So, David Cameron has stepped down following the results of the Brexit referendum, which he had himself called. How will he go down in history? How will future generations assess his decision?
(Typo in the poll title, could a mod please fix it?)
Negative. Outright ruin is implausible, but permanent damage seems likely. I expect he’ll go down in history as a fool at best.
I don’t see how he could be viewed as positive re: Brexit. Even if it turns out well, he campaigned against it and only held the referendum so he could silence the people who were for it.
I think he’ll be viewed very negatively. The likelihood now is that the UK will split; even if there are no economic downsides to Brexit, that alone is not a good legacy. He called a referendum when he didn’t have to, solely for internal party management issues, and he lost with grave consequences.
If Remain had won, that would have been his legacy. They didn’t so now he doesn’t have one. Impossible to say whether voting Leave will prove to be the right thing to do until at least 5 years from now - then we’ll see. I’m optimistic about it but there are obviously a lot of things to sort out.
I think he did have to call a referendum having made it part of the 2015 manifesto; so if a mis-step was made, it was some years ago, not this year.
It’s absolutely buried any chance of him leaving a positive legacy, and he will be seen as an incompetent, tactially inept PM by future generations on this basis. That’s without even getting into what the future may hold for the UK after Brexit. Even if we come out of it in good shape [unlikely, IMO], Cameron has been completely out-manoeuvred by factions of his own party, losing his own referendum that should never have been called in the first place.
Understand this wasn’t some plebiscite that the whole country was baying for - it could not be denied, it had to be put in front of the people and all you could do as a PM was stand back. It’s something that has arisen from internecine squabbling within the conservative party, exacerbated by a supine labour opposition. Cameron is a PR man, he doesn’t do long term political strategy, or details, so he let it get well out of hand and has now paid the price.
Should say that we’re not talking about a man who was going to leave much of a legacy in the first place, he’s a politically lightweight administrator governing in somewhat straitened times, so was never going to lay down a legacy for the ages. Brexit has pole-axed him, though, and will be his epitaph.
Should Scotland and Northern Ireland decide to leave the UK, he’ll be seen like Gorbachev in Russia, without the positive legacy of having brought down an oppressive system.
Well Gorbachev never fucked a dead pig, either.
The EU is a disaster and him enabling the UK to get out is a good thing regardless of how he didn’t want it to happen.
The best case scenario is that this leads to other countries getting out and the EU collapsing completely. The worst case scenario is subsequent governments keep holding referendums until the people get it right and decide to remain and then no other countries allow referendums on leaving and this is just a blip on the road to a superstate. I think the worse case scenario is more likely but at least this delays it a couple of years.
Even if getting out of the EU proves beneficial to the UK, he’ll still be remembered as the boob who wanted to stay in, and couldn’t. If Scotland decides to secede because of this, he’ll be remembered as the man who destroyed the United Kingdom. Either way, this is one of the greatest political gaffes in history.
That’s what he’ll be remembered for.
I thought about starting a similar thread with the topic “So: will Cameron go down as the PM who broke the UK?”
Unless something happens to change the course of things, I think so.
I remember how I felt during the whole Watergate thing and I think about how we look at Nixon now. I suspect history will be kind to Cameron and this will turn out to be a positive move.
Wait, what? You think Watergate turned out well for Nixon’s legacy?
I’m sure kopek meant that Watergate is no longer the only thing that comes to mind when we think of Nixon. Despite Watergate, many now have a few rather positive feelings about parts of his legacy (China, EPA…).
I agree that, in some ways, other elements of his administration have as much or more relevance for us today as his crimes of political thuggery. But if you survey any fair assortment of people about their impressions of Richard Nixon, I am pretty sure that Watergate (and associated shenanigans) will be the first, the most frequent, and the most emphatic point of mention. As a matter of cultural memory, Nixon’s legacy is forever capped and shaded by his (justly earned) reputation as power-hungry, jealous and corrupt.
Similarly, I am pretty sure that while people in future may sometimes have “but…” clauses in the conversations about David Cameron, there will be one point that is always recalled first, which colors everything else.
Agree with what people said; he will at best go down as an incompetent fool, at worst the chief cause of the dismantling of the most successful nation-state in human history.
Regardless of long term consequences to leaving the EU, being the guy in charge when your nation started dissolving - especially a nation-state that has its union in its very name - is one of those damned-for-all-time legacies.
Cameron’s going down in history as the negative Churchill. He broke things up despite great odds.
I could not choose an answer. Perhaps the result of the vote was bad, but a person may believe it was necessary or proper to hold the vote.
Actually not that bad for the country. But now that you mention it ------- 
Others jumped in and spoke well also but my main intent was really about us/the United States on a national/international level.
Only time will tell, but I very much doubt that the view will be positive.