The unnoticed reasons for Brexit
Are there reasons which psychological, emotional, social, cultural and many other aspects of human sensibilities which caused Brexit from EU much to the surprise of all our wishes and expectations to see the world more and more unified.
1. Frames of reference and scales of observation decide perceptions and perceptions decide perspective.
2. In the larger scheme of things we can neither deny nor defy the importance of anything or anyone.
3. Everything and every issue has multiple dimensions and every dimension operates with various and varied dynamics.
Trade agreements, common economic developmental concerns with a real sense of purpose, good intentions and exigencies of united power rightfully converged to create EU.
But then EU probably did not take into consideration the three points mentioned above and thus is now subjecting itself to criticisms like it was a mere grouping more for convenience rather than confluence of cultural bonding or even common language.
This could be partially true as togetherness fostered upon for a specific purpose without multiple commonalities is always vulnerable to fall out due to lack of compatibility on certain sensitive issues, more so due to lack of factors which contribute a sense of belonging, importance and involvement.
In addition to these possible inherent weaknesses there were certain unexpected external developments which impacted the EU negatively because it was upsetting the very pillars of the foundations of EU i.e. ‘collective economic benefits’ as they had unexpected millions to feed and had to spend another billions on internal security in otherwise comparatively calm European nations at least after world war-II.
So, in a way though we may wish otherwise we cannot totally blame those who opted for Brexit.
Everything must be infused with a spirit as well as utility for longer sustenance.
That’s why some of the very logically correct and more useful things remain unaccepted.
Here is on example of a very logically useful suggestion to naming towns numerically and geographically but devoid of history, story, meaning, etymology, cultural connections etc to names did not take off.
Architect Stedman Whitwell thought it illogical and confusing that different towns sometimes have the same name. He suggested assigning a unique name to each location based on its latitude and longitude. He published this table in the New Harmony, Ind., Gazette in 1826:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
Latitude ……………..a e i o u y ee ei ie ou
Longitude…………....b d f k l m n p r t
Insert an S to indicate south latitude and a V for west longitude; omit them for north and east. Thus New Harmony (38°11′N, 87°55′W) would be rechristened Ipba Veinul; New York would be Otke Notive, Washington D.C. Feili Neivul, and Pittsburgh Otfu Veitoup.
What these names lack in poetry they make up in utility: a traveler given the name of a town can immediately infer its location. Unfortunately, Whitwell’s scheme never caught on — and today the United States has 28 Springfields, 29 Clintons, and 30 Franklins.