DOCSLIB.ORG

A Way of Understanding Brexit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Way of Understanding Brexit Master Thesis The use of language as an influencing tool in leadership: a way of understanding Brexit Author: Jorge Ernesto Arango Terán, Pearl Bitanihirwe and Diego Emilio Arango Terán Supervisor: Mikael Lundgren Examiner: Lars Lindkvist Term: VT20 Subject: Business Administration with Specialization in Leadership and Management Level: Master’s degree Course code: 4FE41E Abstract New nationalist ideologies have permeated politics for the last decade. New leaders, followers, and conducive environments have emerged to cause the most controversial and unique episodes in recent politics. Brexit was selected by having a set of exclusive characteristics, factors, and social elements which resulted in the UK leaving the EU after 47 years. Additionally, two academic attributes were considered to be politically researched, which were leadership and communication techniques. The former established the relationship between two parts of society (leaders and followers) and how their roles developed during the Brexit referendum campaign, and the latter examined political language by extracting the most representative rhetorical means used by the British leaders to run it. The set of rhetorical techniques was thoroughly investigated using a specially adopted analysis. Several examples were included in how they were performed politically and strategically to create that democratic result. To execute this study, we developed qualitative research based on a study case strategy, descriptive purpose, and by having an inductive approach. Consequently, we selected a sampling method which met specific research criteria and allowed us to analyse this political phenomenon rhetorically. Besides, our empirical data was formed by using interactive and visual material which provided a credible source of study to approach, identify, and answer our research questions. Finally, Brexit’s outcome was viewed as the end of an era in terms of faith in the benefits of globalisation, open labour markets, European integration (Norris and Inglehart, 2019), loss of identity from British individuals, and the reflection of a fractured society (Gherghina and O’Malley, 2019). Key words Political leadership, political followership, political environment, language, rhetorical means, influencing approaches, Brexit, the (Brexit) referendum campaign, the Remain campaign, the Leave campaign. Acknowledgements We would like to express our special thanks and gratitude to all those who were involved directly and indirectly in the successful preparation of this master’s thesis, especially to Lars Lindkvist and Mikael Lundgren, who, by providing us with fruitful guidelines and recommendations, played a crucial role throughout this journey. Additionally, we would like to thank Linnaeus University, especially the School of Business and Economics and the University Library, for giving us a tailored set of tools and quality moments to develop this remarkable project. We could not have done it as well without them. Lastly, we would like to thank our family for supporting us unconditionally throughout this period as well as the city of Kalmar for proving an outstanding academic and social environment to strengthen our skills, improve our weaknesses, and most importantly, enrich new abilities and pieces of knowledge, which will be a part of our personal and professional profiles for a long time. Jorge, Pearl, and Diego Kalmar, Sweden June 2020 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 The Importance of the Research Topic .............................................................................. 4 1.3 Problem Discussion ........................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Research Purpose and Research Questions ....................................................................... 8 1.5 Research Objective ............................................................................................................ 9 1.6 Thesis Scope and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 9 1.7 Thesis Outline .................................................................................................................. 10 2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Political Leadership ......................................................................................................... 13 2.2.1 Description of Political Leaders ....................................................................................... 14 2.2.2 Sensemaking and Management of Meaning .................................................................... 18 2.2.3 Language as an Influencing Tool ..................................................................................... 20 2.2.4 Narratives and Stories ...................................................................................................... 23 2.2.5 Rhetoric ............................................................................................................................ 26 2.3 Political Followership ..................................................................................................... 32 2.4 Political Context .............................................................................................................. 36 3 Methodological Approach ............................................................................................. 39 3.1 Research Design .............................................................................................................. 39 3.2 Empirical Data................................................................................................................. 40 3.3 Sampling Description ....................................................................................................... 41 3.3.1 Criteria Assessment ......................................................................................................... 