relatively large content of salt, and this is true of many non-perishable foods, which are being stockpiled; for many people, the potential difficulties in acquiring food could result in the necessary adoption of a poor quality diet, adversely affecting their health and well-being. A similar scarcity of medication is also possible, with the UK importing up to 73% of its pharmaceutical drugs from the European Union, and such a scarcity has prompted worries amongst health organisations people, who are reliant on such drugs to maintain their health, such as diabetics. As a result of these fears, people and organisations have also begun to stockpile medications, with health organisations and pharmaceutical manufacturers keeping a reserve of medication to supply the need for such medication for a period of up to six weeks in length. Some pharmaceutical organisations, such as the ‘Royal Pharmaceutical Society’, have stated that fears surrounding medical supplies are unfounded, and have advised against stockpiling medication, but the Chief Medical Officer of England, Sally Davies, has confirmed that the National Health Service has been stockpiling medication, and that she is concerned about the potential disruption to the British supply of medication. Brexit may already be hindering people’s access to medication; current supply shortages and prices rises of certain medications have been attributed by some to market concerns regarding Brexit, and the aforementioned stockpiling of medication. Any scarcity, or rise in the price, of medication will have potentially devastating consequences for the people who are reliant on them to maintain their health, or, in some cases, survive.

The ability of the people to secure their own well-being will be further reduced as many as 750,000 people face losing their jobs in the event of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit. Part of this number has already been guaranteed as ‘Ford’, which employs approximately 14,000 people within the UK, has announced that it will be cutting jobs in the future, albeit neither imminently or on a large-scale, and ‘Jaguar Land Rover’ has announced the loss of around 1,000 jobs in its Solihull factory; such cuts have been partly attributed, alongside reductions in car-sales and legal opposition to diesel vehicles, to uncertainties regarding Brexit, which the ‘UK Trade Policy Observatory’ has found will damage the manufacturing sector of the United Kingdom, even if favourable trade agreements can be established. Without jobs, people will be reliant on the British Government’s ‘Universal Credit’ scheme, which has been widely criticised for its discrimination against those with disabilities, smaller payments compared to the previous system of benefits, and its long, debt-inducing waiting period before the first payment. People with disabilities within the United Kingdom will face a far harsher impact from the potential national decrease in the standard of living as 59% of the United Kingdom’s disabled population already suffers from material deprivation, and 18.4% of British people, who are between 16 and 64 years of age, with disabilities suffer from food poverty, which is the defined as the inability to secure a meal with meat, fish or a vegetarian equivalent every two days. I apologise if some of my earlier descriptions of potential scarcities seemed exaggerated, and I clarify now that I expect Brexit neither to induce apocalyptic conditions nor to result in widespread starvation and immediate mortalities on a large scale, but Brexit undoubtedly has the potential to damage the well-being and living-standards of the British population, with the vulnerable being negatively impacted more greatly, as increases in the prices, and decreases in the availability, of goods, including food and medication, which are understandably essential for any standard of living, will have a vast quantity and variety of adverse effects, which will be exacerbated by a decreased availability of work, on their health, both mentally and physically, and their quality of life.

Initially, I had planned to discuss migration and the security of EU Nationals in Britain, and the security of British Nationals in the UK, before discussing the role of the ‘far-right’ in Brexit, but I realised that I need to address this role first as the far-right has manipulated and distorted perceptions and information regarding migration. The far-right is defined in this article as ideologies, and proponents of such ideologies, that hold racist, xenophobic, nativist, nationalist and other discriminatory views and tendencies; it should be noted that, at any point in this article, I do not have any intention to imply or convey that the far-right is a coherent, unified group, or that the far-right is following a consolidated, premeditated plan of action.

