Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

I think all politicians in the UK are terrified of saying anything that will annoy Leave voters but I predict all of that will change rapidly in the next two years or so when Brexit collapses in on itself and is exposed as the disaster and mistake it always was.

The next 2-3 years in Britain are going to be far more interesting to watch than the last three.

Exactly. This is a long game.

Strazdas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Exactly. This is a long game.

How long before former Leave voters start denying they ever voted Leave? It's heading that way.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

How long before former Leave voters start denying they ever voted Leave? It's heading that way.

Once something hits the fan. Mind you, there will always be a hardcore who would happily live in caves if it meant that Britain was free from the shackles of the EU.

Joe_ Public

Strazdas wrote: »

I think all politicians in the UK are terrified of saying anything that will annoy Leave voters but I predict all of that will change rapidly in the next two years or so when Brexit collapses in on itself and is exposed as the disaster and mistake it always was.

The next 2-3 years in Britain are going to be far more interesting to watch than the last three.

Unquestionably true. Pandering to red wall voters makes sense in relation to brexit, seen as it has already happened anyway, but does become a bit more problematic when it comes to other stuff like c-19 and controversial legislation for example. People can justify a lot on the basis it's all about wresting power, like biden cosying up to the big fracking corporations in the US. The red wall has effectively become the uks '"swing states". Will definitely be interesting to see where those lines are drawn over the next few years.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would fundamentally disagree. The MPs and membership haven't suddenly done a 180 degree turn and become pro-Brexit. Labour is being deliberately vague because it suits them to sit on the sideline and let this Brexiteer Tory party shoot themselves repeatedly in the foot. Thankfully, Corbyn is gone and they can now be political for the right reasons. For me, in the context of getting the Red Wall back and Labour re-elected, Starmer is playing a blinder on Brexit by putting all the responsibility back on Johnson.

Well the Labour party fought against the Scottish Indyref, I presume, because they saw Scottish independence robbing them of 40 Scottish MPs and the hope of forming a Gov in Westminster.

It did not work out that way for them. Despite being on the winning side, they lost all but one of those MPs and are unlikely to form a Westminster Gov for quite some time unless Brexit poisons the electorate against the Tories, and that same electorate sees Labour as their saviour. I think that is unlikely for some time.

So what are Labour to do? Well, not much. They must keep their powder dry and their heads down and allow the Tories to destroy themselves and hope they get none of the blowback.

It might work, but politics moves on and the pandemic is going to change globalisation for ever. I think countries will be unlikely to allow control of their trade to slip away from them so easily. It was easy to allow China to take over whole industries because of lower costs, but leave supply lines vulnerable.

We will see global changes in the next few years from Covid and related issues.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would fundamentally disagree. The MPs and membership haven't suddenly done a 180 degree turn and become pro-Brexit. Labour is being deliberately vague because it suits them to sit on the sideline and let this Brexiteer Tory party shoot themselves repeatedly in the foot. Thankfully, Corbyn is gone and they can now be political for the right reasons. For me, in the context of getting the Red Wall back and Labour re-elected, Starmer is playing a blinder on Brexit by putting all the responsibility back on Johnson.

They're not being "deliberately vague"; they are explicitly and unambiguously pro-Brexit, while being (rightly) critical of the way the government is implementing it.

It may be true that they are pro-Brexit for pragmatic reasons; they don't think a Rejoin project is politically feasible, and they think it would alienate more voters than it would attract. (And, though I hate to say it, they are right on both counts.) But their motives for adopting a pro-Brexit position don't change the fact that they have a pro-Brexit position; if anything, they underline it. If you're in the UK and you want to vote for a pro-Rejoin party, don't vote Labour. This may mean you have to vote for a party that has zero chance of winning in your constituency, but that is the fault of the crapulous electoral system. The crapulosity of the electoral system does not mean that Labour is an anti-Brexit party, however much you might like it to be.

Where am I going with all this? I suggest:

- If there were to be a general election tomorrow, most British voters would not have a viable anti-Brexit candidate in their constituency.

