Brexit process

[Little John]

Two thoughts, firstly going back to 2010, I thought it would have been good for UK politics if both Labour and Conservatives had split, forming three parties. A UKIP / Jacob R-M / Boris party, a Cameron / Osborne / Blareite party and a Corbyn themed party. These smaller parties would be able to better represent different people and ensure ongoing coalition governments.

Secondly, following the Brexit vote, a government of national unity would have been good. And it may still come to that. Brexit is too big a thing to constrain by one political party.

Bullshit.

Firstly, I note you idea of a three party setup, with the Leavers all being in a right wing party, gives away what you really want, which is for the Leavers to be hived off to the far right, where you think they belong and, in being so, more easily dismissed as extremist. In turn leaving all of the parties, you then approve of (or, at least, can live with) to form your government of "national unity". In other words, a government that will not enact Brexit.

You are an anti-democrat who, in wanting to overturn the democratic decision of the British people by staying in the EU in all but name, are supporting the undemocratic dissolution of the UK. And don't tell me you accept Brexit. Because we both know that's not true. Brexit means and has always meant in the minds of the millions who voted for it, democratic return of the capacity to control borders, judiciary and legislature. In other words, the three pillars of statehood. If those things are not under control of a nation state, it ceases to be a nation state. And, if the people who do control those thing are appointed, as opposed to elected, it also ceases to be a democracy

Just admit it, you are an anti-democrat.

[woodburner]

A reasonable summary I think.

[Little John]

This is the kind of area I live in. These are my kind of people. They are not right wing.

And if anyone has a problem with people like this, they can go f**k themselves.

I know I could have put that more eloquently. But, I don't want to

https://vimeo.com/172932182

[UndercoverElephant]

Two thoughts, firstly going back to 2010, I thought it would have been good for UK politics if both Labour and Conservatives had split, forming three parties. A UKIP / Jacob R-M / Boris party, a Cameron / Osborne / Blareite party and a Corbyn themed party. These smaller parties would be able to better represent different people and ensure ongoing coalition governments.

Secondly, following the Brexit vote, a government of national unity would have been good. And it may still come to that. Brexit is too big a thing to constrain by one political party.

Bullshit.

Firstly, I note you idea of a three party setup, with the Leavers all being in a right wing party, gives away what you really want, which is for the Leavers to be hived off to the far right, where you think they belong and, in being so, more easily dismissed as extremist. In turn leaving all of the parties, you then approve of (or, at least, can live with) to form your government of "national unity". In other words, a government that will not enact Brexit.

You are an anti-democrat who, in wanting to overturn the democratic decision of the British people by staying in the EU in all but name, are supporting the undemocratic dissolution of the UK. And don't tell me you accept Brexit. Because we both know that's not true. Brexit means and has always meant in the minds of the millions who voted for it, democratic return of the capacity to control borders, judiciary and legislature. In other words, the three pillars of statehood. If those things are not under control of a nation state, it ceases to be a nation state. And, if the people who do control those thing are appointed, as opposed to elected, it also ceases to be a democracy

Just admit it, you are an anti-democrat.

This is true, CLV. The problem with your summary is that the "UKIP/JRM/Bojo party" isn't a natural home for supporters of Lexit. Like, for example Jeremy Corbyn.

?

[clv101]

Two thoughts, firstly going back to 2010, I thought it would have been good for UK politics if both Labour and Conservatives had split, forming three parties. A UKIP / Jacob R-M / Boris party, a Cameron / Osborne / Blareite party and a Corbyn themed party. These smaller parties would be able to better represent different people and ensure ongoing coalition governments.

Secondly, following the Brexit vote, a government of national unity would have been good. And it may still come to that. Brexit is too big a thing to constrain by one political party.

Bullshit.

Firstly, I note you idea of a three party setup, with the Leavers all being in a right wing party, gives away what you really want, which is for the Leavers to be hived off to the far right, where you think they belong and, in being so, more easily dismissed as extremist.

