Will they stay or will they go?

For the second time in two years, Britain i s on t he verge of a vote that could dramatically alter its future. In September 2014, voters in Scotland rejected a proposal to form an independent country. Today, Britain will choose whether to remain a member of the European Union, or be the first country to quit since it was founded in 1957 as a sixcountry economic pact.

As with the Scottish vote, the implications are farreaching. Leaving Europe could have profound economic and political effects. Britons could lose their right to work and travel freely in Europe. Trade could be significantly affected, although opinions vary. As with the Scottish vote, business and industrial leaders heavily favour staying, while grassroots sentiment appears more inclined to bid the Continent adieu. Quitting Europe could give new life to the Scottish independence movement, as Scots tend to be more pro- Europe and could see a vote to quit as a new reason to go it alone.

Even before the murder of pro- Europe MP Jo Cox, the Brexit campaign had become increasingly heated. Sentiment is divided between two primary forces: those motivated largely by the economic advantages Britain derives from membership in a 28- country marketplace of 500 million people, and those who resent the broad powers of the EU government and its sprawling bureaucracy, and consider Britain’s ability to make its own decisions of paramount importance.

To a large degree, it’s a contest of the head versus the heart. Big business argues there are clear benefits to being part of the EU. Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne claims the average household would be $ 8,500 worse off outside Europe, though surveys suggest few people believe him. Just as in the final weeks of the Scottish vote, pro- Europe forces have run a welloiled campaign, warning of economic Armageddon if Britain breaks away.

The fear factor worked in Scotland, but is up against emotional forces that are strongly anti- Europe. Many in Britain see the Brusselsbased EU as an unresponsive monolith that sucks money out and spends it on red tape and subsidies to other countries. According to the BBC, Britain pours more than $ 16 billion into the EU than it gets back each year. The Leave cam- paign argues it could build a new hospital every week for the money it sends to Europe.

While pro- Europe supporters maintain Britain benefits from the young, eager migrants who arrive in search of a better life, opponents claim they take jobs from locals and are angered at the generous benefits made available to new arrivals. There has been more than a hint of xenophobia in the Leave camp that has tainted some otherwise reasonable arguments with the stench of bigotry.

What may be the core of the argument rests on conflicting images of modern Britain. The Remain campaign argues British prestige would be damaged by leaving and that the country would go from a senior member of a powerful union, to an island nation of 64 million that is shunned its by resentful former partners. The Leave forces see separation as an advantage, an outlook reflected in their campaign slogan, “We want our country back.” Derided as “Little Englanders,” they show a willingness to risk economic pain, in return for the ability to once again insulate England from the perceived taint of foreign influences. They also say the dangers are overblown: Europe’s recent history has been one of economic crises and meltdowns, particularly the mammoth bailout of Greece on terms largely dictated by Germany. Once outside the EU, proponents say, Britain could negotiate new access agreements along more favourable lines.

Whichever way the vote goes, t he campaign has made clear that while open borders create many winners, there has been a stark failure to mitigate the impact on those who feel left behind. It is not a small community, and it shares the same sense of abandonment that has spurred the surprising success of Donald Trump’s U. S. presidential quest, despite the offensiveness of the candidate and the ugliness of his message. Open borders bring greater prosperity, but they do not erase inequity, and Western powers have done a demonstrably poor job of preparing people to deal with the challenges they bring. In or out of Europe, Britain reflects the failure of governments on both the right and left to successfully integrate economic advances with the needs of populations to adjust. The anger will only grow if that underlying failure is not addressed.