Representation, Truthfulness and Integrity: The Case of the Brexit Campaign

Established norms of democratic debate such as truthfulness, integrity and accountability appear to increasingly break down. In critical decision-making processes from referenda and general elections to policy debates around migration and climate change, sentiments, misinformation and outright lies seem increasingly accepted as common currency. Whilst there is a good amount of research available on why citizens (as receivers) willingly believe misinformation, little is known about how political elites (as senders) exploit and use misinformation and lies for strategic purposes. Using misinformation for strategic purposes brings with it obvious questions in regard to democratic representation and as a result integrity. Indeed, democratic politicians can experience a conflict between their personal convictions, on the one hand, and their duty to represent the views of their constituents, on the other, a tension that perhaps falls outside of even a trustee model of representation. They may even find themselves in a double bind between keeping faith with their own views and those of their constituents, and pursuing those policies that seem pragmatically the best available to them given the available opportunities. In either case, they might find that resorting to misinformation resolves the conflict. Though it might allow them to close the representation gap, does it also allow them to keep their integrity? This paper explores whether there are situations in which lying can be what democratic representation requires, and how it affects political integrity, using the Brexit campaign to illustrate the argument.