Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is Brexit actually going to happen?

Will we have a brexit?


  • Total voters
    362
ye gods - is it possible to be anymore smug and lacking in self awareness? - "genteel" ?!?! FUCK OFF YOU CUNTS!!!
What could be more genteel and properly british than private school and a PPE at at oxford? Oh yeah and the BBC of course.

This thing on saturday has turned the tide i think.
 
butchersapron you need to stop sitting on the fence mate. Stop equivocating and tell us what you really think about the character and motivation of these half-million-odd people.
 
A large gathering marched in London to revert the current negotiations to remain in the EU. To remain in the EU after the current negotiations is a folly. Majority of people and the politicians of UK want to remain in the EU for the benefit of free trade, business and industrial relations, and tourism. They want to leave EU because of the large annual financial contributions UK pays to the EU, and the political subordination the EU regime is entrenching.

Brexit as declared by the Brexit proponents is not viable with the geopolitics of UK and Ireland. Brexit without negotiated customs union or free trade area is not viable because the Ireland does not accept a hard border with customs control with Northern Ireland. Both UK and EU desire an amicable, efficient solution. Why is the government insensitive to a compromised deal with negotiated customs union or free trade area that will resolve the current impasse.
 
Majority of people and the politicians of UK want to remain in the EU for the benefit of free trade, business and industrial relations, and tourism. They want to leave EU because of the large annual financial contributions UK pays to the EU, and the political subordination the EU regime is entrenching.
this majority of people seem somewhat confused.
 
Though some appear to have great clarity; the Guardian picked this particular participant's views on their fellow marchers...

View attachment 150325

Fill yer boots.
How lucky to find that chap. So, they're saying that a 2010 cameron/clegg/osborne style anti-scrounger program with a nationalist (sorry, properly british) tint is going to form the base of their latest guardian endorsed billionaire and celeb astroturfed centrist party.
 
"from being a campaign of the establishment, by the establishment and for the establishment, they’re now styling themselves as a populist insurgency. Or what a PR agency might think a populist insurgency looks like..."

Worth it just to see superior seymour writing for...VICE. A piece really worth reading though. Cuts right through the bullshit.
The last paragraph is worth quoting here.

"The main reason the Remainers would lose again, however, is that they’ve learned nothing. They still talk in generic terms about "the economy", as though everyone benefits from it in exactly the same way. As though most people might not have slightly different interests, say, to the boss of pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca. They still have shockingly little to say about the institution that they say Britain must remain a part of. And nothing at all to say to the large number of people who don’t worship the triumvirate of Blair, Heseltine and Clegg. And they deserve to lose, repeatedly, until they get the point."
 
tbh it really wouldn't be that hard to design materials for a remain campaign which wasn't based around the notion that leave voters were stupid feckless racist working class people, which is how they were portrayed in e.g. the guardian during the referendum campaign. it wouldn't be hard to say 'yes, there are problems with the eu, some of them quite serious problems. but we believe the way to deal with this is to respond from within the tent rather than stand in the rain. leaving - no matter the deal - will leave us all worse off, and likely hit areas with heavy leave results much worse off than areas which voted remain. we understand the range of reasons why people wished to leave in june 2016: but we now know a lot more about things than we did then, and it's important to confirm that rather narrow result, to ensure that the greater certainty of what brexit means is what people want to go along with. 52/48's no way to decide a matter which will leave recriminations for decades and a more certain result could - should - allow us to recombine as a nation regardless of which way it goes. if it's leave, fine. if it's remain, fine. nonetheless as matters stand now, with the 2016 result, about half the country will be pissed off whichever way we jump and this will cause ructions in the future.' but i don't believe politicians of any stripe have the bollocks to say anything like that.
 
The last paragraph is worth quoting here.

"The main reason the Remainers would lose again, however, is that they’ve learned nothing. They still talk in generic terms about "the economy", as though everyone benefits from it in exactly the same way. As though most people might not have slightly different interests, say, to the boss of pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca. They still have shockingly little to say about the institution that they say Britain must remain a part of. And nothing at all to say to the large number of people who don’t worship the triumvirate of Blair, Heseltine and Clegg. And they deserve to lose, repeatedly, until they get the point."

Both sides completely guilty of infantilising with such simplistic drivel denying the socio-economic reality of the neoliberal base.
 
tbh it really wouldn't be that hard to design materials for a remain campaign which wasn't based around the notion that leave voters were stupid feckless racist working class people, which is how they were portrayed in e.g. the guardian during the referendum campaign. it wouldn't be hard to say 'yes, there are problems with the eu, some of them quite serious problems. but we believe the way to deal with this is to respond from within the tent rather than stand in the rain. leaving - no matter the deal - will leave us all worse off, and likely hit areas with heavy leave results much worse off than areas which voted remain. we understand the range of reasons why people wished to leave in june 2016: but we now know a lot more about things than we did then, and it's important to confirm that rather narrow result, to ensure that the greater certainty of what brexit means is what people want to go along with. 52/48's no way to decide a matter which will leave recriminations for decades and a more certain result could - should - allow us to recombine as a nation regardless of which way it goes. if it's leave, fine. if it's remain, fine. nonetheless as matters stand now, with the 2016 result, about half the country will be pissed off whichever way we jump and this will cause ructions in the future.' but i don't believe politicians of any stripe have the bollocks to say anything like that.
I think that was pretty much what corbyn was saying pre-referendum. Or was forced to say.
 
Back
Top Bottom