This is a smashing debate held in Sweden about the potential of the UK leaving or staying in the EU. What the implications are? Why Brits have a detached outlook from a lot of mainland Europeans. It is very entertaining and interesting to watch. It lasts about one and a half hours with panel questions. The answers and talks are very good.
It is also becoming obvious that some of the arguments about Brits being detached from the EU are very relevant from the point of view about wealth distribution. Basically, the British electorate will gain nothing from the EU or an independent UK. Its something for the the elite 1% who might lose if the Brit electorate decides to leave.
Immigration is becoming the antagonistic issue that seems to be getting under the radar of the pro-EU Brits. They have no control of the electorate concerning this. The only weapon the pro-EU 1% have is fear of the unknown if we leave. This fear is being diluted among an electorate who gain nothing from staying in, where wealth distribution is concerned. They don't care about global influence either. It seems the UK will probably stay in the EU. However, the immigration argument could still win the day for the anti - EU.
Its a very good debate and questions, TV show, but I still think the audience was largely well educated and academic. This doesn't count for the more common plebiscite view concerning immigration fears. This taboo subject is still not handled full on and people are generally sweeping the issue under the carpet. At one point the Swedish lady on the panel mentions how the UK depends on 40% of health workers being from abroad. As though the UK are reliant on this type of immigration with no choice.
The Swedish ladies rhetoric does not allow for the alternative perspective view of successive UK governments not training National Health workers from its own country to do the health care job in the first place. Instead the government recruits from abroad to get cheap workers. This is what fuels British people's fears of mass migration in the first place. Anything can be made to look good and progressive. Its what we are not allowed to bring into the debate that makes the unheard (and often less academic) electorate vote in strange ways.