I mostly agree but the idea that the electorate is just stupid or racist because they vote for things you disagree with is part of the problem. Immigration is fine if you plan for it but it is obvious in lots of ways it wasn't planned for in terms of its impact. And when services are strained then its not stupid for people to feel that the status quo will be part of the problem.
Brexit was in part lost because too many people who opposed told people who were considering voting for it that was because they were stupid and/or racist.
I wasn't suggesting that it be used as a campaign slogan, and I agree about the Brexit mistake, but it kind of makes my point. It's not rational to vote against your own interests because you feel insulted. Brexit was against the status quo but it was always clear that it would only make things worse for most people.
You're also right about immigration not being planned for, but it's all too easy for those in power to cover up their own planing failures by simply blaming immigration itself. Actually, it's worse than that, they are trying to blame the relatively small number of asylum seekers - the "small boats". The small boats could be stopped immediately by simply providing a safe and legal way for people in France (and preferably more widely) to apply for asylum in the UK. The planning for the relatively small numbers (compared to legal immigration) should be relatively straightforward, given that most successful applicants will work and contribute to the economy.
Collectively, the electorate
do behave stupidly, but it's not all about individuals being stupid (although about half of them are below average intelligence) it's partly ignorance, lots of people don't follow politics much at all and only end up with a few sound bites that have filtered through.
I think it was Robert A. Heinlein who said, "
There are perhaps 5% of the population that simply can't think. There are another 5% who can, and do. The remaining 90% can think, but don't." I think this is doubly true of engagement with political issues so as to make an informed choice.
Nasty Nigel doesn't have any worked out policies, just some vacuous slogans. He says "zero net migration" but there's no clue how he'd actual achieve that. And yet large numbers of people are turning to Reform UK because of the slogans alone.
There are also the normal cognitive biases that you have to work hard to avoid. A comforting lie can easily appeal more than the hard truth. And since Trump in the US and Johnson here, some politicians seem to think that utterly brazen, barefaced lies are now acceptable. They can easily stick in some people's minds if it's something they find plausible, aligns with what they already think, and they don't pay enough attention to fact-check.
