Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

jm08

hill16bhoy wrote: »

There's a big difference between autonomy in some areas for the constituent parts of the UK, which in NI's case was voted for democratically via the Good Friday Agreement referendum, and being told you are diverging from the rest of the UK through no choice of your own.

I think in many areas the DUP's bigotry leads them to adopt positions which are very bad for society as a whole.

But despite their extremely stupid campaigning for Brexit and their often toe curlingly awful rhetoric, I think in reality they've remained reasonably steadfast in their wish to keep both the current north-south and east-west circumstances intact.

I suspect you may be right about a lot of people in SF, or at least a lot of their supporters, secretly desiring a hard border as a sort of disruptive event that proves a catalyst for a united Ireland, sadly, even though they would publicly deny this.

But that's by the by, and Sinn Fein have no power in this situation. The DUP have now all but joined them in that boat.

So everyone should be just tolerant of their bigotry?

20silkcut

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1171447467755229186


A lot of talk recently of the NI only backstop being revived and maybe slight polished . The ERG would of course reject this but you might get some labour rebels on board. Is this a realistic proposal or just the last viable hope of no deal being trashed out before being killing reality being force upon it.

Why would the ERG reject a NI only backstop?
Surely they don’t give a flying flamingo about NI.

hometruths

prawnsambo wrote: »

If that was the plan all along, then when you look back on what's happened, you'd have to either think it's the most fortuitous series of coincidences or a very clever plan.

Like how do you convince the opposition to not vote your government out of office when you haven't the numbers to stop them?

I think the plan all along was to force the election, try and win it without the DUP, then put the border down the Irish sea.

The wheels came off the plan when the opposition turned down the choice of election.

However as it turned out by that stage his majority was so shot, he was no longer reliant on the DUP anyway!

Crack on with Plan A so!!

swampgas

20silkcut wrote: »

Why would the ERG reject a NI only backstop?
Surely they don’t give a flying flamingo about NI.

The (plausible, IMO) suggestion is that the ERG are backed by those who will make a financial killing from a no-deal Brexit. As such they will use any convenient excuse to reject whatever withdrawal agreement is on offer.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

A quick internet search indicates that there's nowhere near a majority in favour of Corsican independence.

I don't think he said they were a majority.

20silkcut

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The DUP are

But shouting at unionists that there is going to be a united Ireland in the next 20 years whether they like or not is not the best way to bring it about, and neither is dismissing their concerns about being forcibly taken out of the customs union of what, remember, is still currently their own country.

t.

That’s brexit for ya. They voted for it.

Can’t they join the remain alliance and fight to keep the union together.

They are a unionist party after all.

20silkcut

swampgas wrote: »

The (plausible, IMO) suggestion is that the ERG are backed by those who will make a financial killing from a no-deal Brexit. As such they will use any convenient excuse to reject whatever withdrawal agreement is on offer.

The nature of the future trade deal will be unknown. Surely the potential of a Canada style deal with a NI back stop is the holy grail of a hard brexiteer.
Did the EU offer that at one stage??

CelticRambler

hill16bhoy wrote: »

A quick internet search indicates that there's nowhere near a majority in favour of Corsican independence.

A not-so-quick life in France indicates that the Corsicans voted to send 3 "Independence" candidates out of 4 députés to the Assemblée Nationale, and that the regional government is led by a (majority) coalition made up of candidates seeking autonomy/independence from France.

There's also a very similar attitude amongst the "mainland" French towards their Corsican fellow-citizens as there is amongst the "mainland" British towards those-who-identify-as-British in NI: i.e. they're Corsican, not French - same as unionists are Irish (to the English), not British.

Part of me wonders if this will be the one thing that persuades Macron to agree to another extension. He's doing well in the polls at the moment, and the last thing he needs is any kind of outcome that pushes Scotland towards independence. While it's great for us that poor wee Ireland is being well looked after in the face of so much bullying by its former colonial master, it's not a great message to sending to other small nations who have a gripe with their colonial masters. It's a delicate line for the EU to tread too.

hill16bhoy

jm08 wrote: »

So everyone should be just tolerant of their bigotry?

See, where have I said anything about tolerating the DUP's bigotry?

I said nothing of the sort, and I do think they're a crowd of hateful, bigoted wee shltes, to use Northern terminology.

What I do respect is their right to their British identity and their opposition to an NI backstop on that basis, as I do with all unionists who oppose it.

Respecting Irish/British/both identities is the cornerstone of the Good Friday Agreement.

swampgas

20silkcut wrote: »

The nature of the future trade deal will be unknown. Surely the potential of a Canada style deal with a NI back stop is the holy grail of a hard brexiteer.
Did the EU offer that at one stage??

A hard Brexit, without a transition period would cause chaos, and chaos is where a certain type of predatory "investor" can make a fortune. A Canada style deal will no doubt be a fall back, but I fear that the likes of Rees-Mogg and others are heavily invested in no-deal and may even incur losses if it doesn't happen.

If that's the case (and who knows for sure) then the ERG will reject any deal on whatever spurious grounds they find most convenient.

is_that_so

LeinsterDub wrote: »

That certainly isn't going to happen in less than 52 days.