- This situation is unlikely to change in the short to medium term. Certainly not by the next election.

- If a Rejoiner were to vote Labour, it could not be because that is a pro-Remain vote. To my mind the only anti-Brexit-related reason for voting Labour is the hope that a Labour government offers a better prospect of creating the conditions in which "Rejoin" might become a viable political project. I think a Labour government is more likely to seek a closer relationship with the EU than a Tory government is, because they have never been wedded to hard Brexit in the way that the controlling faction of the Tory party is, and because the Labour faction that is attracted to hard Brexit is in retreat.

It will more realistic to think of Labour moving the UK towards an EFTA-type association with the EU than it is to think of the Tories doing so. There's no guarantee that Labour would do that, but it's a better bet than the Tories doing it. And if the UK, after a torrid period of "sovereignty", enters such a relationship and find it works out well for them, then after a while they may begin to wonder why they ever inflicted Brexit on themselves and Rejoin might become realistic.

In short: you're in this for the long haul, Rejoiners. Don't underestimate the challenge ahead of you. And imagining that Labour is an anti-Brexit party would be doing precisely that.

Strazdas

Peregrinus wrote: »

They're not being "deliberately vague"; they are explicitly and unambiguously pro-Brexit, while being (rightly) critical of the way the government is implementing it.

It may be true that they are pro-Brexit for pragmatic reasons; they don't think a Rejoin project is politically feasible, and they think it would alienate more voters than it would attract. (And, though I hate to say it, they are right on both counts.) But their motives for adopting a pro-Brexit position don't change the fact that they have a pro-Brexit position; if anything, they underline it. If you're in the UK and you want to vote for a pro-Rejoin party, don't vote Labour. This may mean you have to vote for a party that has zero chance of winning in your constituency, but that is the fault of the crapulous electoral system. The crapulosity of the electoral system does not mean that Labour is an anti-Brexit party, however much you might like it to be.

Where am I going with all this? I suggest:

- If there were to be a general election tomorrow, most British voters would not have a viable anti-Brexit candidate in their constituency.

- This situation is unlikely to change in the short to medium term. Certainly not by the next election.

- If a Rejoiner were to vote Labour, it could not be because that is a pro-Remain vote. To my mind the only anti-Brexit-related reason for voting Labour is the hope that a Labour government offers a better prospect of creating the conditions in which "Rejoin" might become a viable political project. I think a Labour government is more likely to seek a closer relationship with the EU than a Tory government is, because they have never been wedded to hard Brexit in the way that the controlling faction of the Tory party is, and because the Labour faction that is attracted to hard Brexit is in retreat.

It will more realistic to think of Labour moving the UK towards an EFTA-type association with the EU than it is to think of the Tories doing so. There's no guarantee that Labour would do that, but it's a better bet than the Tories doing it. And if the UK, after a torrid period of "sovereignty", enters such a relationship and find it works out well for them, then after a while they may begin to wonder why they ever inflicted Brexit on themselves and Rejoin might become realistic.

In short: you're in this for the long haul, Rejoiners. Don't underestimate the challenge ahead of you. And imagining that Labour is an anti-Brexit party would be doing precisely that.

You're ignoring somewhat that Brexit's biggest enemy is Brexit itself. It is a clear and obvious failure and damages the UK. Whatever position political parties take on it is almost irrelevant at this stage.....nobody will be able to conceal the cluster-f that will be unfolding before their eyes.

But it will take some considerable time before a rejoin movement starts to grow. Also, we could be talking about whether "England" would be interested in joining : very possible the UK will have broken up in the meantime. The Scottish nationalists' dream of Scotland as an EU member, a united Ireland too, but England on the outside could well come to pass.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

They're not being "deliberately vague"; they are explicitly and unambiguously pro-Brexit, while being (rightly) critical of the way the government is implementing it.

