Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[SaskiaJayne]

I think it's simply they do not want to lose the UK financial contribution. They know the EU project is failing & the loss of the UK contribution will either have to be made up by the taxpayers of the contributor countries or the bulk of EU members the taker countries will have to receive less. Either way it will cause further dissatisfaction with the EU project which really needs to reduce itself to more of just a free trade group & forget about the closer integration that probably the ordinary folk of most member states do not want.

I don't think the EU will give an inch. They will continue to demand amounts of cash that they know the UK can never possibly agree to & hope the UK parliament tears itself apart to such an extent that we end up staying in in some form or another rather than leave without a deal which might be good for the EU but possibly not so much for the UK.

 

[gosub]

I think it's simply they do not want to lose the UK financial contribution. They know the EU project is failing & the loss of the UK contribution will either have to be made up by the taxpayers of the contributor countries or the bulk of EU members the taker countries will have to receive less. Either way it will cause further dissatisfaction with the EU project which really needs to reduce itself to more of just a free trade group & forget about the closer integration that probably the ordinary folk of most member states do not want.

I don't think the EU will give an inch. They will continue to demand amounts of cash that they know the UK can never possibly agree to & hope the UK parliament tears itself apart to such an extent that we end up staying in in some form or another rather than leave without a deal which might be good for the EU but possibly not so much for the UK.

But no deal means no UK cash which means beaucoup arguments among the EU27 about how to make up the shortfall

 

[gosub]

I think no deal Brexit isn't just a death sentence for the tories, its a death sentence for the Oxbridge PPE and fast track to Parliament brigade that refers to itself as an 'elite'. Everybody with a half decent job outside politics has questions and headaches about the shit that needs sorting...our elected representatives ain't raising them - i they stuff this up, what exactly were/are they elite at?

 

[Raheem]

I don't think the EU will give an inch

Centimetre.

But I don't think they'll have any cause to. They just need to wait. May is over there tomorrow and she will have shifted a bit to their position and they will tell her she's welcome to come back as often as she likes whenever she feels like shifting a bit more.

Also tomorrow, Corbyn meets with Michel Barnier for the first time.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

Move on from what? I don't think there will be any moving on from the basic point that those who advocated leave in the referendum are not now being held accountable for their positions. That's a huge failure in democratic accountability, and it is ongoing.

Please don't tell me you are talking about voters, or people on this board?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Please don't tell me you are talking about voters, or people on this board?

No, I'm talking about politicians. The people who are now deciding how to do brexit.

 

[toblerone3]

I think no deal Brexit isn't just a death sentence for the tories, its a death sentence for the Oxbridge PPE and fast track to Parliament brigade that refers to itself as an 'elite'. Everybody with a half decent job outside politics has questions and headaches about the shit that needs sorting...our elected representatives ain't raising them - i they stuff this up, what exactly were/are they elite at?

What about a no deal Brexit with a very slimmed down token deal. Such as we will generally agree not to nuke each other. Unless provoked of course.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Funnily enough the overwhelming consensus amongst the "everyone" you speak of is that Neoliberalism is the dogs bollocks. Correlation or causation? Economic Science Experts.

What - are you paraphrasing michael "we've had enough of experts "gove" now? Its the UKs biggest trading partner. The UK has 40 odd years of interrelated legal, trading and regulatory agreements with the EU. The whole economy is deeply entwined with it. If thats all dumped - how can it not cause huge disruption? It hardly take a nobel prize in economics to see that.

What about n.ireland? academia? the respective residency status of EU and UK citizens? taking away the right of people to live and work in the EU? For what? Especially from any sort of left perspective -

And the most ardent free marketeers are in the brexit camp. And they think it will cause an economic shit storm as well - but think its a price worth paying to bring about their Freidmanite wet dream.

FFS - start another thread about it - Potential Positives of Brexit - cos im fucked if i can think of any and you haven't offered any. This is getting nowhere. Its like arguing with climate change deniers.