Seriously Steve, this may be your view, but it isn't mine. I have categorically not suggested "the Leavers all being in a right wing party". I doesn't help any discussion to misrepresent my views like this. In my three party scenario it's perfectly likely the "Corbyn themed party" would be pro brexit, albeit a different flavour of Brexit than UKIP/JRM/BoJo.

In turn leaving all of the parties, you then approve of (or, at least, can live with) to form your government of "national unity". In other words, a government that will not enact Brexit.

Again, your words, not my opinion. My opinion is that a government of national unity would do a better job of delivering Brexit than the debacle of the current minority Tory government.

You are an anti-democrat who, in wanting to overturn the democratic decision of the British people by staying in the EU in all but name, are supporting the undemocratic dissolution of the UK. And don't tell me you accept Brexit. Because we both know that's not true. Brexit means and has always meant in the minds of the millions who voted for it, democratic return of the capacity to control borders, judiciary and legislature. In other words, the three pillars of statehood. If those things are not under control of a nation state, it ceases to be a nation state. And, if the people who do control those thing are appointed, as opposed to elected, it also ceases to be a democracy

Just admit it, you are an anti-democrat.

Your third mistake in as many paragraphs, I am not "wanting to overturn the democratic decision". What I'm unhappy about is being governed by possibly the most incompetent government in this country's history, at probably the most critical time since WWII.

[clv101]

This is true, CLV. The problem with your summary is that the "UKIP/JRM/Bojo party" isn't a natural home for supporters of Lexit. Like, for example Jeremy Corbyn.

I was thinking a Corbyn themed party, without the Blairite influence would be much better able to articulate Lexit. Leaving the Remain argument to be pushed by the Blairite half of today's Labour, LibDem, SNP...

[clv101]

Changing the subject slightly, I was talking with a former senior civil servant this evening, of course Brexit came up and he though it very likely we would crash out with no deal. I've always thought this essentially impossible but he was of the opinion that now the conveyor belt is moving the other 27 won't agree to stop it but at the same time Westminster won't agree to EU demands. Interesting times.

[UndercoverElephant]

Interesting times.

Very interesting. A lot is at stake, and nobody knows what is going to happen. History unfolding.

[Catweazle]

This is the kind of area I live in. These are my kind of people. They are not right wing.

I would bet that if the vote was held again there would be a large majority for "remain". People are starting to understand that we were lied to, massively, and that even the so-called remainers in the Tories were just shills, putting up a weak argument.

[UndercoverElephant]

This is the kind of area I live in. These are my kind of people. They are not right wing.

I would bet that if the vote was held again there would be a large majority for "remain". People are starting to understand that we were lied to, massively, and that even the so-called remainers in the Tories were just shills, putting up a weak argument.

I think if it was held again, there would be an increased majority for leave. The arrogant and inflexible behaviour of the EU - all this "punishment" - has just confirmed people's suspicions.

[Little John]

I think the majority for Leave would increase as well. But, not only because of EU intransigence. Also, because, the first time around, people could see, well enough, that the Establishment and all of its media lackeys were ranged against Leave and that, since the vote, that same establishment has sought, from the start, to find ways of spinning the narrative such that they may ignore the result of that vote.

If you want to see incandescent rage, come to where I live because you wont see it reported on the news. But, it's real and it's growing and it's going to explode at some point.

[Little John]

There will be civil unrest or worse if Brexit does not happen

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-wi ... d-10716408

[vtsnowedin]

There will be civil unrest or worse if Brexit does not happen

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-wi ... d-10716408

I expect "civil unrest" in the UK will be a lot more civil than it is in the USA. After all what are you going to riot with? Cricket bats and Pub darts?
Even the college tuition marches that turned out tens of thousands resulted in a few dozen injuries and no deaths.
But I suppose there is always the "troubles" in Northern Ireland to look at as a cautionary tail of how bad things can get.

[fuzzy]

NI was live fire training for the UK army. Now we do it in the ME and Africa.

[Catweazle]

Harsh words and stern looks will be all we have to defend ourselves with.