It may be true that they are pro-Brexit for pragmatic reasons; they don't think a Rejoin project is politically feasible, and they think it would alienate more voters than it would attract. (And, though I hate to say it, they are right on both counts.) But their motives for adopting a pro-Brexit position don't change the fact that they have a pro-Brexit position; if anything, they underline it. If you're in the UK and you want to vote for a pro-Rejoin party, don't vote Labour. This may mean you have to vote for a party that has zero chance of winning in your constituency, but that is the fault of the crapulous electoral system. The crapulosity of the electoral system does not mean that Labour is an anti-Brexit party, however much you might like it to be.

Where am I going with all this? I suggest:

- If there were to be a general election tomorrow, most British voters would not have a viable anti-Brexit candidate in their constituency.

- This situation is unlikely to change in the short to medium term. Certainly not by the next election.

- If a Rejoiner were to vote Labour, it could not be because that is a pro-Remain vote. To my mind the only anti-Brexit-related reason for voting Labour is the hope that a Labour government offers a better prospect of creating the conditions in which "Rejoin" might become a viable political project. I think a Labour government is more likely to seek a closer relationship with the EU than a Tory government is, because they have never been wedded to hard Brexit in the way that the controlling faction of the Tory party is, and because the Labour faction that is attracted to hard Brexit is in retreat.

It will more realistic to think of Labour moving the UK towards an EFTA-type association with the EU than it is to think of the Tories doing so. There's no guarantee that Labour would do that, but it's a better bet than the Tories doing it. And if the UK, after a torrid period of "sovereignty", enters such a relationship and find it works out well for them, then after a while they may begin to wonder why they ever inflicted Brexit on themselves and Rejoin might become realistic.

In short: you're in this for the long haul, Rejoiners. Don't underestimate the challenge ahead of you. And imagining that Labour is an anti-Brexit party would be doing precisely that.

Somebody has to represent the majority of people in Britain who are anti-Brexit. That will be the Labour party once the populist hubris generated by Tory Bexiteers has died down. I'll keep saying it, the vast majority of Labour MPs are anti-Brexit as is the membership. Labour is currently and rightly playing politics by having an ambiguous position.

But it remains an anti-Brexit party and that systemic position will reassert itself at the right time. They will then become the Rejoin party or push for a closely aligned FTA. Until then, real politik demands that they play to the Brexiteers in the Red Wall who would prefer to vote Labour but held their noses and voted Tory because of Brexit. Simultaneously, by having an ambiguous position on Brexit, they can continue to point the finger at Johnson as crash out looms ever closer. On Brexit, Starmer is playing a blinder.

BlitzKrieg

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Somebody has to represent the majority of people in Britain who are anti-Brexit.

Lets be careful of not falling into the same trap as the Brexit campaign, the current anti Brexit sentiment will likely have the same sort of spread of opinions that are varied enough that assuming all of them are in favour of rejoining the EU would be a potential recipe for disaster.

I will not be surprised if a distressing amount of people who consider themselves in the centre politically would be of the position that they don't want Brexit, but they also don't want to go back into what they see as the EU system. I further will not be surprised if this non committal position will grow even as Brexit is a complete disaster. To the point that they'll become the 'centre' both moderate labour and moderate conservatives will target.


Honestly I'm pretty sure this was the same base Johnson targeted already at the last election, his Get Brexit done policy was as much about getting it off the news then anything else for a portion of the UK

It is probably not wrong to consider that a significant percentage of the British population would see rejoining the EU in a similar way that most Irish people would view rejoining the UK.
A bad Brexit will reinforce that viewpoint even more.

looksee

Deleted User wrote: »

It is probably not wrong to consider that a significant percentage of the British population would see rejoining the EU in a similar way that most Irish people would view rejoining the UK.
A bad Brexit will reinforce that viewpoint even more.

Well, in fairness, at the moment there are a lot more reasons for not joining the UK than for not joining the EU!

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

It is probably not wrong to consider that a significant percentage of the British population would see rejoining the EU in a similar way that most Irish people would view rejoining the UK.
A bad Brexit will reinforce that viewpoint even more.

How so?

A bad Brexit will show that what they have been told by Johnson, Davis, Gove, Fox, Rabb, Farage et al. for 4 years has been completely baseless.

