Brexit: ‘Revolt’ against the ‘elites’ or Trojan horse for more deregulation?

Arana, Arantza Gomez; Rowe, Jay; Ruyter, A. de; Semmens-Wheeler, Rebecca; Hill, Kimberley M

doi:10.1177/1035304619881271

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, that part of the country that associate the free movement of people with a series of threats, such as "stagnant real wages, increased professional insecurity and cultural dislocation" (Blagden, 2017). An issue that contributes to reinforcing this cleavage is immigration (Arana, 2019;Wincott, 2017;Goodwin & Milazzo, 2017). Immigration would generate a sense of insecurity and resentment towards non-British residents.…”

Section: Brexit Would Underscore the Existence Of Two Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining Brexit: Level of Analysis and Explanations

Betti¹

2021

internationalrelation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses the scholarly debate on the Brexit phenomenon and its possible causes. By contextualizing Brexit in the International Relations Theory debate about the levels of analysis, the article focuses on some of the most recent contributions of the Brexit literature. Firstly, it analyses the contributions that explain Brexit as a problem of international and European politics, related to the adaptation of the United Kingdom to the process of European integration. Secondly, it analyses the contributions that explain Brexit as the result of causes located at the domestic level, such as the decisions and perceptions of national leaders, the decision-making process, and the impact of populist and Eurosceptic political discourse. The article identifies the advantages of an approach capable of considering both international and domestic variables. This allows a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and a potentially fruitful collaboration between political scientists from different disciplines, such as International Relations Theory and Comparative Politics.

show abstract

Section: Brexit Would Underscore the Existence Of Two Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining Brexit: Level of Analysis and Explanations

Betti¹

2021

internationalrelation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anti-immigrant sentiments occurred not only in Poland and Hungary ruled by right-wing populists, but also in other countries of the region (Czech Republic, Slovakia and Romania) (Trauner, 2016). Just as in France and Great Britain, where Brexit gained the support of part of the lower classes, who were lost and left alone (Mckenzie, 2017) or terrified by competition from immigrants (Gomez Arana et al, 2019; Virdee and McGeever, 2018), so also in Eastern Europe right-wing populism built its strength based on those who felt that they did not benefit from the neoliberal transformation. The campaign of hate against immigrants combined with the promise of social support allowed the right-wing nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party to gain independent power in Poland in 2015 (Żuk and Żuk, 2018).…”

Section: A Shift Of the People’s Classes’ Sympathies: From The Left Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capitalism after communism: The triumph of neoliberalism, nationalist reaction and waiting for the leftist wave

Żuk

Toporowski

2020

Econ. labour relat. rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Was neoliberal capitalism the only possible development path in Eastern Europe after the collapse of real socialism? How did the restoration of capitalism in the former Eastern bloc affect the economic and political situation in the world? Is the support of workers and lower classes for right-wing populists that has been observed in Eastern Europe for the past 30 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall a permanent phenomenon? By asking these questions, the authors point out that the offensive of the far right began in Europe before the 2015 migration crisis and the 2008 financial crisis, and that it coincided with the weakening of leftist workers’ parties. This process began in the 1990s after the collapse of the Eastern bloc. What can stop this process and change the situation? The solution is to show that another model is still possible: greater egalitarianism, democracy and the rule of law. This sociopolitical alternative, however, must simultaneously oppose two powerful forces: neoliberal capitalism and nationalist populism. JEL Codes: B50, P30, P34, P36

show abstract

Regulatory strings that bind and the UK Parliament after Brexit

Jančić

2022

Comp Eur Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses Brexit’s promise of restoring UK sovereignty and retrieving regulatory autonomy from the EU from the perspective of the UK Parliament. It argues that while the prospects of post-Brexit regulatory alignment remain high, they are to some extent counterbalanced by those of targeted divergence. A twofold argument is put forward to demonstrate this. The first argument builds on the literature on the Brussels effect and argues that the strength of economic interdependence between the UK and the EU and the size and influence of the latter’s market generate significant pressures for UK regulatory alignment with EU standards. This is demonstrated through a qualitative empirical examination of the contents of UK parliamentary scrutiny of the projected impact of Brexit on the key UK export industry sectors: automotive, pharmaceuticals, chemicals and financial services. It is shown that select committees in both Houses of Parliament, including the Eurosceptic ones, have consistently advocated close alignment with EU regulatory standards across the export-intensive economic sectors. As such, these findings relativise the prospects of taking back control to the extent that the substance of Westminster’s post-Brexit legislative activity may continue to be significantly influenced by EU regulation and policy. This is reinforced by the sanctioning mechanism foreseen in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement and the economic benefits of adhering to the EU’s adequacy and equivalence regimes. These factors therefore facilitate the future Europeanisation of UK law after Brexit. The second argument nuances the first argument by showing that UK legislative and regulatory divergence is not an abstract possibility, but rather a political reality grounded in strong government majority following the 2019 election, the scrutiny approaches that favour assessment of regulatory impacts, and the UK’s willingness to take unilateral action.

show abstract

Brexit: ‘Revolt’ against the ‘elites’ or Trojan horse for more deregulation?

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Examining Brexit: Level of Analysis and Explanations

Examining Brexit: Level of Analysis and Explanations

Capitalism after communism: The triumph of neoliberalism, nationalist reaction and waiting for the leftist wave

Regulatory strings that bind and the UK Parliament after Brexit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About