To understand how to approach the liberalist and realist theories of the EU referendum of Britain’s exit to the EU “Brexit”, we must ask why must there be an exit to the international institution? There are different contributors to the reasoning in leaving. We can begin with saying that the conservative party had won the electoral votes and proceeded to make this change. David Cameron was pushing for an “EU stay”; however, this was not the only factor in play. There were membership fees, trade, sovereignty, immigration, and security factors also in play. The UK had many factors to their decision to leave the UK now we must see if it is the best for them.
The first approach to the “Brexit” situation displays the first major difference between …show more content…
Membership fee’s were getting more expensive as the Britain’s economy started growing. In the financial crisis of 2008 the UK’s membership fee was 2.7 billion pounds. But, the fee grew more and more, in 2013 it was reported to be 11.3 billion pounds. Leaving the European Union would relieve the UK from this expense. The money would go to the poor countries in the European Union instead of its people. The UK would now be going after its own interests correlating with the realist perspective that states should purse their own interests. But the liberalist view see that states can cooperate with one another more altruistically. With the UK leaving it a seen as a realist approach but, it would have been the liberalist …show more content…
The European Union always had a say on how the trade would be handled for all the countries in the EU. In a way this was testing the sovereignty of the UK. Again, the realist approach is to pursue self interests. The UK’s self interests are that the majority of small and medium sized firms don’t trade with the EU do to regulations leaving this institution would open “opportunities” for more trade. The trade expansion could possibly be with the US which are currently negotiating the worlds biggest free trade agreement. Liberalists believe that states could cooperate, but there is a limitation because cooperation would mean that there is an “opportunity” for all types of firms and no regulations restricting them. But, there were restrictions thus the liberalist approach
The first approach to the “Brexit” situation displays the first major difference between …show more content…
Membership fee’s were getting more expensive as the Britain’s economy started growing. In the financial crisis of 2008 the UK’s membership fee was 2.7 billion pounds. But, the fee grew more and more, in 2013 it was reported to be 11.3 billion pounds. Leaving the European Union would relieve the UK from this expense. The money would go to the poor countries in the European Union instead of its people. The UK would now be going after its own interests correlating with the realist perspective that states should purse their own interests. But the liberalist view see that states can cooperate with one another more altruistically. With the UK leaving it a seen as a realist approach but, it would have been the liberalist …show more content…
The European Union always had a say on how the trade would be handled for all the countries in the EU. In a way this was testing the sovereignty of the UK. Again, the realist approach is to pursue self interests. The UK’s self interests are that the majority of small and medium sized firms don’t trade with the EU do to regulations leaving this institution would open “opportunities” for more trade. The trade expansion could possibly be with the US which are currently negotiating the worlds biggest free trade agreement. Liberalists believe that states could cooperate, but there is a limitation because cooperation would mean that there is an “opportunity” for all types of firms and no regulations restricting them. But, there were restrictions thus the liberalist approach