41 3.3.2 Data Collection Process ................................................................................................... 42 3.3.3 Sampling .......................................................................................................................... 43 3.4 Empirical Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 45 3.4.1 Analytical Framework ..................................................................................................... 46 3.4.2 Documentation of Empirical Data Analysis .................................................................... 47 3.5 Ethical Matters................................................................................................................. 49 4 Understanding Brexit ..................................................................................................... 51 4.1 The Concept of Brexit ...................................................................................................... 51 4.2 History of Brexit ............................................................................................................... 52 4.2.1 Before Referendum (1975 – May 2015) .......................................................................... 52 4.2.2 The Brexit Referendum Campaign (May 2015 – June 2016) .......................................... 55 4.2.3 The Brexit Referendum Results ....................................................................................... 65 4.2.4 Post-Referendum Period (June 2016 – December 2020) ................................................. 67 5 Empirical Data Analysis ................................................................................................ 69 5.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 69 5.2 Remain Campaign ............................................................................................................ 69 5.2.1 Interactive Material .......................................................................................................... 69 5.2.2 Visual Material................................................................................................................. 72 5.3 Leave Campaign .............................................................................................................. 73 5.3.1 Interactive Material .......................................................................................................... 73 5.3.2 Visual Material................................................................................................................. 75 6 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 77 6.1 Rhetorical Means ............................................................................................................. 77 6.1.1 Remain Campaign ...........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case Study on the United Kingdom and Brexit Juliane Itta & Nicole Katsioulis the Female Face of Right-Wing Populism and Ex
    Triumph of The women? The Female Face of Right-wing Populism and Extremism 02 Case study on the United Kingdom and Brexit Juliane Itta & Nicole Katsioulis 01 Triumph of the women? The study series All over the world, right-wing populist parties continue to grow stronger, as has been the case for a number of years – a development that is male-dominated in most countries, with right-wing populists principally elected by men. However, a new generation of women is also active in right-wing populist parties and movements – forming the female face of right-wing populism, so to speak. At the same time, these parties are rapidly closing the gap when it comes to support from female voters – a new phenomenon, for it was long believed that women tend to be rather immune to right-wing political propositions. Which gender and family policies underpin this and which societal trends play a part? Is it possible that women are coming out triumphant here? That is a question that we already raised, admittedly playing devil’s advocate, in the first volume of the publication, published in 2018 by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Triumph of the women? The Female Face of the Far Right in Europe. We are now continuing this first volume with a series of detailed studies published at irregular intervals. This is partly in response to the enormous interest that this collection of research has aroused to date in the general public and in professional circles. As a foundation with roots in social democracy, from the outset one of our crucial concerns has been to monitor anti-democratic tendencies and developments, while also providing information about these, with a view to strengthening an open and democratic society thanks to these insights.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Inevitability and Contingency: the Political Economy of Brexit1 Placing
    Inevitability and contingency: the political economy of Brexit1 Placing Britain’s vote on 23 June 2016 to leave the European Union in historical time raises an immediate analytical problem. What was clearly the result of a number of contingencies, starting with the 2015 general election where we can see how events could readily have turned out otherwise and was a shock to the British government that had not prepared for this outcome might also represent the inevitable end of Britain’s membership of the EU seen from the distant future. This paper seeks to take both temporal perspectives seriously. It aims to provide an explanation of the vote for Brexit that recognises the referendum result as politically contingent and also argue that the political economy of Britain generated by Britain’s position as non-euro member of the EU whilst possessing the offshore financial centre of the euro zone and Britain’s eschewal in 2004 of transition arrangements on freedom of movement for A8 accession states made Brexit an eventual inevitability, saving a prior collapse of the euro zone. Keywords: Brexit, European Union, Cameron, the euro, freedom of movement Britain’s vote on 23 June 2016 to leave the European Union (EU) presents a temporal paradox. Seen from the distant future, Brexit is likely to appear the inevitable outcome of the long history of Britain’s membership of the EU and its predecessors. Britain joined a partial economic union whose rules had been determined by others, when that union became a currency union it was unwilling to sacrifice monetary sovereignty and opted-out, and when that currency union produced an economic crisis that both required more political union and had spill-over effects for Britain, membership was rendered unsustainable.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reluctant European