 

[Kaka Tim]

There is no alternative?

please offer one. on another thread. knock yourself out.

 

[SaskiaJayne]

But no deal means no UK cash which means beaucoup arguments among the EU27 about how to make up the shortfall

Quite so but this is a game of high stakes. The EU are gambling everything on the UK not walking away with no deal & I do think that no deal would bring down the government which might be to the EU's advantage.

 

[gosub]

What about a no deal Brexit with a very slimmed down token deal. Such as we will generally agree not to nuke each other. Unless provoked of course.

Best not tie our hands, leave all options open

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

please offer one. on another thread. knock yourself out.

Have you not met Tina?

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

What - are you paraphrasing michael "we've had enough of experts "gove" now?

I like that phrase, particularly how it is used in Streeks essay. You don't appreciate the accidental truth in it? (((((leading economists)))))))

 

[redsquirrel]

The crap on this thread over the last few days a perfect example of what exasperates me about this debate, the implicit assumption that those voting Leave don't care about 'stopping families going to the wall' or the cuts to services. It's crap every bit as much as if I were to argue that Remain voters are supporting the murder in Greece, the EU supported concentration camps etc.

British socialism has been anti-EU for a long time, a lot of (perhaps most) socialists supported a Leave vote (e.g. the majority of socialist/communist/anarchist groups, Benn, Crow), the most radical union in the country called for a Leave vote. Now you don't have to agree with them, you can think they are wrong but I do think you owe them the courtesy of (1) listening and trying to understand their reasons for voting the way they did, (2) recognising that even if you don't agree with their reasoning that they did what they did for the of best intentions.

I can recognise and understand why some socialists voted Remain, essentially the same argument made by Corbyn - that despite it's problems the EU offers some form of protection. Now I don't like that argument, I don't agree with the assumptions behind it and ultimately I don't accept it. But I don't deny that people who voted on such a basis did so because they genuinely felt it was the best option. I still consider them comrades.

---------

Im waiting to see one single positive argument for brexit in terms of material conditions. All im getting is junkers a cunt, the EU are cunts, it will tweak the nose of international capital, it might open up possibilities for a more socialist economy - maybe, fingers crossed.

You've been repeatedly given positive arguments - that it weakens the EU (one of levers of capital), that it creates cracks in capital that open possibilities for labour, that it increase the ability of future UK governments to nationalise businesses. You might disagree with those opinions, OK but don't say they haven't been made because they have.

None of that is going to build a single council house, save a hospital from closure or stop a family going to the wall.

Neither will staying in the neo-liberal EU.

 

[pocketscience]

Best not tie our hands, leave all options open

Talking of going nuclear, a couple of months ago, I recall reading somewhere about the potential effects that a (hypothetical) hard brexit case could have on the UK clearing house business.

Essentially, the Eu had identified the risk that in the event of an acrimonious hard exit, the UK could essentially cripple the Eurozone within minutes by raising clearing margins, even by moderate levels, on Euro derivative trading.
The started ti investigate new laws to enable trading in the Eurozone (Paris was proposed iirc) but they faced the reality that 1. such a transition would take up to a decade, and 2. The Americans wouldn't stand for it as and politely asked them reconsider their plans.

This seems to be a big leverage, and one on the scale the Eu doesn't hold over the UK in the short term hard ball stakes.
It just goes to show how stupid and stubborn the Eu stance is on not holding the divorce bill talks and trade talks in parallel.

I'll see if i can find the article (it may even have been on here in the global financial implosion thread)

 

[Kaka Tim]

You've been repeatedly given positive arguments - that it weakens the EU (one of levers of capital), that it creates cracks in capital that open possibilities for labour, that it increase the ability of future UK governments to nationalise businesses. You might disagree with those opinions, OK but don't say they haven't been made because they have.

but these are all vague and hypothetical - and dependant on many other things to happen - getting the uber neo-cons out of the economic driving seat for starters. It sounds like "emiseration theory" to me - "i.e. if things get worse than the power of capital is weakened and the working class are more likely to turn to socialism."
That may or may not be true - but to argue for actions that bring about worse conditions in pursuit of an ideological objective is a RCP stylee wank. Nobody is explicitly arguing that - but unless you can show that conditions wont get worse post-brexit then that is the implication of the lexit position.

