The EU Referendum - The educational divide

As the results of the EU Referendum came in, it became clear that the areas with the highest number of graduates were more likely to vote for Remain and the areas with the fewest were more likely to vote Leave. The areas with the lowest number of graduates tend to be the the less affluent areas of the UK and the the areas with the highest proportion of pensioners. Why do people believe that education was a dividing factor? What difference does having a degree make to the way people viewed this referendum?

The young are more likely to be graduates

Over the past several decades there has been a push to get increasing numbers of young people to university. This means that the areas with more graduates tend to also be the areas with the highest proportion of people 35 and under.

Diversity in education

There is the possibility that it is more the diversity that often comes with a university education, where students often live and study with a broad range of people of different races, different nationalities and even across the class barrier. Perhaps this is one of the key benefits of studying for a degree over GCSEs and A-Levels.

With the diversity of the people around you, with the chance to meet with people from different backgrounds, meeting these people, talking to them and befriending them puts a human face and makes it significantly harder to "other" similar people. They no longer become just a vague "bogeyman" that the press and politicians can use to frighten people into submission, they become real people, with real emotions, with real problems.

One potential theory as to why those who do not attend universtiy is that they find themselves in the same community in which they grew up, some will move away and experience new cultures, but there will be many who remain in the same place and will have more limited chance to meet people from different backgrounds. It becomes easier for people to be persuaded that those who are different pose a threat because they are more of an abstract concept, easier to turn stereotype and demonise.

Expert knowledge?

This is a more difficult theory, still very rough, but a university education is more based on personal learning and research than at any earlier stage in a person's education. Perhaps it is that the more educated a person is the deeper they will research into a given subject, the more analytical the person's research will be as they approach their research with critical thinking.

Some people will only get their news, their information on critical issues like the EU Referendum from a few sources, from the mainstream media, seeing the same kinds of headlines each day and experiencing a biased view of events (after-all no human is unbiased on a subject, there is always some interpretation). Those who mainly get their news from the mainly anti-EU/anti-immigrant tabloid newspapers will have a very different view of the world than someone who collects data from multiple sources. It is possible to presume that the tabloid readers would be more likely to vote Leave.

However, another view could be taken from the surveys that suggest that the people on the Leave side were less likely to trust experts than the people on the Remain side. There could easily be a level of "intellectual snobbery" going on where the people who have degrees are more likely to respect others who are educated to a similar or higher level, that there is an inherent trust in the experts.

Some of the things written during the referendum, some of the things we see every day from politicians (perhaps even this blog) has a level of intellectual snobbery in it, a way of talking down to and patronising less-educated people, being dismissive of their views and feelings. Talking down to people is more likely to drive them away from your cause than discussing with them, including them in the debate, agreeing on core principles and being willing to change your own position to accomodate their needs, that is what politics is all about, I think.

So what next?

The country is divided, it is not just enough to say we need to listen more but we have to properly engage people, bring them into the process of discussion and make them feel like they are included. It is not about talking down to them or pandering to their fears but having that constructive discussion, asking why until there is nothing left but the underlying core value, hopefully a shared one, and forging a new path together. It is not just taking others on a journey until they reach the destination that has been pre-determined.