    SPECIAL REPORT BRITAIN AND EUROPE October 17th 2015 The reluctant European 20151017_SRBRITEU.indd 1 05/10/2015 16:26 SPECIAL REPORT BRITAIN AND EUROPE The reluctant European Though Britain has always been rather half-hearted about the European Union, its membership has been beneficial for all concerned, argues John Peet. It should stay in the club THE QUESTION THAT will be put to British voters, probably in the au- CONTENTS tumn of 2016, sounds straightforward: “Should the United Kingdom re- main a member of the European Union, or leave the European Union?” 4 How referendums can go (The final clause was added last month at the insistence of the Electoral wrong Commission, which decided the question might look biased without it.) Herding cats When David Cameron, Britain’s Conservative prime minister, first pro- 5 Euroscepticism and its roots posed a referendum in early 2013, he was hoping that the answer would The open sea ACKNOWLEDGMENTS also be straightforward. Once he had successfully renegotiated some of Britain’s membership terms, the electorate would duly endorse him by 6 Britain’s clout in Brussels Besides those mentioned in the text, Not what it was the author would like to thank the voting to stay in. following for their help: Andy But referendums are by theirnature chancy affairs, as a string ofpre- 7 Costs and benefits Bagnall, Matthew Baldwin, Steven vious European examples have shown (see box later in this article). Mr Common market economics Blockmans, Stephen Booth, Hugo Cameron is well aware that the September 2014 referendum on Scottish Brady, Helen Campbell, Martin 9 The euro zone Donnelly, Monique Ebell, Matthew independence, an issue about which he said he felt far more strongly Elliott, Jonathan Faull, Maurice than he does about the EU, became a closer-run thing than expected.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Consequences of Leaving the EU
    April 2016 The economic consequences of leaving the EU The final report of the CER commission on Brexit 2016 Advisory Board Esko Aho Sir Richard Lambert Senior fellow, Harvard University, consultative Chairman of the British Museum, former partner for Nokia and former Finnish prime director-general of the Confederation of minister British Industry and editor of the Financial Joaquín Almunia Times Former vice-president and competition Pascal Lamy commissioner, European Commission President emeritus, Jacques Delors Institute Carl Bildt Philip Lowe Former prime minister and foreign minister Former director-general for energy, European of Sweden Commission Nick Butler Dominique Moïsi Visiting fellow and chairman of the Kings Senior adviser, Institut français des relations Policy Institute, Kings College London internationales Tim Clark Lord Monks Former senior partner, Slaughter & May Former general secretary, European Trades Iain Conn Union Confederation Group CEO, Centrica Mario Monti Sir Robert Cooper President, Bocconi University and former Special adviser to the High Representative Italian prime minister and former counsellor, EEAS Christine Ockrent Professor Paul De Grauwe Former chief executive officer, Audiovisuel John Paulson Chair in European Political Extérieur de la France Economy, London School of Economics Michel Petite Stephanie Flanders Lawyer Of Counsel, Clifford Chance, Paris Chief market strategist for the UK and Europe, Lord Robertson J.P. Morgan Asset Management Deputy chairman, TNK-BP and former Timothy Garton Ash secretary
    [Show full text]
  • Navigating Brexit: Priorities for Business, Options for Government Iod Policy Report
    IoD Policy Report February 2017 Navigating Brexit: Priorities for business, options for government IoD Policy Report About the author Allie’s work focuses on devising recommendations and representing the voice of members on EU policy matters to Westminster, Whitehall and European institutions. She provides the link between business and government on increasing international trade through practical and policy- focused measures, as well as running a number of trade missions for IoD members around the world every year. She routinely provides advocacy for the IoD on a range of regulatory issues in Brussels. Allie joined the IoD in April 2014. Allie Renison Prior to this, she was research director at Business for Britain, Head of Europe and the campaign focused on renegotiating the UK's relationship Trade Policy with the EU. Allie has previously advised a number of [email protected] parliamentarians in both houses on EU legislative issues, with a focus on trade and employment policy areas. @allierenison Allie holds a master's degree in the political economy of emerging economies in the post-Soviet space. Table of Contents 3 Executive summary 6 Impact of the referendum – How are businesses coping? 10 A smooth Brexit process • Parallel negotiations 12 Transitional arrangements and the “cliff edge” • The “British option” • Business links to the EU • Priorities 18 Potential models • European Economic Area • Customs union • Comprehensive free trade/partnership agreement 30 Communication and preparation • Government • What can business and the IoD do to prepare? 2 Navigating Brexit: Priorities for business, options for government Executive summary The referendum campaign and its outcome are now over, and the substantive debate on what Brexit might mean is only really just beginning, despite the fact that it should have advanced long before 23 June.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'Today' Programme's Coverage of the 2019
