Outspoken Brexit supporter, former London mayor Boris Johnson, leading candidate to succeed David Cameron as prime minister, pulled out of the race days earlier.
A previous article speculated on if he was pushed, powerful anti-Brexiteer interests on both sides the Atlantic going all-out to maintain unity – disregarding popular sentiment.
Boris Johnson’s surprise announcement was the first shot across the bow, followed by likely orchestrated London anti-Brexit street protests.
And now Eurosceptic Nigel Farage, Brexit’s leading advocate, a European parliament member, two-time UKIP leader, announcing his resignation Monday, saying:
“During the referendum, I said I wanted my country back. Now I want my life back.”
“I have never been and I have never wanted to be a career politician. I couldn’t possibly achieve more than we managed to achieve in the referendum. So I think it’s right that I should stand aside as leader of UKIP.”
Was he pushed perhaps like Johnson or did he intend this all along? Draw your own conclusions. Britain’s two leading Brexit proponents, stepping out of the fray back-to-back, days after the June 23 vote raises suspicions.
They’re needed to help shepherd things toward Britain regaining its sovereign independence. Their absence makes it easier for anti-Brexit interests to prevent it – a virtual certainty, how things will play out to assure it beginning to unfold, lots more to come.
The will of the powerful virtually always prevails over popular sentiment, referendums most often exercises in futility. Exceptions prove the rule.
Venezuelan Bolivarian democracy Hugo Chavez instituted stands out. Following his December 1998 election, a national referendum was held in April 1999 on whether to convene a Constituent Assembly for a new constitution – strongly supported.
Popular sentiment prevailed. In July 1999, the Assembly was elected to draft a new constitution, its members largely Chavista supporters.
In December 1999, a national referendum to decide up or down on the proposed constitution won overwhelmingly, popular sentiment again prevailing.
In February 2012, Syria’s Assad let voters decide on whether to approve a new constitution – including 14 new articles, 37 amended ones and another 34 reformulated from its proposed draft.
Political pluralism was established for the first time. So were presidential term limits and press freedom. Despite Obama’s war raging, turnout exceeded 57%, approval over 89%.
Ordinary Syrians got to decide whether or not to adopt their nation’s constitutions, bedrock governing documents – unheard of most elsewhere, real democracy, absent in Western societies and most others.
Previous articles explained Brexit voting was non-binding, a meaningless exercise, parliamentarians alone deciding if Britain stays or leaves the EU – the former choice virtually certain.
Powerful US/EU/UK interests won’t tolerate divorce. What they want they’ll get.