Chaos still reigns - more self-inflicted Brexit disaster

So, the clock's ticking and the UK is rapidly running out of time to arrange a deal with the EU for its relationship upon departing. Our glorious ruling Conservative Party, unfortunately, have still not even managed to decide amongst themselves.

Storm clouds have been gathering - well, more than before - with numerous of major companies (Airbus, Jaguar Land Rover, Phillips, etc.) issuing strong warnings about their willingness to invest in the UK in the face of hard Brexit. The head of our diplomatic service, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, was heard to say "Fuck business" off the record in response, which I'm sure will be reassuring for the tens of millions of Britons who rely on jobs for their livelihoods.

Last week the PM, Theresa May, trying to scrape together some semblance of cohesion, pulled all the cabinet ministers together at the PM's country retreat, Chequers, to hash out an approximate idea of what the UK would want from the deal. This intended aim was a decidedly "soft" looking Brexit. Peace just about reigned for all of about three days... until this morning, when the Secretary of State for Exiting the EU and lead negotiator with the EU, David Davis, promptly resigned because he felt a bit lukewarm about the PM's rough guideline plan. As he didn't feel that enthusiastic, apparently he didn't feel the need to get the job done. Isn't that an inpiring attitude for a person in high office overseeing the most important issue the country has faced for decades? Meanwhile, cuntnugget-in-chief Jacob Rees-Mogg, who wishes to dictate the terms of Brexit without bothering to take any responsibility for it, has ominously offered nominal support for the PM, but in reality a coded threat of bringing her down if she doesn't do Brexit his way.

Spare a thought for poor Michel Barnier, the EU lead negotiator. A man who has almost got to the point of begging the UK to please tell him a realistic idea of what it wants from leaving the EU, and seems doomed to wait another few months.

I haven't followed the Brexit stuff for a while, so what has May and her government agreed on so far in terms of Brexit?

I am glad to see everything is running so smoothly over across the pond. It's nice to see that our politicians over here are not the only ones inept in doing their jobs.

Aaaaand cue the Queen.

This is turning into a worse fiasco than my grade 6 science fair project. It's almost as if voting for something because a bus told you to is a bad idea.

So, can't May threaten with new elections? Under the present circumstances the Tories are likely to lose and deliver power to Corbyn. The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

Hades:
So, can't May threaten with new elections? Under the present circumstances the Tories are likely to lose and deliver power to Corbyn. The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

I think there would be a Conservative leadership challenge first if she did that and I think Johnson would have a good chance of winning, maybe Davis. I a pro-Brexit Conservative leader like one of those two running on a campaign of Hard Brexit would get the same voters who voted for Brexit in the first place and probably beat Corbyn.

Hades:
So, can't May threaten with new elections? Under the present circumstances the Tories are likely to lose and deliver power to Corbyn. The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

At some point they'll probably take there chance with the general election, thinking that people voted for brexit once and they'll do it again. Cause at the moment, almost every strong brexiter are gone and your just left with plenty of soft or against, so brexit will end up being so diluted that it'll be almost like not leaving, which they'd see as a betrayal.

But if Labor win... man I don't know what would happen. They'd probably ask for an extension of the deadlines, which may or may not be granted.

Hades:
So, can't May threaten with new elections? Under the present circumstances the Tories are likely to lose and deliver power to Corbyn. The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

The rules for elections changed with the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011. An early election requires two-thirds Parliament vote or vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister with no replacement within 14 days.

Hades:
The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

If Corbyn promises a hard Brexit, no, at this point even a Labour government would be preferable to May. I'm saying this despite everyone knowing my stance on Corbyn and Labour in general, 4 to 8 years under him with a hard Brexit is preferable to a bad deal under May. You can quote me on that.