    THE BBC AND BREXIT THE ‘TODAY’ PROGRAMME’S COVERAGE OF THE 2019 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This survey assesses coverage by BBC Radio 4’s Today programme of the European Parliamentary elections between April 12 and May 30, 2019. The volume of EU material was 28.5% of feature time, indicating the importance of the Brexit debate on the news agenda. This amounted to a third of a million words of transcripts. Standout points include: Pro-Brexit opinion was overwhelmingly swamped by those who wanted to avoid ‘no deal’. Speakers had only minimal time to express their views and presenters were not much interested in exploring the potential benefits of Brexit, but rather alleged malpractice or prejudice by pro-Brexit parties and spokesmen. The treatment of anti-Brexit figures was generally much more favourable. After the results of the poll, for example, presenters barely challenged assertions by Remain parties that they had ‘won’ (on a combined basis) the election. By contrast, Sir William Cash – brought on the programme to justify why he had described the government’s negotiating approach as ‘appeasement’ – was questioned by Nick Robinson as if his behaviour was verging on the criminal. Business News – a significant daily chunk of the Today programme – was heavily dominated by contributors who were against ‘no deal’, determined to push as hard as possible the scale of the disruption that would ensue, and who saw almost every negative business development as being the outcome of Brexit uncertainty. The perceived opportunities of Brexit were scarcely explored Almost 500 speakers (487) contributed to the Today coverage.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom, July 2002
    Description of document: US Department of State Self Study Guide for United Kingdom, July 2002 Requested date: 11-March-2007 Released date: 25-Mar-2010 Posted date: 19-April-2010 Source of document: Freedom of Information Act Office of Information Programs and Services A/GIS/IPS/RL U. S. Department of State Washington, D. C. 20522-8100 Fax: 202-261-8579 Note: This is one of a series of self-study guides for a country or area, prepared for the use of USAID staff assigned to temporary duty in those countries. The guides are designed to allow individuals to familiarize themselves with the country or area in which they will be posted. The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question.
    [Show full text]
  • A View from the City
    UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OXFORD ISSUE 3 SUMMER 2015 A VIEW FROM THE CITY LEIGH INNES (1994) AND LIFE IN THE MARKETPLACE ALSO IN THIS ISSUE GEORGE CAWKWELL CELEBRATES 65 YEARS AT UNIV LOUISE TAYLOR (2011) ON THE PURSUIT OF PERFECTION ELECTION NIGHT SPECIAL WITH SIR IVOR CREWE THE MAGNA CARTA AT UNIV JOHN RADCLIFFE’S MEDICAL LEGACY FROM THE EDITOR University College Oxford OX1 4BH elcome to the Summer 2015 issue of The Martlet, the magazine for www.univ.ox.ac.uk Members and Friends of University College Oxford. I would like to Wexpress my sincere thanks to those Old Members, students, Fellows, staff www.facebook.com/univalumni and Friends of the College who contributed to this issue. [email protected] I would also like to take this opportunity to thank our extended Univ team – © University College, Oxford, 2015 Charles New and Andrew Boyle at B&M Design & Advertising Limited, who produce the magazine; Clare Holt and the team at Nice Tree Films who worked tirelessly on Produced by B&M Design & Advertising our recent videos – in particular the Election Night Special, for which they stayed www.bm-group.co.uk up well past their bedtimes! Michelle Enoch and the team at h2o creative for their splendid design concepts for the 1249 Society, and our unofficial ‘in-house’ designer Rob Moss and photographer Rachel Harrison for all their hard work on our event If you would like to share your thoughts or programmes and College photography. comments about The Martlet, please e-mail: [email protected] Enormous thanks also to Dr Robin Darwall-Smith and Frances Lawrence for their invaluable help with the In Memoriam section of the magazine.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of English Nationalism Is Something British Politicians Can No Longer Ignore
    The rise of English nationalism is something British politicians can no longer ignore blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/12/britains-brexit-vote-has-thrown-up-more-questions-than-answers/ 12/07/2016 Britain’s vote to leave the EU was supposed to help settle Britain’s ‘European Question’ – Tim Oliver argues that instead it has thrown up more questions than answers. This piece was first presented at the LSE IDEAS post Brexit vote event. When in 2013 David Cameron committed to calling an in/out referendum, he declared: “It is time to settle this European question in British politics.” But, in his wide-ranging speech he failed to identify or narrow down what the actual question was. The wording of the actual question asked last week might have seemed clear enough. But that last week’s vote to leave the EU has thrown up more questions than answers points to how the issue of Europe in British politics is a multifaceted one, especially in three areas: party politics, the constitution and identity politics. The referendum result has thrown both the Conservative and Labour parties into a turmoil that has shaken their leadership and put MPs at odds with the people they represent: While the majority of MPs favoured remaining in the EU, 37 per cent of Labour voters and 58 per cent of Conservative voters opted to leave. For the Conservative party, this now risks shouts of betrayal if, as we’ve seen hints of with Boris Johnson’s position in the past few days, the UK now seeks a deal with the EU that – as the Eurosceptic press are likely to describe it – scuppers, thwarts or betrays what some Leave voters thought they were voting for.