The far-right has been chiefly in favour of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, and, like some other groups in favour of Brexit, their chief argument for the withdrawal is the reduction in migration. The narrative, which has involved, in a multitude and variety of instances demonstrable and likely deliberate misinformation, surrounding migration by the far-right and similar groups, has strongly influenced, and been perpetuated by the British media; in the year of 2016, during the approach of the General Referendum regarding Brexit, a combined total of 34 front-pages of the newspapers, the ‘Daily Express’ and the ‘Daily Mail’, bore headlines with an anti-migrant rhetoric, describing migrants as ‘jobless’, ‘crooks’ and ‘invaders’, as well as making claims that the migrants were harming the United Kingdom and its people economically. As I mentioned previously in the article, it has been found that migrants are a positive contributor to the economy, and have little impact on the wages and employment of native workers. The earlier mentioned report of the Migration Advisory Committee also concluded that migrants result neither in an increase of crime, nor in a decrease in quality of the National Health Service. Yet, a survey found that 71% of the British public incorrectly believed that migrants did not contribute more in taxes than they received in benefits, and that an average of 56% and an average of 39% of the British people incorrectly believed that immigration has increased crime and decreased the quality of the NHS respectively. This misinformation can be partly and directly attributed to the false claims published by the British media and far-right, and likely affected the results of the general referendum. Some false claims during the approach of the referendum were far more dangerous; Nigel Farage, the leader of the ‘UK Independence Party’, or ‘UKIP’, at the time, made the claim that 5,000 jihadist terrorists entered the UK as the result of the EU’s migration policy, citing Rob Wainwright, the boss of Europol. Rob Wainwright, himself, has denied that claim, which is a manipulation of a statistic regarding 5,000 EU Citizens who left the EU to enter Syria and Iraq in support of the Islamic State. The examples of misinforming media that I provided earlier, alongside further examples, such as the online ‘Vote Leave’ campaign’s advertisements, can be found in the ‘Sources and Resources’ section of this article.

The far-right uses misinformation and attacks against groups of people in order to create further social divisions between such groups and the group that they belong to. These groups social divisions are created on the basis of race and nationality, and serve to justify the apparent superiority of the far-right’s own group; in the United Kingdom, the group of the far-right is white people of British nationality, which is the majority of the British population, so, for the remainder of this article, I shall refer to the Far-right’s own group as the majority group. The other groups are presented as, while being inferior, threats to the majority group, in order to make members of the majority group feel threatened and support the far-right, who promises both to protect them, and to secure the place of the majority group at the top of the social hierarchy. The far-right claims that the only way to achieve these two goals is to eliminate or otherwise hinder the other groups within its society. The misinformation regarding immigration has been, in many cases, an attempt by the far-right to present another group (migrants) as both inferior (“Jobless”, unskilled individuals from poor nations) and a threat (Being criminals and extremists, and responsible for lowering wages and unemployment) to the majority group, who can defend and strengthen themselves by supporting the far-right and ‘removing’ the apparently threatening group from society (By supporting Brexit and ‘stopping’ migration).

Unfortunately, the far-right does not only use misinformation, but also campaigns politically and uses direct, and often forceful and violent, action to attack and threaten the security of other groups in pursuit of the fulfilment of their ideological goals. In the context of Brexit, such political action can be seen by the prominent role of UKIP in the campaign in favour of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. In the manifesto of the party, UKIP repeats the misinformation that migration “depresses the wages and living standards” in the UK, promises to restrict migration, especially from Islamic nations, and states its intention to encourage and bolster “English Identity”. UKIP’s manifesto demonstrates that they hold an ideology that is consistent with that of the far-right, as defined in this article, and, as a result, UKIP should be considered as a far-right group. UKIP works politically not only to restrict migration, but to also directly reduce the well-being and security of migrants within the UK by removing benefits for the children of foreign nationals, preventing foreign nationals from accessing benefits for a period of 5 years, and to repeal hate-speech laws, which protect minority groups from harassment and threats. The removal and restriction of benefits serves to bolster the far-right’s association of migrants with poverty, and to directly reduce the quality of life, and financial security, of foreign nationals. Migrants are neither the only minority group that are threatened by the elimination of hate-speech laws nor the only group that receives the threatening attention of UKIP; the elimination of hate-speech laws includes the removal of equal employment opportunities for ethnic minorities, and UKIP frequently links Muslims and Islam to extremist terrorism. It is interesting to note that UKIP cites its defence of the rights to free-speech of “our people”, or the earlier mentioned majority group, as its reasoning behind its intended removal of hate-speech laws, as this is further promotes the far-right belief that the majority group is threatened within society.