That being said, it's long past the time for the backbenches to kick May out and replace her with Mogg. This should have happened a year ago at this point, the UK holds all the cards in these negotiations, the only way the EU has any leverage is if Germany is willing to sabotage its own auto industry to the point of practical irreconcilability and the assured death of Merkel's career and what little remains of her reputation. The largest roadblock in all this is the fact that much as with those in Labour, the Remoaners within the Tories seem willing to harm the nation as punishment for daring to threaten the globalist hegemony and having the audacity to vote in the interest of anyone other then the 1%. It's disgusting, but that's to be expected from globalists.

Here's hoping it doesn't come down to a bad deal or Corbyn. The UK can at least recover from a Corbyn government, but ideally it shouldn't have to make that choice.

It looks like Brexit is becomming a lose-lose scenario for everyone. Is it possible that they can do a do over referendum just to see if people still want to leave the E.U.?

And there goes Boris Johnson too. Only quit as Foreign Secretary, not as an MP altogether, unfortunately, so this is possibly Step 348 in his needlessly circuitous plan to be made PM.

All these people resigning because they don't like may's Brexit strategy...what was there strategy that it was so great? That lot have been fumbling about for months now with apparently no goals or aims and the minute May realises they need to actually do something about the whole thing they start whining and complaining and trying to take their ball and go home only its not their ball. Its like watching a bunch of spoilt children get a punishment for the first time, its honestly kind of sad

WolvDragon:
It looks like Brexit is becomming a lose-lose scenario for everyone. Is it possible that they can do a do over referendum just to see if people still want to leave the E.U.?

That would delegitimise both referendum and lead to a situation like that in Ireland, Hungary and Romanian where EU referendum are no longer seen as legitimate by the population because they're clearly designed to go on until the EU gets its way. It would be a massive blow against democracy itself, and while I'm all for hastening the inevitable death of the EU, the UK would be better out of it when the time comes and the whole system collapses.

Zontar:

WolvDragon:
It looks like Brexit is becomming a lose-lose scenario for everyone. Is it possible that they can do a do over referendum just to see if people still want to leave the E.U.?

That would delegitimise both referendum and lead to a situation like that in Ireland, Hungary and Romanian where EU referendum are no longer seen as legitimate by the population because they're clearly designed to go on until the EU gets its way. It would be a massive blow against democracy itself, and while I'm all for hastening the inevitable death of the EU, the UK would be better out of it when the time comes and the whole system collapses.

Yes well how many times have countries or places like Puerto Rico, Scottland, and Catalonia kept on voting on referendums and almost never got the outcome they wanted? (Like puerto rico voting for statehood). Point is, referendums tend to not have the affect they want.

Not actually living in Britain I always found the Brexit and everything associated with it very entertaining. I think it's hilarious just how much people are willing to screw themselves over just to make a point. It's like the most elaborate Monty Python sketch ever staged.

WolvDragon:

Zontar:

WolvDragon:
It looks like Brexit is becomming a lose-lose scenario for everyone. Is it possible that they can do a do over referendum just to see if people still want to leave the E.U.?

That would delegitimise both referendum and lead to a situation like that in Ireland, Hungary and Romanian where EU referendum are no longer seen as legitimate by the population because they're clearly designed to go on until the EU gets its way. It would be a massive blow against democracy itself, and while I'm all for hastening the inevitable death of the EU, the UK would be better out of it when the time comes and the whole system collapses.

Yes well how many times have countries or places like Puerto Rico, Scottland, and Catalonia kept on voting on referendums and almost never got the outcome they wanted? (Like puerto rico voting for statehood). Point is, referendums tend to not have the affect they want.

Puerto Rico's statehood was rejected because it doesn't meet the very clearly spelt out criteria needed to quality. No amount of referendum will make a difference until it qualifies for statehood in the first place. Scotland also got the outcome she wanted, she voted to remain in the UK, and she has, and under precedent set by Quebec cannot vote on it again until 15 years after the previous referendum. As for Catalonia, well yeah the Spaniards screwed them over.

PsychedelicDiamond:
Not actually living in Britain I always found the Brexit and everything associated with it very entertaining. I think it's hilarious just how much people are willing to screw themselves over just to make a point. It's like the most elaborate Monty Python sketch ever staged.