    [Show full text]
  • The London School of Economics and Political Science
    1 The London School of Economics and Political Science British Opinion and Policy towards China, 1922-1927 Phoebe Chow A thesis submitted to the Department of International History of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, November 2011 2 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. Phoebe Chow 3 Abstract Public opinion in Britain influenced the government’s policy of retreat in response to Chinese nationalism in the 1920s. The foreigners’ rights to live, preach, work and trade in China extracted by the ‘unequal treaties’ in the nineteenth century were challenged by an increasingly powerful nationalist movement, led by the Kuomintang, which was bolstered by Soviet support. The Chinese began a major attack on British interests in June 1925 in South China and continued the attack as the Kuomintang marched upward to the Yangtze River, where much of British trade was centred.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Reading List: No Deal Subject Specialist: Stefano Fella
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 8642, 5 November 2019 Compilers: Julie Gill, Antonia Garraway Brexit reading list: no deal Subject specialist: Stefano Fella Contents: List of 2019 publications www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 Brexit reading list: no deal Contents Summary 3 List of 2019 publications 4 November 4 October 4 September 5 August 8 July 9 June 11 May 11 April 12 March 12 February 14 January 14 Cover page image copyright: Flagging support by Dave Kellam. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped. 3 Commons Library Briefing, 5 November 2019 Summary As the possibility of the UK leaving the EU without a withdrawal agreement – or ‘deal’ – has become more likely, the commentary on and analysis of a no-deal scenario have increased. This paper provides links to a selection of 2019 publications on a no-deal exit from the EU by private and voluntary sector organisations, think tanks, research institutes and other academic institutions. The publications selected consider the general political, constitutional and economic implications of a no-deal Brexit rather than its effects in particular sectors. So, for information on Brexit and future trade options or specific parts of the economy or agriculture, for example, see the relevant papers on the Library’s Brexit website. 4 Brexit reading list: no deal List of 2019 publications November No-deal Guidance Dashboard – November 2019, British Chambers of Commerce October Claire Milne, Could we still have a “no deal” Brexit in 2020 at the end of the transition?, Full Fact, 29 October 2019 MEPs want to keep 2020 EU funding for UK in no-deal Brexit, European Law Monitor, 25 October 2019 Chris Curtis, No-Dealers think MPs should back Boris’ Brexit deal, YouGov, 24 October 2019 Simon Blackford, Negotiating Brexit, Briefings for Brexit, 22 October 2019 Patrick Benham-Crosswell, BoJo’s deal is not Brexit.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit: Options for Britain Graham Avery CMG Professor Aldwyn Cooper Sir Malcolm Rifkind KCMG, QC
    Brexit: Options for Britain Graham Avery CMG Professor Aldwyn Cooper Sir Malcolm Rifkind KCMG, QC iCES Occasional Paper XXV Institute of Contemporary European Studies iCES Occasional Paper XXV © Institute of Contemporary European Studies Graham Avery, Professor Aldwyn Cooper, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, 2017 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the permission of the publishers. ISSN 2040-6517 (online) First published in Great Britain in 2017 by the Institute of Contemporary European Studies (iCES) Regent’s University London, Regent’s Park, London, NW1 4NS regents.ac.uk/ices 02 Contents Foreword Professor John Drew 3 Contributors Graham Avery CMG 5 Professor Aldwyn Cooper 11 Sir Malcolm Rifkind KCMG, QC 17 Discussion 22 Background Paper 25 1 Professor John Drew Chancellor, Regent’s University London Director, Institute of Contemporary European Studies A former UK diplomat in Paris, Kuwait and Bucharest, John held the positions of Director of International Corporate Affairs at Rank Xerox and Director of European Affairs at Touche Ross International. He was the Representative of the European Commission in the UK and is the Director of the Institute of Contemporary European Studies at Regent’s University London. 2 Foreword Good evening ladies and gentlemen, students and staff. As Chancellor of Regent’s University London and Director of Regent’s Institute for Contemporary European Studies it is my very pleasant duty to welcome you this evening to our joint seminar with the Senior European Experts. The seminar is based on the background paper prepared by the Senior Experts. I think it is one of the best papers that they have written over the many years I have been reading their work.
    [Show full text]