Abstract
The paper focuses on the analysis of the main arguments in the period before the referendum on the departure of Great Britain from the European Union. It deals with the arguments of two campaigns - Britain Stronger in Europe, which supported remaining in the European Union, and Vote Leave, which fought for leaving it.
This paper strives, through qualitative research, to map and analyse the arguments and justification for the reasons why British voters decided to leave the long-standing European Union. This paper focuses on the analysis of individual arguments through the analysis of participants' speeches as well as printed (internet) media and statistical data.
However, this is not a quantitative solution. It is about qualitatively mapped arguments of the two campaigns.
The decision was made by the British public with 51.9% of the vote. During the campaigns two irreconcilable camps stood against each other - supporters of Britain's membership in the European Union (Britain Stronger in Europe) and opponents of its membership (Vote Leave).
The first group, Britain Stronger in Europe, built the campaign on the economy and employment, i.e. highlighting the economic benefits of Britain's involvement in the Union's single internal market. The Vote Leave campaign did not question the fact that participation in the single internal market was beneficial for the country, but their views were more emotional.
They followed the algorithm for statistical analysis and built a digital system that provided them with empirical data to know who their constituents were and what they wanted to hear. With respect to the civilizational specifics of Great Britain, in this paper we are going to analyze the individual arguments which formed the campaign of both camps and influenced the British population in the election.