You know the worst part of it is that it's impossible to tell who this applies to because many would and have argued this against both sides.

Palindromemordnilap:
And there goes Boris Johnson too. Only quit as Foreign Secretary, not as an MP altogether, unfortunately, so this is possibly Step 348 in his needlessly circuitous plan to be made PM.

All these people resigning because they don't like may's Brexit strategy...what was there strategy that it was so great? That lot have been fumbling about for months now with apparently no goals or aims and the minute May realises they need to actually do something about the whole thing they start whining and complaining and trying to take their ball and go home only its not their ball. Its like watching a bunch of spoilt children get a punishment for the first time, its honestly kind of sad

There strategy was to have every advantage and none of the disadvantage (ie trade with Europe like there part of it, but not abide by its rule, not have to accept freedom of movement and not pay into the budget). Since Europe isn't letting May/tory get that they have to make a choice. Either accept freedom of movement and rule (probably still pay too) and keep trading with Europe or don't and go back to having an hard border with Europe (including Ireland), they would also lose there banking license in Europe (big deal cause a large part of the economy is the banking sector).

This is where the soft and hard brexit come in, with soft looking more and more like the likely outcome and hard brexit being the form that most people who are leaving want (while usually denying it'll cause any problem). Since they claim soft brexit is a betrayal of the will of the population (a hug stretch since brexit was very nebulous back then and the brexit camp often selling it as something impossible) they leave in protest I guess?

Zontar:

Hades:
The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

If Corbyn promises a hard Brexit, no, at this point even a Labour government would be preferable to May. I'm saying this despite everyone knowing my stance on Corbyn and Labour in general, 4 to 8 years under him with a hard Brexit is preferable to a bad deal under May. You can quote me on that.

That being said, it's long past the time for the backbenches to kick May out and replace her with Mogg. This should have happened a year ago at this point, the UK holds all the cards in these negotiations, the only way the EU has any leverage is if Germany is willing to sabotage its own auto industry to the point of practical irreconcilability and the assured death of Merkel's career and what little remains of her reputation. The largest roadblock in all this is the fact that much as with those in Labour, the Remoaners within the Tories seem willing to harm the nation as punishment for daring to threaten the globalist hegemony and having the audacity to vote in the interest of anyone other then the 1%. It's disgusting, but that's to be expected from globalists.

Here's hoping it doesn't come down to a bad deal or Corbyn. The UK can at least recover from a Corbyn government, but ideally it shouldn't have to make that choice.

I think its the other way around. Its the Brexiteers who are willing to harm the countries interests just for their own political advancement. I don't see how those who are against Brexit harms the UK's interest because leaving goes against their interest. Everything points to an economic disaster and they don't even get much sovereignty in return. Without the rest of Europe Britain simply lacks the power to stand up for itself which leads to a loss of sovereignty when China, Rusia, The US and future powers like India and Brazil starts threatening them.

Hades:

Zontar:

Hades:
The Brexiteers know this and might fall back in line if given the choice between a soft Brexit or a Labor government.

If Corbyn promises a hard Brexit, no, at this point even a Labour government would be preferable to May. I'm saying this despite everyone knowing my stance on Corbyn and Labour in general, 4 to 8 years under him with a hard Brexit is preferable to a bad deal under May. You can quote me on that.

That being said, it's long past the time for the backbenches to kick May out and replace her with Mogg. This should have happened a year ago at this point, the UK holds all the cards in these negotiations, the only way the EU has any leverage is if Germany is willing to sabotage its own auto industry to the point of practical irreconcilability and the assured death of Merkel's career and what little remains of her reputation. The largest roadblock in all this is the fact that much as with those in Labour, the Remoaners within the Tories seem willing to harm the nation as punishment for daring to threaten the globalist hegemony and having the audacity to vote in the interest of anyone other then the 1%. It's disgusting, but that's to be expected from globalists.

Here's hoping it doesn't come down to a bad deal or Corbyn. The UK can at least recover from a Corbyn government, but ideally it shouldn't have to make that choice.