Far-right political groups, such as UKIP, also pose a threat to people by the normalisation and dissemination of their views. This normalisation empowers the far-right to share their views and take actions that they would otherwise be prevented from doing so by the reactions of Society. This is a threat to the safety and security of many people as such actions are taken by the far-right to eliminate or otherwise harm targeted groups of people, as well as opposition to their ideology, both indirectly, as demonstrated by UKIP’s proposed elimination of hate-speech laws, and directly, as will be demonstrated later. The Brexit campaign served to normalise the racist and nativist ideologies of the far-right, and the adverse effects of this include, and are evidenced by, a 44% increase in reported hate-crime in the month following the general referendum when compared to that same month of the previous year. This increase may be partly attributed to an improved recording of such crimes by the police, and an increased public awareness of the issue, but these two factors cannot explain the increase entirely. A paper from the ‘Nottingham University’ analysed data surrounding hate-crime following the referendum to create a model that supported its hypothesis that the rise in hate-crime could not be attributed to any political or economic policy, but could be attributed to the normalisation of racist and nativist views. The campaign for Brexit also directly bolstered the exposure and popularity of far-right groups themselves; during the period of time between the 28th of May 2016 and the 28th of June 2016, which encompasses the month leading to, and the following days, of the General Referendum, four prominent far right groups (‘British Unity’, ‘Britain First’, ‘British National Party’ and the ‘English Defence League’) all experienced an increase of online visibility, with British Unity gaining the largest increase of 11,943%. These groups also all experienced an increase in online followership, with Britain First’s Twitter account undergoing a 15% increase in followers. It would, understandably, be incorrect to claim that Brexit was the sole contributor to the increased prominence of the far-right, as such prominence has been increasing for a variety of reasons, even during the decades before the referendum. I had planned to give a brief overview of the rise of the far-right and its beliefs in Britain, but ultimately decided that it was beyond the scope and intention of this article; you can find some resources regarding this rise in the ‘Sources and Resources’ section of this article if you are interested. Nevertheless, Brexit has, and likely continues to, aid the far-right in the dissemination of its ideology, and in the direct strengthening of its groups.

The increased prominence of the far-right is a threat and a danger to our society. The aforementioned rise in hate-crimes is a direct and often physical threat to individuals and groups that has lasting consequences on its victims. An analysis of the Home Office’s ‘Crime Survey for England and Wales’ revealed that 92% of victims of hate-crime reported feeling emotionally affected, and over a third of all hate-crime victims reported being affected “very much” . These emotional effects can severely damage an individual’s well-being; victims of hate-crime were twice as likely than victims of other types of crime to report suffering from feelings of vulnerability and a loss of confidence, and victims of hate-crime were also twice as likely to suffer from difficulty sleeping, anxiety, panic attacks or depression. Hate-crimes also have an indirect impact on communities as such crimes can make those who share the targeted characteristics of the victim feel threatened, vulnerable and stigmatised. Participants in the ‘Sussex Hate Crime Project’ reported that knowing about hate-crime increased their consciousness regarding their own security, caused them to avoid certain places and locations, and instilled emotions of anger, anxiety and vulnerability, alongside a sense of injustice, within them. The problems and inefficiencies of the criminal justice system were exposed by the fact that the participants who were victims of hate-crime were more likely to have negative perceptions of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service, and Muslim participants, who had contacted the police were less likely to believe in the effective response of the police than those, who had not contacted the police. Some participants explained that they would avoid reporting hate-crimes to the police as they had a lack of trust in the police, feared that the police would misuse their personal details, or feared the potential prejudice of the police against them. It should be noted that the participants of the Sussex Hate Crime project were grouped as ‘Muslim’ or ‘LGBT’, but I believe that their emotions and experiences are partly shared, and can, thus, be translated to other groups.

