Only one in 10 feel leaving the EU has helped their finances, while just 9% say it has benefited the NHS, despite £350m a week pledge according to new poll

A clear majority of the British public now believes Brexit has been bad for the UK economy, has driven up prices in shops, and has hampered government attempts to control immigration, according to a poll by Opinium to mark the third anniversary of the UK leaving the EU single market and customs union.

The survey of more than 2,000 UK voters also finds strikingly low numbers of people who believe that Brexit has benefited them or the country.

Just one in 10 believe leaving the EU has helped their personal financial situation, against 35% who say it has been bad for their finances, while just 9% say it has been good for the NHS, against 47% who say it has had a negative effect.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    141
    ·
    1 year ago

    You mean a backwards looking ideology doesn’t address the needs of society today and in the future?

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Even calling it “backwards” is falling for conservatives’ euphemistic lie. Conservatism has never really been about “upholding tradition” or any of the bullshit they claim; it’s only ever been about authoritarianism and enforcing hierarchy. If it happens to jive with a “tradition” it is only because said tradition is authoritarian and hierarchical.

      • LemmysMum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s never really been conservatism, it’s regressivism. They want Feudalism because they think they can be king.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Conservatism” has always been a euphemism for regressivism. There is no difference between the two concepts, and never was.

          To say that “it’s never really been conservatism,” as if there’s a distinction to be made between the abhorrent ideology of conservatives like Trump and some kind of other non-abhorrent version of conservatism, is to be an apologist for it. It’s understandable that you’d make such an error since conservatives spend a lot of effort trying to gaslight the public and launder the reputation of conservative ideology, but nevertheless, the notion that there exists (or has ever existed) some idealized form of conservatism that isn’t thoroughly regressive garbage remains a fallacy.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yep. There is value in looking at how things are currently done and have been done in the past. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel, and there may have been good reason for some decisions in the past. We had a safety system at work that had some superfluous quirks, but when we went to remove them, we learned the customer had specifically requested it to be that way. On the other end, we learned that we had some poorly designed equipment because we had specifically requested it in the past.

        None of that though is what modern conservatives do.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          None of that though is what modern conservatives do.

          FTFY. Half the point I was trying to make is that the notion about conservatism being about acting with caution isn’t just a lie now, but has always been one. Conservatives have been falsely claiming this ever since the 16th Century!

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No we don’t.

              I think I still haven’t quite made myself understood: The version of conservatism centered around perpetuating social hierarchy is conservatism. We don’t need another name for it because it’s the only kind of conservatism there ever was. The “good” kind of conservatism that’s about caution or moderation that folks keep trying to contrast it with also doesn’t need a name because it’s not actually a thing that exists as a distinct ideology. (I suppose if you really insist on labeling it, you could call it “not-conservatism.”)

              Everybody who claims to be the “good” kind of conservative is either (a) a trash conservative who is lying about their motivations, or (b) a confused non-conservative.