I think its the other way around. Its the Brexiteers who are willing to harm the countries interests just for their own political advancement. I don't see how those who are against Brexit harms the UK's interest because leaving goes against their interest. Everything points to an economic disaster and they don't even get much sovereignty in return. Without the rest of Europe Britain simply lacks the power to stand up for itself which leads to a loss of sovereignty when China, Rusia, The US and future powers like India and Brazil starts threatening them.

The UK could easily argue a deal like that Norway has, or what Switzerland has sans the open border. No deal would be bad, but a mutually beneficial trade deal would be better then this. The UK has nukes, it has the second strongest military in the world and the 5th largest economy in the world, it being in a trade agreement with the EU without being a part of it won't harm her in any length of time.

Zontar:

Hades:

Zontar:

If Corbyn promises a hard Brexit, no, at this point even a Labour government would be preferable to May. I'm saying this despite everyone knowing my stance on Corbyn and Labour in general, 4 to 8 years under him with a hard Brexit is preferable to a bad deal under May. You can quote me on that.

That being said, it's long past the time for the backbenches to kick May out and replace her with Mogg. This should have happened a year ago at this point, the UK holds all the cards in these negotiations, the only way the EU has any leverage is if Germany is willing to sabotage its own auto industry to the point of practical irreconcilability and the assured death of Merkel's career and what little remains of her reputation. The largest roadblock in all this is the fact that much as with those in Labour, the Remoaners within the Tories seem willing to harm the nation as punishment for daring to threaten the globalist hegemony and having the audacity to vote in the interest of anyone other then the 1%. It's disgusting, but that's to be expected from globalists.

Here's hoping it doesn't come down to a bad deal or Corbyn. The UK can at least recover from a Corbyn government, but ideally it shouldn't have to make that choice.

I think its the other way around. Its the Brexiteers who are willing to harm the countries interests just for their own political advancement. I don't see how those who are against Brexit harms the UK's interest because leaving goes against their interest. Everything points to an economic disaster and they don't even get much sovereignty in return. Without the rest of Europe Britain simply lacks the power to stand up for itself which leads to a loss of sovereignty when China, Rusia, The US and future powers like India and Brazil starts threatening them.

The UK could easily argue a deal like that Norway has, or what Switzerland has sans the open border. No deal would be bad, but a mutually beneficial trade deal would be better then this. The UK has nukes, it has the second strongest military in the world and the 5th largest economy in the world, it being in a trade agreement with the EU without being a part of it won't harm her in any length of time.

If it really was so easy they would have already managed to do so. So far they've just been insisting they want all the boons and none of the banes of EU membership which isn't going to happen. It remains to be seen what's left of their economy after Brexit which would directly affect the army and the thing about Nukes is that its really hard to bring yourself to actually use them. If a corrupt businessman ever gets elected president and tries to exploit the UK's lone position then I doubt they will employ their nukes.

The Uk even getting a trade agreement remains to be seen considering how insistent the Brexiteers are that they are fine with there being no deal at all.

Zontar:

The UK could easily argue a deal like that Norway has, or what Switzerland has sans the open border. No deal would be bad, but a mutually beneficial trade deal would be better then this.

But that's not what the Brexiters you're cheering want. The Brexiters you're cheering are driving the UK towards a "no deal", or a very weak trade deal (and thus also loss of the trade deals the EU has with the rest of the world - which are mostly very good deals).

Now, the thing is, the UK currently has almost frictionless trade with the EU. Any deal less close than perhaps Norway starts meaning that a large number of costs start getting added to UK-EU trade. And that is inevitably going to shrink trade. It's worse again for the UK. The economy of the EU (minus the UK) is something like 15 trillion Euros. The economy of the UK is under 3 trillion Euros. So when companies decide which "side" they want to operate on, they generally want to be on the side with the economy ~5 times larger, because they are taking a financial hit (tariffs, etc.) on a fifth as much of their sales. This is what companies are warning: they don't want to leave the UK, but staying in the UK without a good deal endangers their profits more... and so they will start moving European operations to the continent.

