In the early months of
2016 I was attending a couple of crowdfunding events in Europe. One
in Amsterdam I remember particularly well for the conversations
outside of the sessions and at the networking events. Lots of people
asked me, being one of the few Brits there, what I thought would
happen on the BREXIT referendum.
There was general
surprise and disbelief when I told them that I fully expected the UK
would vote to leave. At first they mocked and played along with what
they thought was a joke on my part. The idea that the UK would vote
to leave was completely unbelievable to this predominately young
crowd who, when engaged with the UK, tended to do so via London and
the metropolitan views so commonly expressed there which would have
simply echoed theirs.
As it dawned on them
that I was serious they at first thought I was crazy. But as I spoke
to them about why I thought it would be the case the reaction moved
to one of apprehension and, in some cases, fear.
As it turned out my
prediction was correct.
Later in the year I was
in Europe again at another fintech event and was told in no uncertain
terms by some German EU reps that inspite of the vote that it,
BREXIT, would never happen. The UK would never leave they told me and
that I simply did not understand how these things worked. It seems I
did know my country better after all.
I make this point today
for two reasons.
Firstly there is an
important lesson for anyone involved in the crowd economy, beware of
confirmation bias and be sure you are listening widely when you try
to engage with the crowd.
The second reason for
mentioning it is because today we do begin that journey away from the
strictures of the EU and for this I am wholly thankful as the
regulatorily interventionist, bureaucratic and civic code model of
the EU stands four square against the opportunity and promise of
crowd economics.
For me the two points
are in a way related. As it happens I not only managed to call that
referendum, but the US presidential, two general elections and a
Scottish independence vote pretty much spot on, much against the
prevailing wisdom of pollsters and predictors everywhere. I am also
not a fan of the EU.
How so?
As someone with
numerous degrees, having lived and worked over seas for many years,
being married to an immigrant I am by most estimations a “citizen
of nowhere” by Goodharts rules and should in all probability share
the prevailing pro EU views of such demographics and been wholly
undone by finding pout that my iphone chatter was so out of step with
the electorate.
But, I also failed my
11+, have trade tickets as a welder and bricklayer and have done more
than my share of terrible soul destroying jobs to understand that
real pressure is working back shifts in a foundry as casual labour
worrying about making the rent. It is not sitting in a swanky office
working hard as a well paid management consultant deciding who might
get fired at a clients business.
As a result I have
always managed to retain connections from people through out my life.
I have good ties to both ends of societies spectrum White collar,
gilded collar and blue collar and so I seem to have a reasonable feel
for a broader swell of feeling than perhaps those that have a a lens
dominated by social media and a group of like minded followees at
that.
No, I have seen what
has happened to my once proud little home town and not in the
slightest surprised they said “enough” to politicians who seemed
to despise them and hid behind the excuse of Brussels to not act in
their interests.
This is, I think, an
important lesson for anyone in the crowd economy. Social media is not
the real world and it is, in large part, a low touch relationship.
Use it as a barometer at your peril.
But my antipathy to the
EU (not Europe I hasten to add – two very different things) runs
deeper than simply the decline of my home town. No I think their
instincts are all wrong for the crowd economy so freeing ourselves
from that approach is a cause for celebration in my opinion.
When I was invited to
debate the merits, or otherwise, of Brexit with an eminent Economics
Professor and vice principle of Glasgow University last year, you
will not be entirely surprised that we didn't see much eye to eye.
Apart, that is, from the fact that we both agreed that to that point
the negotiations had been very poorly handled.
The Professor was
unwilling to engage with the dreadfully inaccurate predictions made
by other eminent economic advisors to the Bank of England or the then
Chancellor ( apparently he hadn't read them). Similarly he had no
answer to why it was that Europe was not leading in the fintech arena
or indeed how it had singularly failed to great a Microsoft, Facebook
or Google. One wag suggested in the audience that a large American
market to build from might have something to do with this, to which
my counter was “so much for the much trumpeted single market eh?”
No the answer is, in
large part, interventionist regulation. English common law has
allowed the regulated aspects of crowd finance to flourish here in a
way it hast under a civil law model. Similarly it is the EU's
instinctive Luddite fear of allowing technologies liberating aspects
to flourish which gives us bureaucratic failures like GDPR and “the
right to be forgotten” and the disastrous copyright directives
which we will thankfully be ignoring here in the UK.
No I wont lament our
departure from the EU and I shall continue to use it as a real
example of both the risk of narrow consultations, and the dangers of
poor ill considered regulation in a world where innovation runs ahead
of old protectionist regulatory models designed to favour incumbents
and not to embrace the opportunities we could, and should, be looking
forward to.