Extremism and terrorism are two threats that have also been enhanced by the increased prominence of the far-right; during the period of April 2017 to March 2018, 1,312 people, an increase of 36% from the previous year, were referred to ‘Prevent’, a scheme by the UK Government to prevent extremism, as the result of concerns related to extreme far-right activity. An example of far-right terrorism with particular relevance to Brexit was the murder of Jo Cox, a member of the British Parliament, by Thomas Mair on the 16th of June 2016. Mair was undoubtedly a member of the far-right, owning Nazi memorabilia and far-right books, participating in and corresponding with far-right groups, holding beliefs regarding the superiority of, and threats against the White race, and idolising far-right terrorists. Cox was killed by Mair as the result of her support for the European Union and her opposition to Brexit; Mair is reported to have shouted “Britain first, keep Britain independent, Britain will always come first.” as he attacked Cox, and, when asked to confirm his name in court, Mair said “My name is death to traitors, freedom for Britain”. This example demonstrates the violent nature of the far-right, its role in Brexit and threat that it poses.

As I hope to have established earlier in this article, migration has and continues to be a key issue surrounding Brexit. Immigration and travel between the European Union and the United Kingdom will be heavily restricted by the end of the freedom of movement, potentially isolating people in one nation from their loved ones in others, trapping people in conditions that are detrimental to them, or preventing them from accessing conditions that could otherwise greatly enhance their well-being, as well as potentially reinforcing nationalistic ideas. In the UK, the British government plans to act in accordance with the nativist and anti-migrant sentiments, which were promoted by the far-right and disseminated during the Brexit campaign, by barring migrants from the British Welfare system, preventing them from accessing the aid that they may require to maintain a good standard of living, preventing migrants in low-skilled employment from staying in the UK for more than a year, denying them access to a long-term, secure wage and more greatly impacting the underprivileged, and by implementing a salary threshold against migrants, which, although I do not begrudge the prevention of any capitalistic accumulation of wealth, is not intended to induce any fairer distribution of wealth, but to discriminate unfairly based on national identity. These oppressive actions unjustly impede the ability of people to secure their own well-being on the discriminatory basis of national identity, reinforcing the nativist and nationalist ideologies that are held and disseminated by the far-right. EU Nationals already living within the UK have been promised by the British Government that they shall be allowed to continue to do so, and that they will still be able to access public funds and services, but they will need to apply for a ‘Settled’ status, regardless if they have already secured the documentation for permanent residence or an indefinite leave to remain. ‘Settled’ status is eligible to any EU National who has lived in the UK for at least five years, and started to live in the UK before the 31st December 2020; EU Nationals who meet the second requirement, but not the first, can apply for a ‘Pre-settled’ status, which will allow them to live in the UK for a further five years before they must apply for a ‘Settled’ status in order to remain. There are concerns that the need to apply for, and to receive, such a status will adversely effect vulnerable and underprivileged people, such as the elderly, disabled, or impoverished, as well as children, who may not be able to readily apply, and are, thus, at risk of losing their rights within the UK, severely damaging the security of their well-being. Initially, the British Government planned to charge a fee for the application for a settled status, making application even more difficult for underprivileged people, but this planned fee was removed as the result of widespread political opposition to it. The settlement scheme of the UK will remain in place even in the event of a ‘No-deal’ Brexit. A withdrawal agreement between the EU and UK has secured the rights of British Nationals living in EU nations to continue to have the same access to residency, as well as the public funds and services that they have at present, provided that they apply for and receive the appropriate residency status; the need to apply for residency poses the same threat to vulnerable British Nationals within the EU as it does to vulnerable EU Nationals within the UK. However, this withdrawal agreement would not be implemented in the event of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, imperilling the livelihoods of British Nationals living abroad. Some nations, such as Germany and Italy, have promised to secure the rights of British Nationals in a similar manner as to what was described by the withdrawal agreement, even in the event of such a no-deal Brexit, but British nationals in other nations remain at risk of displacement.