The UK has nukes,

So what? These cannot effectively be translated into political and economic leverage.

it has the second strongest military in the world and the 5th largest economy in the world

Somewhere between wrong and misleading. The UK obviously has a weaker military than China and Russia, and probably several other nations. What it does have is a relatively high ability to conduct military operations far from its borders. Nevertheless, this ability is so miniscule compared to (say) the USA, it's hard to know exactly what benefit it is.

Likewise, what does "the fifth largest economy in the world" mean? (Incidentally, thanks to the Brexit referendum, and depending on how measured it's arguably now sixth, behind France). See the above about the issues with the UK's relationship with the EU to see it means a damn sight less than you'd think.

A large economy is attractive as a market and has an ability to leverage forms of trade. However, there's usually a major limitation: and that's distance. One of the best known rules of economics is that trade declines heavily with distance. The UK, therefore, is in fact not a hugely interesting economy to much of the world. The UK economy is vastly greater than Malysia's, but nearly all countries from India to Japan trade more with Malaysia than they do with the UK, and so Malaysia is more important market to them. That's what distance does for trade.

* * *

An interesting fact is that the US defence secretary recently sent a letter to his UK counterpart threatening to replace the UK as favoured military ally with France. Similarly, Trump says he's going to sign the UK an amazing trade deal... but hang on a minute. He's threatening virtually all the countries that the USA has good trade deals with (China, EU, Canada, Mexico). And let's bear in mind, that EU goods tariff is hitting the UK, too. In fact, the USA has a trade deficit with the UK over twice that of the one it does with Canada - and Trump hates trade deficits. He's obviously not going to give the UK a lovely, bright, shiny trade deal, is he? He's going to try to fuck the UK up the backside, and leverage the UK's weaker position outside the EU for all its worth.

This is the thing about your view of the world, Zontar. You want nationalism and you don't like globalisation and international organisations such as the EU. But your view of the world is a dog-eat-dog world where countries vie for dominance. What that necessarily means is that smaller and weaker countries are bent into subservience by the stronger. It's ironic for instance that you argue this as a Canadian: but look at what Trump is threatening your country with. Canada is hugely dependent on the USA. The USA is about three-quarters of Canada's international trade, worth around 20% of the Canadian economy. The USA can send Canada into crushing recession at a whim. And so it is similar for the UK. You want the UK to leave the EU for various points of ideology, but what it really does is weaken the UK and leave it vastly more vulnerable to other powers - ironically including the EU. Although thankfully, the EU is by its nature a lot more inclined to co-operative dealings than countries like China, the USA and Russia.

TrulyBritish:
I haven't followed the Brexit stuff for a while, so what has May and her government agreed on so far in terms of Brexit?

A transition period from march 29th 2019, when Brexit officially happens until the last day of 2020. There has been a deal to protect the rights of Brits already living in the rest of Europe and vice versa. There has been a general promise to not have a hard border in Ireland though it is unclear how that is supposed to work. And I think the EU and the UK have worked out that the UK was due a certain amount of money to the EU, estimated around 50billion euro's, I believe.

Bobular:
I think there would be a Conservative leadership challenge first if she did that and I think Johnson would have a good chance of winning, maybe Davis. I a pro-Brexit Conservative leader like one of those two running on a campaign of Hard Brexit would get the same voters who voted for Brexit in the first place and probably beat Corbyn.

Public opinion on Brexit has changed since the referendum, and polling now shows quite consistently that the majority of people in the country no longer support Brexit at all, let alone hard Brexit (this does not translate, of course, into the decision being reversible).

