Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[philosophical]

It matters a great deal. From a leave perspective it matters because it is important not to simply ignore the 52% who voted. From a remain perspective it matters because it is important not to exceed the mandate provided by the referendum.

Isn't the problem that the so called mandate is open to wide interpretation?
Isn't it also a problem that some interpretations of what that mandate is conflict with practical reality, and can usher in huge problems?
The Irish border had been mandated to be strictly enforced (which is one way of looking at brexit) but that clashes with the GFA.

 

[Raheem]

Isn't the problem that the so called mandate is open to wide interpretation?

Yes, but how wide is legitimate is up for debate, and to do the interpretation you need to think about what, beyond the wording of the referendum question, people were voting for. Which is why it remains (/leaves) relevant and not just a historical curiosity.

 

[Winot]

This is a good summary of the options on the table.

Theresa May is circling the Brussels sky and low on fuel. Time to buckle up | Rafael Behr

 

[philosophical]

Yes, but how wide is legitimate is up for debate, and to do the interpretation you need to think about what, beyond the wording of the referendum question, people were voting for. Which is why it remains (/leaves) relevant and not just a historical curiosity.

I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.

 

[butchersapron]

earlier some in the thread were taking time out of bemoaning how thick the general public are to express suprise at fortress europe's camps, but here's a piece from Malik in todays observer which talks about where the camps are located now.

The Sunday Essay: how we all colluded in Fortress Europe | Kenan Malik

The full piece that the Observer bit was taken from is now here. Worth posting again as it may get some additional readers eager to find out what's actually happening.

 

[danny la rouge]

And worth quoting this bit of it for people (Anju) who aren't going to read it anyway:

"Second, we need to recognize that creating Fortress Europe as a quid pro quo for freedom of movement within the EU will not work. The policies of Fortress Europe are both immoral and unworkable. Immoral because their aim is to treat migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen. And unworkable, because the lesson of the past 25 years is that however vicious EU migration policies become, they will be insufficient to wall off Europe from migrants."

AKA "not racist" and "well-intentioned".

 

[philosophical]

There is an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.

 

[gosub]

I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.

It's the narrative that seems to have won out, much to the chagrin of the likes of me for whom it wasn't even an issue. But I stopped banging my head against the wall a while ago. Headbangers from both sides still dominate. Too late to change things now

 

[Pickman's model]

And worth quoting this bit of it for people (Anju) who aren't going to read it anyway:

"Second, we need to recognize that creating Fortress Europe as a quid pro quo for freedom of movement within the EU will not work. The policies of Fortress Europe are both immoral and unworkable. Immoral because their aim is to treat migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen. And unworkable, because the lesson of the past 25 years is that however vicious EU migration policies become, they will be insufficient to wall off Europe from migrants."

AKA "not racist" and "well-intentioned".

i would have thought that enlightened self-interest would lead the eu to do as much as possible to make north africa a pleasant place to live, as you stop more potential migrants with kindness than with potential drowning.

 

[danny la rouge]

There is an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.

Who has done that?

 

[ska invita]

I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.

im going to stop going on about this now, but last thing just in case i wasnt being clear: im not saying the vote "was principally about immigration", but keeping freedom of movement or not is the first decision from which all subsequent post-brexit options and negotiations stem from and develop. Labour and Tories both recognise that they cant be seen to want to keep Freedom of Movement - thats the realpolitik bit. This is why freedom of movement becomes primary. Its not about "opinion", its about recognising the realities of the process, electoral and party political forces, and limits of what is politically expedient (eta: limits set in large part by the tone and message of the leave campaign).

 

[Pickman's model]

im going to stop going on about this now, but last thing just in case i wasnt being clear: im not saying the vote "was principally about immigration", but keeping freedom of movement or not is the first decision from which all subsequent post-brexit options and negotiations stem from and develop. Labour and Tories both recognise that they cant be seen to want to keep Freedom of Movement - thats the realpolitik bit. This is why freedom of movement becomes primary. Its not about "opinion", its about recognising the realities of the process, electoral and party political forces, and limits of what is politically expedient.

if it was about recognising the realities of the process etc then you'd have thought they'd be honest and say around 300,000 NON-eu people came here last year and regardless of what we do with our european cousins people from outside the eu ON THEIR OWN add more than the population of york to the country every year

 

[teuchter]

i would have thought that enlightened self-interest would lead the eu to do as much as possible to make north africa a pleasant place to live, as you stop more potential migrants with kindness than with potential drowning.

Do you have proposed measures as to what the EU could do to make N Africa a pleasant place to live?

 

[Pickman's model]

Do you have proposed measures as to what the EU could do to make N Africa a pleasant place to live?

no, i do not have proposed measures as to what the eu could do to make n africa a pleasant place to live. whatever proposed measures are i do not have them.

what are proposed measures?

