Leaving Democracy?

By Johnathan Kemp

In June 2016 the United Kingdom held the European Union Referendum. The result has been almost universally interpreted as a win for those who want the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. Often the result is discussed as if it was an overwhelming victory for Leave.
This book offers an alternative interpretation of the result, based on rational argument derived from the available evidence. It challenges the UK Government interpretation of the referendum result as a mandate for taking the UK out of the EU. Instead it maintains that there is a legitimate and valid case for interpreting the EU referendum result as a landslide victory for Remaining in the EU.
It is a wake up call for all those Remain voters who feel obliged to respect the result of the referendum. They can respect democracy and continue to promote a future for Britain in the EU. It is also a challenge to those Leave supporters who cling to the idea that Brexit is being brought about by adhering to democratic principles.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Johnathan Kemp
• Release date: Dec 19, 2016
• ISBN: 9781370016723

Johnathan Kemp

I am in my 60s now, happily married and enjoy trying to play the Chromatic Button Accordion. Though I have been using computers for many years I am new to social media and published my first ebook in the tail end of 2016.

Book preview

Leaving Democracy?

Johnathan Kemp

Copyright 2016 Johnathan Kemp

The right of Johnathan Kemp to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988

All rights reserved

About the author

Smashwords Edition, License Notes

Thank you for downloading this ebook. This book remains the copyrighted property of the author, and may not be redistributed to others for commercial or non-commercial purposes. If you enjoyed this book, please encourage your friends to download their own copy from their favourite authorised retailer. Thank you for your support.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my beloved wife Pat for the patience she has shown me and the support she has given me during the creation of this book.

I would also like to thank everyone associated with the following IT projects whose products and services have proven invaluable for the creation of this work.

Libre Office

Yed

Calibre

and of course

Smashwords

Table of Contents

Forward

Chapter 1 - The answer is defined by the question

Chapter 2 - Turning famous victories into defeats

Chapter 3 - Background to the 2016 European Union Referendum

Chapter 4 - Was Leave really a single option?

Chapter 5 - The 2016 EU Referendum

Chapter 6 - Some EU Referendum fallacies

Chapter 7 - Conlusions and final observations

Appendix 1 - References

Appendix 2 Enhanced images

Forward

At the time of writing the United Kingdom is anything but united. It is divided by the issue of membership of the European Union. The aim of this book is to briefly examine the nature of the EU referendum, the outcome of the referendum, and the way that outcome has been interpreted as a mandate for action.

Reassessing the interpretation of the EU referendum result

It is my intention to demonstrate

1. That the referendum question was fundamentally flawed.

2. That to interpret the result as a mandate for leaving the EU is unjustified.

3. That the evidence provided by the referendum suggests a majority in favour of preserving the benefits offered by membership of the EU even if a case for leaving the EU is claimed.

4. That the most valid or legitimate interpretation of the referendum result is that of a landslide in favour of Remain.

These assertions are not the commonly presented view of the referendum. The votes cast present as a small majority in favour of Leave. My claim is however founded in the referendum result and the nature of the referendum question.

An invitation

This is a strong assertion to make and it is certain to be met with hostility by those who wish for the United Kingdom to leave the EU. It would be easy to attempt to avoid the argument by resorting to name calling. There is already in the national press an attempt to shut down discussion by referring to those who raise