There are plenty of hardline Euroskeptics who just think the EU is bad and that any price is worth it to be out of it, of course, but they aren't the majority. A significant proportion of people who voted for Brexit did so based on a series of promises made by the leave campaign. The most obvious one was the infamous ?350 million to the NHS claim. Even leave campaigners are aware that they wouldn't have won the referendum without this claim, and it illustrated very directly the supposed benefits of leaving the EU, but it's also been publicly debunked and walked back on even by most leave campaigners. People were also sold a narrative of what negotiations would be like which is frankly ludicrous and unworkable and in which the EU would be unable to demand any concessions, despite representing economies with combined value many times that of the UK.

In short, the ordinary people who were galvanized into action by the promise of being financially better off due to Brexit have realised that they will not be, and in fact that there will, at the very least, be a transitional period in which they are worse off. May ran the 2017 election on a hard Brexit platform, and lost a significant number of seats (incidentally, despite the threat of leadership challenges, her personal approval ratings have generally risen as she has moved towards softer Brexit). Even most pro-Brexit newspapers have abandoned an explicitly hard-Brexit stance, because at this point it is not a ticket to political success.

Johnson shot his political career in the dick by not running for leader after the referendum. While he could run now, it would be perceived as cynical, which of course it is. Johnson in general doesn't have the popularity he had a few years ago, his popularity came from his personality and the fact he came across as uncontroversial and eager to please everyone. Now, he's expressed a lot of controversial and divisive opinions, and that's meant burning a lot of bridges.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6766531/trump-may-brexit-us-deal-off/

My apologies for linking to that but it is the source of an interview in which Trump weighs in on Brexit. In it he he claims to have doubled and tripled the US gdp (he's earlier stated that the US gdp was below zero under Obama, so combined that means he's made the situation worse). That's not what people have talked about, though. He also says that closer trade relations with the EU will probably come at the price of trade relations with the US. Some have taken this as a threat to May though Trump has since stated that he'll support May in whatever she does.

Pseudonym:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6766531/trump-may-brexit-us-deal-off/

My apologies for linking to that but it is the source of an interview in which Trump weighs in on Brexit. In it he he claims to have doubled and tripled the US gdp (he's earlier stated that the US gdp was below zero under Obama, so combined that means he's made the situation worse). That's not what people have talked about, though. He also says that closer trade relations with the EU will probably come at the price of trade relations with the US. Some have taken this as a threat to May though Trump has since stated that he'll support May in whatever she does.

I see Trumps statement as yet another sign that he just doesn't like Europe in general. He sees a chance to undermine Europe through Brexit and so he's very willing to toss some oil on the fire. Paradoxically him expressing his dislike for the EU also shows exactly why we need the EU. Trump is now in a position where he can bully and intimidate the relatively isolated UK. His willingness to do just that with May shows that the European countries need to stick together.

Hades:
Paradoxically him expressing his dislike for the EU also shows exactly why we need the EU. Trump is now in a position where he can bully and intimidate the relatively isolated UK. His willingness to do just that with May shows that the European countries need to stick together.

Absolutely. Brexit was a terrible idea to begin with, but especially right now.

Zontar:

WolvDragon:
It looks like Brexit is becomming a lose-lose scenario for everyone. Is it possible that they can do a do over referendum just to see if people still want to leave the E.U.?

That would delegitimise both referendum and lead to a situation like that in Ireland, Hungary and Romanian where EU referendum are no longer seen as legitimate by the population because they're clearly designed to go on until the EU gets its way. It would be a massive blow against democracy itself, and while I'm all for hastening the inevitable death of the EU, the UK would be better out of it when the time comes and the whole system collapses.

Except the referendum wasn't legally binding, it was basically an opinion poll. One that was down-to-the-wire enough that they can tell the idiots who voted for it "Shut up, the adults are talking".

Souplex:

Zontar:

WolvDragon:
It looks like Brexit is becomming a lose-lose scenario for everyone. Is it possible that they can do a do over referendum just to see if people still want to leave the E.U.?

That would delegitimise both referendum and lead to a situation like that in Ireland, Hungary and Romanian where EU referendum are no longer seen as legitimate by the population because they're clearly designed to go on until the EU gets its way. It would be a massive blow against democracy itself, and while I'm all for hastening the inevitable death of the EU, the UK would be better out of it when the time comes and the whole system collapses.