There is no tangible, identifiable benefit in hard brexit. Thats what im asking for. Anti-brexit can give a long long list of detailed negative effects backed up by mountains of data. Im not hearing anything that refutes or engages with with that - other than "economists are cunts" - so give me a non-cunt economist with a sunny brexit argument.

Neither will staying in the neo-liberal EU.

Leaving the EU will make it much much harder to invest in positive social stuff like housing and health because the uk - and most of its people - will be significantly poorer. There is no getting round that. Unless you can convincingly argue that hard brexit will not seriously weaken the economy (never mind all the other negatives) than the Lexit argument is the most busted of busted flushes.

Will elements within the EU27 be unhappy with a left wing labour government - yes. But their ability to do anything about it is constrained because - and praise be - the Uk is not in the Euro and can ignore what the ECB says. And there is a long history of EU members ignoring the supposed rules and nobody batting an eyelid - i.e Germany. The EU can put the squeeze on the likes of greece and ireland - because they needed bailouts - but the UK is a much more powerful entity with an independent national bank.
IF - and we're off into hypothesis land again - the EU tries to clips the wings an anti-austerity labour government - then you have a potential case for lexit. But in terms of here and now and what can be done it really is a no-brainer.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

No, I'm talking about politicians. The people who are now deciding how to do brexit.

Good, so I just meant the conversation on here needs to move on from rehashing why people didn't want a referendum in the first place. It needs to move onto how Brexit is actually done surely, it will be impossible to hold anyone to account as long as remain voters keep harassing leave voters about how they chose to vote in referendum they didn't really ask for either.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

And vice versa of course.

 

[redsquirrel]

but these are all vague and hypothetical - and dependant on many other things to happen - getting the uber neo-cons out of the economic driving seat for starters.

I don't see them as anymore vague of hypothetical than the scenarios you have put forward.

It sounds like "emiseration theory" to me - "i.e. if things get worse than the power of capital is weakened and the working class are more likely to turn to socialism."That may or may not be true - but to argue for actions that bring about worse conditions in pursuit of an ideological objective is a RCP stylee wank. Nobody is explicitly arguing that - but unless you can show that conditions wont get worse post-brexit then that is the implication of the lexit position.

I'm sorry but that's cobblers. I might as well argue that the implication of your position is that EU should continue with it's neo-liberal attacks on the people of Europe and paying dictators huge sums to keep refugees out of Fortress EU.

There is no tangible, identifiable benefit in hard brexit. Thats what im asking for.

What are the tangible, identifiable benefits in a soft brexit, or remaining? And people have certainly argued that leaving will result in a tangible benefit - an increased ability/likelihood of re-nationalisation of services (I'm not saying they are right but it's simply false to say that it hasn't been argued). And why are you assuming I and other socialists want what you are calling a hard brexit (and what does that even mean?)

Anti-brexit can give a long long list of detailed negative effects backed up by mountains of data. Im not hearing anything that refutes or engages with with that - other than "economists are cunts" - so give me a non-cunt economist with a sunny brexit argument.

Why would I give an argument by an economists when the whole philosophy of economics is an ideology I reject. (And even in their own world they are shit)

Leaving the EU will make it much much harder to invest in positive social stuff like housing and health because the uk - and most of its people - will be significantly poorer. There is no getting round that.

Rubbish, that might be the case but the idea that it is, and has to be, some objective fact is nonsense.

Unless you can convincingly argue that hard brexit will not seriously weaken the economy (never mind all the other negatives) than the Lexit argument is the most busted of busted flushes.

Are you going to apply the same argument to potential nationalisations? Capital constantly tells us they will damage the economy, so I guess we better not do that either?