I shall now, after providing a brief overview of some of the issues surrounding Brexit, attempt to give some advice and suggestions, in accordance with my beliefs and perspective, on how we can mitigate these problems. Firstly, I personally believe that we should refrain from campaigning either in opposition to, or in favour of, Brexit. Campaigning in favour of Brexit must be avoided as a result of the problems that I have discussed in this article. and the fact that doing so would further legitimise the far-right. Campaigning in opposition to Brexit is unadvisable as we should refrain from showing support for the European Union, or for the British Government, as both are oppressive state organisations that unjustly concentrate power to a minority, exploiting people in order to do so. It should also be considered that campaigning in opposition to Brexit may unintentionally undermine the political influence of the power of the people; the British public directly voted in favour of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, and we must be careful not to set a precedent for governments to ignore or overrule the directly democratic decisions of the people. A second general referendum is a popularly proposed method of opposition to Brexit, and, although this would be a vote by the people, it could potentially undermine the authority of general referendums and other directly democratic votes within the current political framework, as it may encourage politicians to simply use and manipulate such votes in order to achieve and falsely justify their own political gain; we should try to ensure that the state is held as accountable as possible to the decisions of the people. It should be noted that there is a good argument that a second referendum would enable the British public to make a better vote, which would be free from, and could potentially combat, previous misinformation, and which would be better informed in light of recent information and observations of the effects and negotiations that have taken place since the first general referendum; I personally do not believe that this argument can completely justify the potential damage to the already limited political influence of the people, but it is an interesting perspective that should be considered.

Instead of acting on the issue of Brexit directly, I propose that we should instead focus on acting against the issues that Brexit presents. Instead of campaigning in favour of Brexit, we should campaign in favour of the decentralisation and equal distribution of power. Instead of campaigning in opposition of Brexit, we should campaign against the decisions of the government, and irresponsible practices of Capitalist organisations that threaten to impoverish, or otherwise impede the well-being of, people. We need to counter the far-right whenever possible, and act to diminish their current political platform in order to stop the legitimisation and dissemination of their dangerous and hateful beliefs and ideology, and we need to ensure that migrants feel safe, welcome and secure, that they are not discriminated against, and that misinformation against them is stopped. In order to mitigate the damages and threats to people’s well-being, we should act as communities and individuals to provide mutual aid and protection for each other, and, particularly those who are especially vulnerable.

The events, issues and discussions surrounding Brexit give us an opportunity to expose the flaws of the current system. The self-interest of the powerful few at the expense of the many has been delineated consistently during the process of Brexit, alongside the problematically bureaucratic nature of our supposed ‘Democracy’. The opportunity arises to also address some flawed perspectives; for a brief example, we can explain that migrants never lower wages directly, but, rather, employers lower wages as they exploit migrants. We should take this opportunity to change the mainstream perspective to one that is more truthful and likely to inspire actual, beneficial change.

I hope that this article has been of some interest or use to you, and I apologise for its flaws; I am still inexperienced when writing articles of this nature. You have my gratitude for reading this article, and for any opinions, criticisms or feedback regarding this article and its discussed topics that you may provide.

An Anarchist Flag with a ‘Circle A’.

Sources and Resources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brexit A ‘Wikipedia’ Article regarding Brexit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union A ‘Wikipedia’ Article regarding the European Union.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/17/uk/non-brits-guide-to-brexit-update-gbr-trnd-intl/index.html https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46318565 Two Articles providing simple explanations regarding ‘Brexit’.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa9zPc4IBEBfE1YnVyKd9rjYVZgRaIGJh A Series of informative, easy-to-understand videos regarding Brexit.

https://wessexsolidarity.wordpress.com/2016/02/27/an-anarchist-argument-for-getting-the-fuck-out-of-the-european-union-by-mal-content/https://wessexsolidarity.wordpress.com/2016/04/27/more-thoughts-on-the-eu-referendum-mal-content/ The arguments of ‘Mal Content’ of ‘Wessex Solidarity’ in favour of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46885828 An Article regarding the rejection of Theresa May’s negotiated deal with the European Union.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47152035 An Article regarding, at the time of writing, Theresa May’s position on the potential backstop.

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/66261/1/Hix_Brexit%20matter_2016.pdf Research by the ‘London School of Economics’ into the United Kingdom’s influence within the European Union, and how the United Kingdom has voted within the European Parliament.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/2018%20IfG%20%20Brexit%20impact%20%5Bfinal%20for%20web%5D.pdf A Government Report on the Economic effects of Brexit.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2014/nov/positive-economic-impact-uk-immigration-european-union-new-evidence An Article describing the evidence of the positive impacts of immigration within the UK.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/741926/Final_EEA_report.PDF A Report on migration within the UK.