Except the referendum wasn't legally binding, it was basically an opinion poll. One that was down-to-the-wire enough that they can tell the idiots who voted for it "Shut up, the adults are talking".

Don't forget all the misinformation that the pro-brexit side did to influence the vote like how much money the NHS would get if the country left the EU or something like that. Imagine if they didn't resort to such dirty tactics, I think we wouldn't talking about Brexit right now.

WolvDragon:

Souplex:

Zontar:

That would delegitimise both referendum and lead to a situation like that in Ireland, Hungary and Romanian where EU referendum are no longer seen as legitimate by the population because they're clearly designed to go on until the EU gets its way. It would be a massive blow against democracy itself, and while I'm all for hastening the inevitable death of the EU, the UK would be better out of it when the time comes and the whole system collapses.

Except the referendum wasn't legally binding, it was basically an opinion poll. One that was down-to-the-wire enough that they can tell the idiots who voted for it "Shut up, the adults are talking".

Don't forget all the misinformation that the pro-brexit side did to influence the vote like how much money the NHS would get if the country left the EU or something like that. Imagine if they didn't resort to such dirty tactics, I think we wouldn't talking about Brexit right now.

And all polls indicate that people now want to stay in. We could just have another referendum. That way we actually know if people still want to shoot themselves in the foot, leg, arms, spine and head. If they vote to leave given all that's happened then we actually take some responsibility, although we'll still blame EU. If we vote to stay we avoid what is looking more and more like a complete shit show. And as a bonus Farage's head will spin around until it explodes.

spartandude:
We could just have another referendum.

Theoretically, yes. Practically, no.

It would require a huge pro-EU majority to justify a new referendum. 55-45 in polls just won't cut it: it would lead to a huge feeling of dissatisfaction and anger for a remain vote to sneak through by a small margin and have the decision reversed. It would entrench a feeling that the EU is a malign actor that just makes us retake votes until it gets its way.

It's increasingly clear Brexit is a fuck-up with no satisfactory outcome (for the UK). Either the UK takes a soft Brexit is basically just like being in the EU minus the influence over what the EU does, or it takes a hard Brexit and receives an economic kick in the testicles. That hard Brexit is inevitably going to end in heavy deregulation and laissez-faire capitalist policies, partly to counteract the economic hit and partly because that's exactly what the Tories have always wanted. I figure that will be deeply unpopular - widened wealth gap, exploitation, reduced public services, etc. They can deny chlorinated chicken now, but once the Leave reality is done and dusted, that's the sort of thing that will happen, NI is just going to have to get shafted with a hard border, etc.

Broadly, I'm coming round to the opinion we should hard Brexit. It'll very likely hurt, and long-term, too. However, sometimes the only way to learn is to learn by experiencing failure and suffering; otherwise people will continue to imagine the grass was greener on the other side. Some Brexiters will never learn: it'll all be the fault of the EU, or Westminster, or anybody else but reality. For the most part, however, public opinion will see the mistake for what it was.

If it works out fine, that of course is a win. I'd rather I'm wrong and the country does well: it's just that outside the empty bombast of Leave rhetoric, there seems precious little evidence that's what will happen.

Apparently, the real solution to the Brexit situation is for the UK to sue the EU. At least, that was Trump's suggestion.

thebobmaster:
Apparently, the real solution to the Brexit situation is for the UK to sue the EU. At least, that was Trump's suggestion.

I find it hard to believe we just spent millions of pounds for that cunt to sow chaos across our political scene and play golf.

I suppose on the other hand, the list of international scumbags who have had state visits over the years is long, and some of them were worse than Trump... although at least they comprehended basic diplomatic norms.

Zontar:

Hades:

Zontar:

If Corbyn promises a hard Brexit, no, at this point even a Labour government would be preferable to May. I'm saying this despite everyone knowing my stance on Corbyn and Labour in general, 4 to 8 years under him with a hard Brexit is preferable to a bad deal under May. You can quote me on that.