Well it is 52 days with feck all else to do and it might even progress somewhere!

hill16bhoy

CelticRambler wrote: »

A not-so-quick life in France indicates that the Corsicans voted to send 3 "Independence" candidates out of 4 députés to the Assemblée Nationale, and that the regional government is led by a (majority) coalition made up of candidates seeking autonomy/independence from France.

There's also a very similar attitude amongst the "mainland" French towards their Corsican fellow-citizens as there is amongst the "mainland" British towards those-who-identify-as-British in NI: i.e. they're Corsican, not French - same as unionists are Irish (to the English), not British.

Part of me wonders if this will be the one thing that persuades Macron to agree to another extension. He's doing well in the polls at the moment, and the last thing he needs is any kind of outcome that pushes Scotland towards independence. While it's great for us that poor wee Ireland is being well looked after in the face of so much bullying by its former colonial master, it's not a great message to sending to other small nations who have a gripe with their colonial masters. It's a delicate line for the EU to tread too.

Scotland elected 56 SNP MPs out of 59 to Westminster in 2015 but they didn't vote for independence.

Show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans favour independence from France.

And show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans want to be taken into a different customs zone to France.

20silkcut

swampgas wrote: »

A hard Brexit, without a transition period would cause chaos, and chaos is where a certain type of predatory "investor" can make a fortune. A Canada style deal will no doubt be a fall back, but I fear that the likes of Rees-Mogg and others are heavily invested in no-deal and may even incur losses if it doesn't happen.

If that's the case (and who knows for sure) then the ERG will reject any deal on whatever spurious grounds they find most convenient.

I think if they vote against such a deal their position (which is ridiculous anyway) will go to the furthest ends of absurdity. Being offered a hard orderly brexit and refusing it. After three years of hell. They will be shown up for being truly unpatriotic and would be castigated by hard brexiteers, brexit party etc. I’d imagine.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Scotland elected 56 SNP MPs out of 59 to Westminster in 2015 but they didn't vote for independence.

Show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans favour independence from France.

And show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans want to be taken into a different customs zone to France.

Again. He never said it was a majority of Corsicans.

McMurphy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm sure they are fine.

Apologies for not towing the "drink is essential for good fun line" that most Irish believe.

I'm sure it's not just because they don't drink alcohol that the poster implied there would be a lack of craic at a dup wedding - many of them are also creationist nutters and Free Presbyterian zealots who belong in the dark ages.

serfboard

hill16bhoy wrote: »

they've remained reasonably steadfast in their wish to keep both the current north-south and east-west circumstances intact.

If that's the case, they should have campaigned for Remain.

hill16bhoy

prawnsambo wrote: »

Again. He never said it was a majority of Corsicans.

I'm not really sure what his point is then.

If a majority of Coriscans want to remain part of France, or even if there was a majority in favour of autonomy, there's a majority in favour of keeping the exact same trading arrangments with France as pertain now.

Which is similar to NI, where a majority want to keep the exact same trading arrangements with both the Republic and Britain.

Which is basically my point about the NI only backstop.

Leroy42

You can sympathise with the DUP or unionist position but the reality is that Brexit, at it's very core, is about changing the status quo. For NI that means that have to accept that the open borders are no longer viable.

The question they needed to ask themselves was whether their sense of unionism should come before the democratic wish of the voters. They, and I do not blame them for this, opted to put unionism at the top.

But that very adherence to unionism means I have little sympathy should their accepted leaders decide that the best course for the union is to diverge NI away from it. It is, after all, the very core of their belief that London should be in charge.

Would I be mad if it was me, you betcha. But such is the deal they signed. This is the price you pay.

swampgas

20silkcut wrote: »

I think if they vote against such a deal their position (which is ridiculous anyway) will go to the furthest ends of absurdity. Being offered a hard orderly brexit and refusing it. After three years of hell. They will be shown up for being truly unpatriotic and would be castigated by hard brexiteers, brexit party etc. I’d imagine.

I agree, the problem is they and their backers may not care. If they make out like bandits, they can walk away from politics having cashed in.

hill16bhoy

serfboard wrote: »

If that's the case, they should have campaigned for Remain.

They should have, yes.

But if they had they'd still be in the exact same position as they're in now.

NI's votes did not make the difference in the referendum.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

What I do respect is their right to their British identity and their opposition to an NI backstop on that basis, as I do with all unionists who oppose it.

Respecting Irish/British/both identities is the cornerstone of the Good Friday Agreement.

And there is nothing in the suggested NI backstop that would affect that. Comparing that to the possible hard border in Ireland is a false equivalence. There would be nothing like the level of imposition of a border that the latter would require. There would be practically no difference to the average unionist and their British identity. This is just another version of the nonsensical 'undemocratic' backstop that Boris was wittering on about.

But seeing as you're making the claim, please feel free to point to the equivalence.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

I'm not really sure what his point is then.

If a majority of Coriscans want to remain part of France, or even if there was a majority in favour of autonomy, there's a majority in favour of keeping the exact same trading arrangments with France as pertain now.