https://www.ig.com/uk/financial-events/brexit/value-of-the-pound-since-brexit https://fullfact.org/economy/pound-fallen-since-brexit/ Two Summaries of the decreases in the value of the United Kingdom’s currency as the result of events and decisions relating to Brexit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36611512 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46510636 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46883147 Articles regarding the changes in value of the Pound Sterling in response to events relating to Brexit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46862790 Article explaining the relationship between the value of the Pound Sterling and Brexit.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/23/forex-markets-euro-british-pound-brexit-in-focus.html Article regarding the devaluation of the Euro in response to tensions surrounding Brexit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45112872 An Article regarding the World Trade Organisation and the potential impacts on trade as a result of Brexit.

https://brc.org.uk/news/2017/brexit-food-prices The Press Release of the British Retail Consortium regarding the potential rise in the prices of imported food after Brexit.

https://foodresearch.org.uk/publications/feeding-britain-food-security-after-brexit/ The Food Research Collaboration’s briefing on food-security in regards to Brexit.

https://www.thesterlingchoice.com/will-food-come-brexit/ http://theconversation.com/how-brexit-threatens-britains-food-security-61716 Articles regarding food-security and its relation to Brexit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47028748 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/31/supermarkets-empty-shelves-brexit-risk-food-shortages Articles regarding Supermarkets and how they could be impacted by Brexit.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/britain-brexit-stockpiling-1.4975197 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47095011 https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/17408117.why-were-stockpiling-food-ahead-of-brexit/ https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/people-wales-stockpiling-food-case-15650461 Articles regarding the stockpiling of food in preparation for Brexit.

https://www.emergencyfoodstorage.co.uk/products/brexit-box https://www.emergencyfoodstorage.co.uk/pages/fuel-your-preparation-ingredients-nutritional-informationThe ‘Brexit Box’ and its nutritional information.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/salt-and-sodium/sodium-health-risks-and-disease/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wirPLVoXtkQ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5098396/ Information of the potential risks of a diet that includes too great an amount of salt. It should be noted that many experts now claim that the recommended limit of salt of many health organisations is, in fact, too low, but there is little dispute that the excess consumption of salt is still considered to be harmful to Human health. Here is a study that is in favour of increasing the recommended limit of salt: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31376-X/fulltext

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/18/revealed-uk-patients-stockpile-drugs-in-fear-of-no-deal-brexit https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46597425 https://www.healthcareglobal.com/public-health/how-will-brexit-impact-uks-access-medicines https://www.rpharms.com/about-us/news/details/Medicines-and-a-no-deal-Brexit Articles, and the position of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society regarding the effects of, and connections between, Brexit and the United Kingdom’s supply of medication.

http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2018/12/632-constituencies-Data-no-deal.pdf https://www.statista.com/chart/16377/no-deal-brexit-job-losses/ Data by the ‘University of Sussex’ regarding the predicted loss of jobs in the event of a no-deal Brexit, and a chart summarising this data.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/10/jaguar-land-rover-and-ford-to-axe-thousands-of-jobs https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/31/manufacturing-firms-plan-job-cuts-after-brexit https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/13/jaguar-land-rover-to-announce-1000-job-cuts-next-week Articles regarding the potential manufacturing job losses as a result of Brexit.

http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/publications/which-manufacturing-sectors-are-most-vulnerable-to-brexit/ A Paper by the ‘UK Trade Policy Observatory’ regarding the effects of Brexit on the United Kingdom’s manufacturing sector.

https://www.gov.uk/universal-credit https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/family/universal-credit/ https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dwp-claimant-service-and-experience-survey-2017-to-2018 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/01/universal-credit-scores-lowest-for-satisfaction-in-benefits-survey https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/06/universal-credit-flaws-leaving-families-debt-child-poverty-action-group https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-47130969 Information regarding Universal Credit and its problems.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/being-disabled-in-britain.pdf https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/07/one-in-five-britons-with-disabilities-have-their-rights-violated-un-told The Report of the ‘Equality and Human Right’s Commission’ regarding the issues facing disabled people within the UK, and an article reporting briefly on that report.

https://twitter.com/BBCKimGhattas/status/747042626235310081/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E747042626235310081&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pri.org%2Fstories%2F2016-06-24%2Fhow-brexit-campaign-used-refugees-scare-voters A Compilation of Newspaper Front-Pages.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/immigration-and-jobs-labour-market-effects-immigration/ https://fullfact.org/immigration/impacts-migration-local-public-services/ Articles addressing the effects of migrants on jobs and public services.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-institute/publications/Brexit-misperceptions.pdf A publication regarding the result of a survey on public misconceptions surrounding Brexit.

https://fullfact.org/europe/have-5000-jihadis-come-eu/ An Article addressing Nigel Farage’s false claim regarding the entry of 5,000 jihadis into the UK.