 

[sleaterkinney]

There might be a possibility of a crack for Labour in the future, but the brexit that's happening now is one led by Tory free marketeers, because that was the only one on the table.

 

[Winot]

There might be a possibility of a crack for Labour in the future, but the brexit that's happening now is one led by Tory free marketeers, because that was the only one on the table.

I think any argument about the rights and wrongs of Brexit is a bit odd if it's built on which political party is in power. The process of Brexit (by which I mean the whole of the disentanglement, not just the act of leaving) is going to take a long time - even leavers accept that. And which party is in power can change (fingers crossed) in that time.

I think Brexit is a bad idea no matter which party is in power.

 

[redsquirrel]

I've specifically talked about labour not Labour. And if by free marketeers you mean Randian type loons then that's garbage. (1) the cabinet/government is neo-liberal (like the Cameron/Blair/Brown/Major governments) and still sees a role for the state (not a role that I support but they aren't going for some Randian wet dream), (2) since the GE we've already seen numerous examples of the government being forced to make concessions, minor ones ok but concessions nether the less (see the climbdown on the UC helpline yesterday), to the sort of social democratic policies that caught them on hop in June.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Good, so I just meant the conversation on here needs to move on from rehashing why people didn't want a referendum in the first place. It needs to move onto how Brexit is actually done surely, it will be impossible to hold anyone to account as long as remain voters keep harassing leave voters about how they chose to vote in referendum they didn't really ask for either.

is anyone actually doing that here? (either way) I think its more that the terms of the debate have changed because "no deal" is looking like a definite possibility - so you a situation where the push to abandon brexit altogether is getting stronger - and the question is weather that is a. a realistic outcome. and b. the likely political consequences.

I think the argument for weather hard brexit could have a potential positive effect and/or weather the dire predictions are bogus is a separate debate. I've taken the doomsday scenario as a given and the left argument against that hypothesis is a new one to me - Im not convinced by it (you may have noticed) - but would like more detail - but preferably on another thread.

Peace out comrades.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I meant labour too but my phone capitalised it, and by free marketers I mean that the brexit they are working on includes lowering barriers, protections, more competition etc it's the point of brexit for them. It isn't a theory - it's what they want to happen and they are in power.

 

[SpackleFrog]

This is a good question. An alternative approach is one that agitates to change the eu. But as France has shown many eu rules are unenforceable against a powerful state, which the UK still is comparatively speaking.

Can you give examples of how France has shown this?

 

[SpackleFrog]

please offer one. on another thread. knock yourself out.

Why don't you go and start another thread? Your contributions are by far the dullest here and you aren't engaging with anyone.

Here''s an alternative for you - replace austerity with Socialism. Yes, it'll be difficult - that's why it's called *struggle*

 

[Kaka Tim]

Why don't you go and start another thread? Your contributions are by far the dullest here and you aren't engaging with anyone.

Here''s an alternative for you - replace austerity with Socialism. Yes, it'll be difficult - that's why it's called *struggle*

and this is best achieved via recession, resurgent nationalism and with Jacob Rees Mogg leading the way is it?

 

[mojo pixy]

Who is struggling? What does the struggle consist of, specifically? Is there the chance the struggle will end in people's deaths? Whose?

I'm a bit tired of abstract nouns replacing empathy tbc. Real people suffer, abstract nouns don't.

 

[teqniq]

and this is best achieved via recession, resurgent nationalism and with Jacob Rees Mogg leading the way is it?

So long as it ends up with his head on a pike somewhere on prominent display, that's fine by me.

 

[Silas Loom]

Why don't you go and start another thread? Your contributions are by far the dullest here and you aren't engaging with anyone.

Here''s an alternative for you - replace austerity with Socialism. Yes, it'll be difficult - that's why it's called *struggle*

Perhaps it would be a good idea for there to be a thread about the chances of stopping Brexit which doesn't get derailed by lexiteering. There's a lexit thread which is similarly prescriptive.