Why would that make people want to follow them further down that path when there is no evidence that they are trustworthy?

CelticRambler

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

In the context of FPTP, in reality, it is not in either party's interest to let other parties get a foot in the door.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think the biggest obstacle to reforming the voting system here is the fact that both parties are the beneficiaries. The 2011 referendum was rejected and attained a turnout of just over 47% IIRC.

Yes, but that's exactly the point I'm making: there's nothing to suggest that even that mediocre 47% are currently interested in making electoral reform a significant issue for the next election. The electorate appears to be quite happy to muddle on with the dysfunctional two-party system that results in successive governments installing themselves on the back of a minority vote, even though it has been shown over these last few years to be a dreadful way to run the country.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Wales, though? No chance. It might have a separatist movement, a language and its own cultural identity but politically it's an extension of England.

Only to the extent that, up to now, parliamentary maths means that the English MPs can ignore what happens in Wales. Assuming Scotland achieves independence, and assuming some kind of centrist party manages to whittle away at the bipolar vote (on the back of a hard Brexit disaster), those Welsh MPs could become crucial to a vote (or several votes) of No Confidence - quite likely from a Wales suffering the worst consequences of a hard Brexit.

It doesn't really take a lot of imagination to see the falling dominoes (Scotland, NI, Shetland, Gibraltar ... ) creating the conditions in which the regions more tightly bound to England decide to emphasise their separateness if the Sunlit Uplands only ever materialise for those territories that opt for independence and eventual EU membership. An increasingly nationalist cohort of Welsh MPs could easily become the kingmakers in Westminster.

As I mentioned some time back on this thread: never in my lifetime did I expect to hear reports of English holidaymakers in Wales being told to go back to where they came from by the Welsh police; and yet it's already happened, thanks to Covid-19.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

How so?

A bad Brexit will show that what they have been told by Johnson, Davis, Gove, Fox, Rabb, Farage et al. for 4 years has been completely baseless.

Why would that make people want to follow them further down that path when there is no evidence that they are trustworthy?

It depends on which side of the fence you're sitting on, if you're on the wrong side to see how they will feel, you will not be able to see their viewpoint.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

It depends on which side of the fence you're sitting on, if you're on the wrong side to see how they will feel, you will not be able to see their viewpoint.

Can you explain how you think their viewpoint would overlook the reality of everything their leaders and influencers have said and done and point out the EU behaviour which would make them want to really double down in staying out.

Note, when they left, the message from EU leaders has been very much one of 'We are sorry you are leaving, we want to get on well with you, and we hope to have a positive relationship'.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

Can you explain how you think their viewpoint would overlook the reality of everything their leaders and influencers have said and done and point out the EU behaviour which would make them want to really double down in staying out.

Note, when they left, the message from EU leaders has been very much one of 'We are sorry you are leaving, we want to get on well with you, and we hope to have a positive relationship'.

Put yourself into the shoes of the Brexiteers and look at the situation from their viewpoint, rather than trying to imagine it from your viewpoint.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Put yourself into the shoes of the Brexiteers and look at the situation from their viewpoint, rather than trying to imagine it from your viewpoint.

No, I'm asking you how you think they will forever more ignore the reality of what they were told, versus what they experienced.

You made the statement that the more difficult Brexit is, the less likely it is that they will try to rejoin.

Why do you think that is?

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

No, I'm asking you how you think they will forever more ignore the reality of what they were told, versus what they experienced.

You made the statement that the more difficult Brexit is, the less likely it is that they will try to rejoin.

Why do you think that is?

Why do I think that is?


Quite simply, there are a large percentage of the population who turned against the EU and they're not going to suddenly turn around and want back in.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do I think that is?


Quite simply, there are a large percentage of the population who turned against the EU and they're not going to suddenly turn around and want back in.

A large percentage of the population were turned against the EU.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do I think that is?


Quite simply, there are a large percentage of the population who turned against the EU and they're not going to suddenly turn around and want back in.

The evidence doesn't suggest this.

Business Insider

A newly released survey found just 35% of British people supporting Brexit, with 57% wanting to rejoin the European Union.