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_immigration.html https://infacts.org/vote-leave-lying-facebook-ads-look-even-worse-2-years-on/ https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-vote-leaves-dark-brexit-ads A selection of campaign material from the ‘Vote Leave’ campaign, and articles addressing these claims.

https://www.ukip.org/ukip-manifesto-item.php?cat_id=20https://www.ukip.org/ukip-manifesto-item.php?cat_id=5 The policies of the ‘UK Independence Party’ regarding immigration and British Culture.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants An Article regarding a controversial ‘anti-migrant’ poster that was created in favour of Brexit.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/09/race-class-and-brexit-how-did-we-get-here/ Article regarding the role of Racism in Brexit.

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/british-population/national-and-regional-populations/population-of-england-and-wales/latest The Demographics of the United Kingdom.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45874265 https://fullfact.org/crime/hate-crime-england-and-wales/ https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/16/hate-crime-brexit-terrorist-attacks-england-wales Articles regarding the rise in Hate Crimes after the General Referendum.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hate-crime-politics-brexit-eu-referendum-identity-facundo-albornoz-a8549051.html http://cep.lse.ac.uk/seminarpapers/19-09-18-ALB_v2.pdf An article and paper discussing how the results of the General Referendum and debates surrounding Brexit normalised and legitimised racist views.

http://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Impact-of-Brexit.pdf A research briefing regarding the impact of Brexit on Far-Right groups.

https://www.ippr.org/publications/england-and-its-two-unions-the-anatomy-of-a-nation-and-its-discontents A report regarding Euroscepticism and nationalism within England.

http://www.thecyberhood.net/documents/projects/race.pdf A Report regarding race relations in the UK.

http://www.socresonline.org.uk/13/5/9.html A Debate Essay regarding white, working class resentment.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/763254/individuals-referred-supported-prevent-programme-apr2017-mar2018-hosb3118.pdf https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46556447 A Report by the UK Government’s ‘Prevent’ scheme on the demographics of referred potential extremists and an article that reports on such demographics.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42622767 https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=sussex-hate-crime-project-report.pdf&site=430 An Article and Report on Hate Crime and how it affects people and communities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jo_Cox A ‘Wikipedia’ Article regarding the murder of Jo Cox.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/nov/23/thomas-mair-slow-burning-hatred-led-to-jo-cox-murder An Article regarding Thomas Mair, the murderer of Jo Cox, and his connection to, and participation within, the far-right.

https://fullfact.org/europe/brexit-deal-immigration/ https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/19/the-post-brexit-immigration-plans-at-a-glance https://www.remaininfrance.org/free-movement.html https://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-says-ending-freedom-of-movement-is-top-priority-after-brexit-11568339 http://eumigrationlawblog.eu/brexit-deal-or-no-deal-the-consequences-for-freedom-of-movement-of-eu-and-british-citizens/ Articles regarding the future of immigration to the United Kingdom, and freedom of movement within the European Union, after Brexit.

https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families The Government’s Settlement Scheme for EU Nationals in the UK after Brexit.

https://www.theweek.co.uk/brexit/73161/will-eu-nationals-be-able-to-stay-in-britain-after-brexit https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44553225 Articles regarding the future of EU Nationals in the UK after Brexit.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/advice-for-british-nationals-travelling-and-living-in-europe The Government’s advice for British Nationals in the Eu.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/19/no-deal-threatens-1m-britons-eu-residence-rights-commission-says https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/22/uk-nationals-in-berlin-given-assurance-of-residency-in-event-of-no-brexit-deal https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/04/uk-nationals-in-italy-assured-of-residency-in-event-of-no-brexit-deal https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46841041 Articles regarding the future of British Nationals in the EU after Brexit.