Why Do Some Pro-EU Remainers Mislabel Opponents as 'Far-Right'? An Exploration of Political Narratives and Ad Hominem Fallacies

Within the complex political landscape of the UK, one common theme emerges: a significant divide between pro-EU remainers and those who voted to leave. A notable aspect of this divide is the way pro-EU remainers often mislabel their opponents as 'far-right,' a practice that raises questions about political narratives and fallacious reasoning. This article delves into the reasons behind these labels and explores the broader implications of such mislabeling.

The Social Democratic Perspective

I am a member of the Social Democratic Party, a center-left political party that aligns with the democratic vote to leave the European Union (EU) rather than a pro-EU stance. Despite this, I observe a consistent pattern: Labour supporters frequently criticize those who voted to leave as 'Tory gammons.' Yet, the regions like Bolsover and Bishop Auckland, which voted Conservative, did so largely due to Labour's disdain for the Brexit referendum. It is ignorant and impractical to dismiss millions of Labour voters as unintelligent or bigoted, especially when it risks electoral defeat.

The Political Narrative of the Left

Much of the pro-EU narrative in the UK is controlled by the Left-wing, leading to a significant mischaracterization of opponents. Any action perceived as diverging from their views is swiftly labeled as 'far-right.' However, this mislabeling is not based on logical reasoning but rather on an attempt to control the political discourse. Left-wing proponents seem to overlook that a majority of voters view them as a marginalized group, and many simply shrug off their attempts at control in favor of electoral success.

The Brexit/Remain Debate: An Ad Hominem Fallacy

The Brexit/Remain debate stands out as a prime example of an ad hominem fallacy in political discourse. The pro-EU side failed to provide compelling arguments for staying in the EU, instead resorting to hyperbolic and unverified claims of death and destruction. The simplicity and lack of robust arguments against leaving the EU are striking. In response, some pro-EU remainers have not engaged with these arguments but instead invited immediate dismissal by labeling their opponents as 'far-right.'

The Validity of the 'Far-Right' Label

It is crucial to question the validity of the 'far-right' label. While some far-right individuals may support Brexit for nationalist reasons, this represents only a tiny fraction of the voter base. Generalizations of this kind are both inaccurate and strategic. By attempting to characterize the entire Leave campaign in this manner, pro-EU remainers can create a false dichotomy that shifts the focus away from substance to identity. This strategy does not address the actual reasons for the Leave vote and often backfires.

Famous Figures and Their Stance

Figures such as Tony Benn, Jeremy Corbyn, and his deputy John McDonnell were, in many ways, as critical of the Brexit campaign as they were of the government. However, the irony is that in their constituents' own constituencies, the vote to leave the EU prevailed. In the case of McDonnell, his own constituency voted to leave, yet he ignored the clear mandate. Similarly, Dennis Skinner, known for his opposition to EU treaties, was often aligned with Corbyn and McDonnell, further highlighting the disconnect between messaging and reality.

The Impact of Mislabeling

Mislabeling opponents as 'far-right' has significant impacts on political discourse. It creates an environment where substantive debate is stifled, and polarizing rhetoric triumphs. This not only alienates potential supporters but also weakens the pro-EU position. Moreover, it misrepresents the democratic mandate of the electorate, allowing the far-right narrative to persist despite evidence to the contrary. It undermines the legitimacy of a center-left party's own positions by painting them in a negative light.

Conclusion

The practice of mislabeling opponents as 'far-right' by some pro-EU remainers is a reflection of deeper issues within political discourse. It is rooted in misunderstanding the constituents' desires and mischaracterizing the Leave campaign. By focusing on reasoned debate rather than identity politics, we can foster a more inclusive and constructive political environment.