That being said, it's long past the time for the backbenches to kick May out and replace her with Mogg. This should have happened a year ago at this point, the UK holds all the cards in these negotiations, the only way the EU has any leverage is if Germany is willing to sabotage its own auto industry to the point of practical irreconcilability and the assured death of Merkel's career and what little remains of her reputation. The largest roadblock in all this is the fact that much as with those in Labour, the Remoaners within the Tories seem willing to harm the nation as punishment for daring to threaten the globalist hegemony and having the audacity to vote in the interest of anyone other then the 1%. It's disgusting, but that's to be expected from globalists.

Here's hoping it doesn't come down to a bad deal or Corbyn. The UK can at least recover from a Corbyn government, but ideally it shouldn't have to make that choice.

I think its the other way around. Its the Brexiteers who are willing to harm the countries interests just for their own political advancement. I don't see how those who are against Brexit harms the UK's interest because leaving goes against their interest. Everything points to an economic disaster and they don't even get much sovereignty in return. Without the rest of Europe Britain simply lacks the power to stand up for itself which leads to a loss of sovereignty when China, Rusia, The US and future powers like India and Brazil starts threatening them.

The UK could easily argue a deal like that Norway has, or what Switzerland has sans the open border. No deal would be bad, but a mutually beneficial trade deal would be better then this. The UK has nukes, it has the second strongest military in the world and the 5th largest economy in the world, it being in a trade agreement with the EU without being a part of it won't harm her in any length of time.

How exactly are you counting the UK as being the second strongest military in the world? It's probably barely in the top 10.

It might be the fifth largest economy, but even that might be shaky depending on how you're calculating it.

I don't think the UK is in quite the position you're presenting.

spartandude:
And all polls indicate that people now want to stay in. We could just have another referendum. That way we actually know if people still want to shoot themselves in the foot, leg, arms, spine and head. If they vote to leave given all that's happened then we actually take some responsibility, although we'll still blame EU. If we vote to stay we avoid what is looking more and more like a complete shit show. And as a bonus Farage's head will spin around until it explodes.

As an addendum, I think Brexit is an example of exactly how NOT to go about a massive game-changing referendum.

Firstly, it's a referendum asking a question that is superficially sensible, but actually chaotic. The problem being that what people really need to be able to vote on is a sort of "end result", not a first step with many varied outcomes. It's incredibly obvious - and many of us didn't even need hindsight - to realise that an awful lot of people might not get what they thought they were voting for.

Secondly, Brexit has been poorly executed - in many ways precisely for the reason above. Lots of people thinking about leaving, and not what the country wanted or needed from leaving. The fault here lies almost entirely with Westminister. Article 50 was triggered far too soon with far too little planning and preparation, that much is obvious. A lot of the problem is that our dumb-as-fuck, lightweight, self-centred political parties (okay, mostly the Tories) approached Brexit as the usual sort of adversarial, power-grabbing job they view most stuff. As a result, we got Tory Brexit. A Brexit where the Conservatives didn't so much care what the whole country wants or needs, they just carried on fighting their decades long wrangle over the EU and their own internal ideological vision of future Britain as if the other 65% of the country didn't exist. The Tories are negotiating Brexit on the basis of a) holding onto the leadership of their party (i.e. satisfying the <100k over-60s who make up their membership) and b) stopping Labour taking power. It's absolutely bizarre to see all those people saying the elites ignore the country resulting in Brexit... at which point the elites carry on their own arcane little squabble and point blank refuse to give the people - and try their damnedest to deny even the political representatives of the people - any input or say whatsoever.

Really, I think Brexit should have been approached in a collaborative, multi-party fashion to represent the huge importance of it to the whole country. A government of national unity, in essence, which would have done a far better job of really canvassing the population and seeing they were properly represented. But it's completely alien to our powermongering, Westminster bubble, Oxford PPE alumni who are more absorbed by their own political games than the 65 million people they're supposed to be governing.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here