 

[gosub]

im going to stop going on about this now, but last thing just in case i wasnt being clear: im not saying the vote "was principally about immigration", but keeping freedom of movement or not is the first decision from which all subsequent post-brexit options and negotiations stem from and develop. Labour and Tories both recognise that they cant be seen to want to keep Freedom of Movement - thats the realpolitik bit. This is why freedom of movement becomes primary. Its not about "opinion", its about recognising the realities of the process, electoral and party political forces, and limits of what is politically expedient (eta: limits set in large part by the tone and message of the leave campaign).

Largely agree BUT remain didn't help by conflating the Single Market and EU membership during the referendum

 

[kabbes]

I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.

Opinion based on anecdata from your little corner of the world. Meanwhile, in my own corner of well-off middle-England country life, I heard a lot of pro-Brexit sentiment but none of it was anti-immigration. If anything, people were worried about the loss of their exploitative cheap labour. The pro-Brexit sentiment was all related to sovereignty. It really isn’t the case that you can just extrapolate your own experience to the country as a whole. That’s why we have polling and other nationwide statistics.

 

[teqniq]

 

[philosophical]

Who has done that?

Errrm....brexit voters.

 

[danny la rouge]

Errrm....brexit voters.

All of them? Personally?

 

[Badgers]

Banks and Wigmore playing the committee like they are running a market stall. They 'led people up the garden path'

Shame that a parliamentary committee is dealing with them. They were fucked over by the Murdoch's and Green so will waffle and do nothing here as well one thinks.

 

[philosophical]

Opinion based on anecdata from your little corner of the world. Meanwhile, in my own corner of well-off middle-England country life, I heard a lot of pro-Brexit sentiment but none of it was anti-immigration. If anything, people were worried about the loss of their exploitative cheap labour. The pro-Brexit sentiment was all related to sovereignty. It really isn’t the case that you can just extrapolate your own experience to the country as a whole. That’s why we have polling and other nationwide statistics.

I think you might have misunderstood me. I was replying to another poster. I was suggesting that immigration was not necessarily the main reason for voting brexit, as you have also done.

 

[philosophical]

All of them? Personally?

Isn't it the result of brexit voters going in person to the voting booth and voting leave, to create fortress UK?

 

[butchersapron]

Errrm....brexit voters.

Maybe you could outline why the extension and militarisation of borders and border regimes is an unironical pro-free movement position?

 

[danny la rouge]

Isn't it the result of brexit voters going in person to the voting booth and voting leave, to create fortress UK?

First, your contention was "an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.". You seem to be ignoring the first clauses now. The irony. The criticism of "fortress Europe". And, regarding the final clause, you're confusing what voters intend with what politicians do.

However, answer me this: what of the irony of thinking you're voting for free movement but actually supporting [the treatment of] "migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen."

Why is it that only the effects of UK policy is the fault of voters, and not the effects of EU policy?

 

[philosophical]

Maybe you could outline why the extension and militarisation of borders and border regimes is an unironical pro-free movement position?

I absolutely don't believe that the establishment extension and militarization of the UK/EU border with the enforcement regimes that come with it on the island of Ireland is a pro free movement position.
At the moment crossing that border is no more difficult than going from Lewisham to Greenwich where within London there is free movement.

 

[philosophical]

First, your contention was "an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.". You seem to be ignoring the first clauses now. The irony. The criticism of "fortress Europe". And, regarding the final clause, you're confusing what voters intend with what politicians do.

However, answer me this: what of the irony of thinking you're voting for free movement but actually supporting [the treatment of] "migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen."

Why is it that only the effects of UK policy is the fault of voters, and not the effects of EU policy?

I am not saying the EU policy is good. I am saying that brexit is bad.
Is that ironic?
Up until whenever (sometime post the referendum) the UK were participants in shaping EU policy, and cumbersome and remote that it might seem there was a chance of influencing EU policy for the better.
That is now over as brexit brings in a domestic control of the borders by the UK.
By voting remain it seemed to me to be much the better of the binary choice presented.

 

[danny la rouge]

By voting remain it seemed to me to be much the better of the binary choice presented.

But you only see irony in voting Leave? No irony in voting Remain, given the above?

 

[butchersapron]

I absolutely don't believe that the establishment extension and militarization of the UK/EU border with the enforcement regimes that come with it on the island of Ireland is a pro free movement position.
At the moment crossing that border is no more difficult than going from Lewisham to Greenwich where within London there is free movement.

No, i should have known better.

 

[teuchter]

no, i do not have proposed measures as to what the eu could do to make n africa a pleasant place to live. whatever proposed measures are i do not have them.

what are proposed measures?

Just wonderin' if your 'make things nicer' platitude was backed up with any suggestions as to how it might be achieved. The answer, it seems, is "not really".

 

[Pickman's model]

Just wonderin' if your 'make things nicer' platitude was backed up with any suggestions as to how it might be achieved. The answer, it seems, is "not really".

the answer is if you use a stupid phrase like 'proposed measures' then as i have no 'proposed measures', no measures which have previously been proposed, of course i'm going to say no.

it's your inability to phrase a decent question which lets you down.