Which is similar to NI, where a majority want to keep the exact same trading arrangements with both the Republic and Britain.

Which is basically my point about the NI only backstop.

Well perhaps you should re-read his first post then. Because you clearly didn't read it properly the first time.

hill16bhoy

Leroy42 wrote: »

You can sympathise with the DUP or unionist position but the reality is that Brexit, at it's very core, is about changing the status quo. For NI that means that have to accept that the open borders are no longer viable.

The question they needed to ask themselves was whether their sense of unionism should come before the democratic wish of the voters. They, and I do not blame them for this, opted to put unionism at the top.

But that very adherence to unionism means I have little sympathy should their accepted leaders decide that the best course for the union is to diverge NI away from it. It is, after all, the very core of their belief that London should be in charge.

Would I be mad if it was me, you betcha. But such is the deal they signed. This is the price you pay.

That "changing of the status quo" was extremely nebulous.

It was in fact sold as "changing the status quo" while simultaneously keeping everything everybody liked about EU membership.

That was the Leave campaign's evil genius, to be all things to all people.

It was never, ever sold as putting up trading barriers between NI and Britain, moving a united Ireland closer by stealth, or putting up a hard border in Ireland.

It was all a massive lie.

Laughing at those who were hoodwinked and now clearly realise they were hoodwinked isn't particularly helpful.

Leroy42

hill16bhoy wrote: »

They should have, yes.

But if they had they'd still be in the exact same position as they're in now.

NI's votes did not make the difference in the referendum.

If they had campaigned for Remain, and highlighted the very real issue of the Irish border and the obvious choice the UK would be faced with, then I am pretty confident many on GB would have voted to remain or at the very least demanded a solution from the likes of Johnson and Farage.

They choose to try to play games and may yet have to pay a price for that. They either weren't aware, incompetent, or deceitful. Hard to have sympathy for either.

CelticRambler

hill16bhoy wrote: »

What I do respect is their right to their British identity and their opposition to an NI backstop on that basis, as I do with all unionists who oppose it.

In what way does the backstop/Irish Sea border change weaken their (right to a) British identity? See Gibraltar example from earlier. I identify as Irish and we're known amongst our French entourage as an Irish family, even if I haven't lived permanently in the country for more than twenty years. The fact that I have to show my passport when arriving in Dublin doesn't change that one iota. As has been pointed out numerous times, in reality, the DUP do not want to be truly British - only when it suits their own isolationist agenda.

[If you're not going to accept the result of two recent elections as a valid expression of Corsican sentiment, I think we can leave that off-topic discussion for another time and place]

BonnieSituation

hill16bhoy wrote: »

See, where have I said anything about tolerating the DUP's bigotry?

I said nothing of the sort, and I do think they're a crowd of hateful, bigoted wee shltes, to use Northern terminology.

What I do respect is their right to their British identity and their opposition to an NI backstop on that basis, as I do with all unionists who oppose it.

Respecting Irish/British/both identities is the cornerstone of the Good Friday Agreement.

You keep jumping the gun and exclaiming how an NI-only Backstop doesn't respect the rights of unionists to protection or indeed projection of their British identity, but it's only been the DUP and their ilk that have had the collective meltdown wrt the backstop.

The common-or-garden (fête) unionist is pro-backstop, anti-hard border and not worried about cultural dilution.

Can you explain how it does to the less able like myself?

I mean that Sylvia Hermon can manage to get onboard should give you pause for thought.

I watched to the guillotined debates on NI last night and the rank hypocrisy coming from the DUP was pathetic. To continue along this bizarre Ahern-esque path might seem to be a crusade for balance to you, but it ignores that the DUP represent but a small subsection of a small subsection of the North.

CelticRambler

hill16bhoy wrote: »

But if they had they'd still be in the exact same position as they're in now.

NI's votes did not make the difference in the referendum.

What about the DUP's funny-money funded campaign on "the mainland"? Did that make a difference? Do you think their right to identify as British also gave them the right to campaign in an entirely different jurisdiction?

Kermit.de.frog

DUP saying Johnson confirmed he is not advocating a Northern Ireland only backstop in their meeting. (This is Boris Johnson though and that means he is).

DUP also said they want a deal that's "good for all of the UK and Ireland" - they might be entertaining some notion that we might be prepared to dilute our place in the EU single market to help them out.

BonnieSituation

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

DUP saying Johnson confirmed he is not advocating a Northern Ireland only backstop in their meeting. (This is Boris Johnson though and that means he is).

DUP also said they want a deal that's "good for all of the UK and Ireland" - they might be entertaining some notion that we might be prepared to dilute our place in the EU single market to help them out.

Probably about time we weren't so intransigent.

20silkcut

hill16bhoy wrote: »

They should have, yes.

But if they had they'd still be in the exact same position as they're in now.

NI's votes did not make the difference in the referendum.

I know it would be the flip flop of all flip flops but the best way of protecting their cherished union and staying in the UK single market and indeed aligning with their kin folk in Scotland is to back remain. Their ten seats would add value to the remain bloc. Whilst the Tory’s , Cummings, ERG couldn’t care if they fell into the sea.