The nearly 60% of people who told the European Social Survey that they wanted Britain to be in the EU was far greater than the 48% who backed Remain in 2016.

Same poll I think but CNN view on it.

According to the European Social Survey (ESS), a pan-European poll carried out every two years, 56.8% of respondents in the UK indicated that they would vote to remain inside the bloc, an increase from 49.9% the last time the survey was published in 2018. The most recent survey shows that of those questioned in the UK, 34.9% said they would vote to leave and 8.3% said they would not vote at all.

If Brexit continues to be difficult, surely the amount who wish they were in the EU will increase further rather than strengthen the nations resolve to stay outside as you suggest.

35% is a large percentage and don't forget that the current government have another four years before the next election.
A bad deal may produce a Stockholm syndrome type reaction from a section of the population who will turn against the EU and will have no interest in wanting to rejoin.

By 2024 the Brexit fallout will have mostly settled and the UK will be working under whatever the political relationships it has reformed by then with the EU and USA.
The presidental election will play a large part in that of course.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

35% is a large percentage and don't forget that the current government have another four years before the next election.
A bad deal may produce a Stockholm syndrome type reaction from a section of the population who will turn against the EU and will have no interest in wanting to rejoin.

By 2024 the Brexit fallout will have mostly settled and the UK will be working under whatever the political relationships it has reformed by then with the EU and USA.
The presidental election will play a large part in that of course.

It's a minority.

And to go a bit further. The EU has adjusted. The UK won't be allowed back in so there's that.

CelticRambler

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A large percentage of the population were turned against the EU.

Dolanbaker has a point, though: some of the most fervent Brexit arguments I heard at the time of the referendum, and during the parliamentary contortions of last year, were from people who used as examples of Britain's greatness all the advantages that they had come to enjoy as members of the EU - even ex-pats benefiting from all their Four Freedoms.

Let's say that a hard, no-FTA Brexit results in the pound losing another 15% of its value against the Euro, these Costa del Sol pensioners will still blame the EU for not blinking soon enough, and moan about how they can't afford to fly "home" to the UK for free treatment in the NHS where the doctors speak English. No doubt they'll vote Tory again, too, at the next election.

Professor Moriarty

CelticRambler wrote: »

Dolanbaker has a point, though: some of the most fervent Brexit arguments I heard at the time of the referendum, and during the parliamentary contortions of last year, were from people who used as examples of Britain's greatness all the advantages that they had come to enjoy as members of the EU - even ex-pats benefiting from all their Four Freedoms.

Let's say that a hard, no-FTA Brexit results in the pound losing another 15% of its value against the Euro, these Costa del Sol pensioners will still blame the EU for not blinking soon enough, and moan about how they can't afford to fly "home" to the UK for free treatment in the NHS where the doctors speak English. No doubt they'll vote Tory again, too, at the next election.

They, and their compatriots in the motherland, have been conditioned for decades by the Tory press; The Telegraph, The Mail, The Sun, The Express, et cetera ad nauseam. Pavlov's dogs would have been more independent minded.

Tell me how

CelticRambler wrote: »

Dolanbaker has a point, though: some of the most fervent Brexit arguments I heard at the time of the referendum, and during the parliamentary contortions of last year, were from people who used as examples of Britain's greatness all the advantages that they had come to enjoy as members of the EU - even ex-pats benefiting from all their Four Freedoms.

Let's say that a hard, no-FTA Brexit results in the pound losing another 15% of its value against the Euro, these Costa del Sol pensioners will still blame the EU for not blinking soon enough, and moan about how they can't afford to fly "home" to the UK for free treatment in the NHS where the doctors speak English. No doubt they'll vote Tory again, too, at the next election.

We're already 4 years post Brexit vote.

Those Costa del pensioners are becoming fewer and fewer and replacing them are non-studying abroad, non-freedom of movement young adults.

There will always be an imperialistic/nationalistic grouping but in surely in the 21st century that mindset is becoming less and less.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

35% is a large percentage and don't forget that the current government have another four years before the next election.
A bad deal may produce a Stockholm syndrome type reaction from a section of the population who will turn against the EU and will have no interest in wanting to rejoin.

