The Ethics of Brexit

After the EU referendum of June 2016, the UK experienced three and half years of political and social dissension, of a depth and on a scale unprecedented in the modern period. The strife was particularly marked on social media, focusing passions in an increasingly polarised and irrational fashion. Grown adults often lost all inhibition, generating levels of vituperation that might serve to let off steam, but failed to cast much (if any) light on the issues. Now the atmosphere has cooled, there is more room to put forward arguments in the dispassionate mode to which philosophers are accustomed. I will be putting forward three arguments, under the broad headings of (1) immigration, (2) populism and (3) nostalgia. Overall, my contention will be that the UK’s departure from the EU should be understood as a legitimate exercise in democratic self-governance, and that competing interpretations lack sufficient warrant. Whatever side one is on – including neither – now is the time for careful, patient consideration of the issues. And if we still end up disagreeing, we will do so, at least, on a clear and reasoned basis.

☛ please register here

Tom Angier
University of Cape Town
Philosophy

Discussant:
Willem Maas
Glendon College, York University
Political Science

Mon, Mar 2, 2020
04:00 PM - 06:00 PM
Centre for Ethics, University of Toronto
200 Larkin