By 2024 the Brexit fallout will have mostly settled and the UK will be working under whatever the political relationships it has reformed by then with the EU and USA.
The presidental election will play a large part in that of course.

35% now was 52% in 2016 mind.

I agree in relation to external influences playing a significant role in what happens going forward. I was listening to a commentator somewhere recently (think Eamon Dunphy's the Stand) and they were saying that a critical part of Brexit (and Dominic Cummings vision of a new world order) is Donald Trump retaining power.

I also think that should another country exit the EU, the UK are likely to look to swiftly engage with them purely to form an alliance. That's unlikely to happen within the next 5 -10 years but if the UK are still outside in 10 years time, then unfortunately, I think other countries may be more inclined to join them.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

35% now was 52% in 2016 mind.

I agree in relation to external influences playing a significant role in what happens going forward. I was listening to a commentator somewhere recently (think Eamon Dunphy's the Stand) and they were saying that a critical part of Brexit (and Dominic Cummings vision of a new world order) is Donald Trump retaining power.

I also think that should another country exit the EU, the UK are likely to look to swiftly engage with them purely to form an alliance. That's unlikely to happen within the next 5 -10 years but if the UK are still outside in 10 years time, then unfortunately, I think other countries may be more inclined to join them.

Another country joining the UK by leaving the EU would very much depend on how things work out for the UK. Currently, EU countries are looking on and thanking their lucky stars that they are not the UK.

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Another country joining the UK by leaving the EU would very much depend on how things work out for the UK. Currently, EU countries are looking on and thanking their lucky stars that they are not the UK.

Agree. Right now. With Covid and everything, countries are going to stay where they are.
But should Hungary/Poland/Greece or whoever have a slow recovery or a deeper recession or whatever and nationalists come to the four in about 5 years and start advocating on considering leaving and at that point the UK is doing ok. It will be an 'interesting' time for the EU project.

Expect the EU know this all too well and at no point will we see them trying to make it particularly easy for the UK. Why would you give a stick to them to beat you with? That doesn't mean they are bullying them or being unfair, just that they will look out for their own best interests.

An Ciarraioch

Tell me how wrote: »

35% now was 52% in 2016 mind.

I agree in relation to external influences playing a significant role in what happens going forward. I was listening to a commentator somewhere recently (think Eamon Dunphy's the Stand) and they were saying that a critical part of Brexit (and Dominic Cummings vision of a new world order) is Donald Trump retaining power.

I also think that should another country exit the EU, the UK are likely to look to swiftly engage with them purely to form an alliance. That's unlikely to happen within the next 5 -10 years but if the UK are still outside in 10 years time, then unfortunately, I think other countries may be more inclined to join them.

The only potential candidates at present are Italy (possible Lega-FdI coalition) and Netherlands (Wilders appears to have seen off his Eurosceptic rival), but in both instances, the sheer complexity of leaving the eurozone would make Brexit look like child's play.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

Agree. Right now. With Covid and everything, countries are going to stay where they are.
But should Hungary/Poland/Greece or whoever have a slow recovery or a deeper recession or whatever and nationalists come to the four in about 5 years and start advocating on considering leaving and at that point the UK is doing ok. It will be an 'interesting' time for the EU project.

Expect the EU know this all too well and at no point will we see them trying to make it particularly easy for the UK. Why would you give a stick to them to beat you with? That doesn't mean they are bullying them or being unfair, just that they will look out for their own best interests.

Absolutely. The UK has behaved appallingly towards the EU throughout the past four years, never mind decades of lies previously. The recent Internal Market Bill being yet another example of the Tories' arrogance and disdain. That doesn't mean that the EU should respond in a similar vein or seek revenge. It just means that the UK has no goodwill left and no credibility. They are not to be trusted. That is the EU's starting point when considering their negotiating position. So they need to be unemotional and clear-minded as they negotiate the very best deal possible for the EU. What that means for the UK is a matter of complete indifference.