Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[Sweet FA]

Looks like she's kacking her drawers. "Please excuse me, your eminences, just curling one out!".

"How dare you shit in front of me!"
"I'm sorry Sir, I didn't realise it was your turn"




dadgag

 

[paolo]

I think I can only watch this if there's a promise of an Alan Partridge meltdown.

I'm thinking of May running round the audience with 500 sheets of A4, saying "you want some, you want some of this? DO YOU?"

In the background, Corbyn is escorted away by minders to his still soundproofed care home.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think I can only watch this if there's a promise of an Alan Partridge meltdown.

I'm thinking of May running round the audience with 500 sheets of A4, saying "you want some, you want some of this? DO YOU?"

In the background, Corbyn is escorted away by minders to his still soundproofed care home.

there till certainly be an alan partridge meltdown if you don't watch it

you will hang your head in shame at missing it for the rest of your days

 

[MickiQ]

I think I can only watch this if there's a promise of an Alan Partridge meltdown.

I'm thinking of May running round the audience with 500 sheets of A4, saying "you want some, you want some of this? DO YOU?"

In the background, Corbyn is escorted away by minders to his still soundproofed care home.

If they can promise that they could put it on a pay-per-view channel

 

[Wilf]

Just a thought about Labours position, im starting to think that Stephen Bush has got it right here (he's on about 30 secs in - the rest doesnt need watching):


To summarise his position:
-If the deal fails to pass Labour will go for a GE but fail (they already know that it wont fly, not got the numbers)
- next step they're going for a second ref...seems there aren't the numbers for that either...
-that leaves No Deal, which nearly no one wants, which might lead to a vote in support of Mays Deal as the only option left!
Thats a scenario of Mays Deal passing with no need from a market shock to get through.
.

His route map to how May might get it through (at the second time of asking) is just about my prediction as well. By that I don't mean she necessarily will get it through - I'm aware of the reported numbers - but that's the plausible map as to how she might do.

Haven't got time to dig out the figures at the moment, but I read her popularity figures have gone up in the last few days, as have those in favour of her actual deal. If that is the direction of travel over the next days and she then beats Corbyn in the debate *, then there's a potential for MPs to have their revolt in the first vote and then 'reluctantly' fall into line for the revote.

* Doesn't really have to beat him performance wise, just portray his line about opening up the negotiations again as unrealistic. She can quite easily point out that it's a bit late in the day for Labour to bring anything to the table.

 

[gosub]

Apparently there's some sort of "reality" TV show that has to be avoided ...

S pose, Corbyn is going to use 'I'm a vegetarian' to stop there being a maggot eating round

 

[Raheem]

hah i didnt realise that! its a complicated world

Just a thought about Labours position, im starting to think that Stephen Bush has got it right here (he's on about 30 secs in - the rest doesnt need watching):


To summarise his position:
-If the deal fails to pass Labour will go for a GE but fail (they already know that it wont fly, not got the numbers)
- next step they're going for a second ref...seems there aren't the numbers for that either...
-that leaves No Deal, which nearly no one wants, which might lead to a vote in support of Mays Deal as the only option left!
Thats a scenario of Mays Deal passing with no need from a market shock to get through.

Someone upthread was saying they're enjoying the Tories splitting over this...there is a still a big chance, perhaps the biggest of all the possibilities, that Mays Deal will pass, that she'll deliver a brexit, and by that point the party will have had to reconcile their difference enough and whatsmore they'll win the next election.

May has already been able to call Labour the party trying to stop Brexit on a whiff of second ref talk - theres more damage for Labour to take in this process.

I saw that as well, but the trouble with his prediction is that it relies on MPs finding it plausible that the government will allow a no deal exit rather than going for an art 50 extension. It didn't work on the EU and it won't work in the HoC either.

 

[redsquirrel]

At what point is the hegemony of centre-right parliamentary politics - by far the single biggest influence over conditions - going to be disrupted, within or without? Why is any of this going to actually deliver positives for the left rather than capital or the far right? What if you are just plain wrong and noone fights back for however long?

No the biggest influence over conditions is the interaction between capital and labour. Your insistence on reducing this to parliamentary/group politics is part of the problem. As the sentence below shows

To this you'll say it means I have no faith in the WC but again I say that it's conditional. And there's no benefit to having an inflated sense of the left's health.

You've gone from the WC to "the left" as if they were the same thing, or at least as if "the left's" health was some pre-requirement for labour to fight. That is completely arse about face.

 

[mauvais]

No the biggest influence over conditions is the interaction between capital and labour. Your insistence on reducing this to parliamentary/group politics is part of the problem. As the sentence below shows

This is like saying that the biggest influence over global warming is the sun - true but useless. As it stands, and it's not what I want because it's clearly not working, PP is the biggest enabler of and biggest brake on changes to working conditions in the UK. Until the current model is disrupted or eclipsed this will continue to be the case and the range of possibilities will be strictly limited as a result.

You've gone from the WC to "the left" as if they were the same thing, or at least as if "the left's" health was some pre-requirement for labour to fight. That is completely arse about face.

They're not the same thing, and clearly top-down directed left wing politics isn't working either. But if you expect some hypothetical WC resistance to automatically go in a leftwards direction, rather than the many other possibilities, then as I said you've got an inflated sense of the left's position. That's not necessarily tangible organisation & leadership but ideas and presence in any kind of discourse. It's not a prerequisite for a fight but it might be a prerequisite for an outcome that isn't, as just one example, factional nationalism.

 

[SpineyNorman]

What's factional nationalism and how does it differ from the regular kind of nationalism?

 

[mauvais]

What's factional nationalism and how does it differ from the regular kind of nationalism?

The opposite of solidarity.

 

[Sprocket.]

Sadly we have seen examples in the past how easily the WC step to the Right when democracy fails.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

This is like saying that the biggest influence over global warming is the sun - true but useless. As it stands, and it's not what I want because it's clearly not working, PP is the biggest enabler of and biggest brake on changes to working conditions in the UK. Until the current model is disrupted or eclipsed this will continue to be the case and the range of possibilities will be strictly limited as a result.
They're not the same thing, and clearly top-down directed left wing politics isn't working either. But if you expect some hypothetical WC resistance to automatically go in a leftwards direction, rather than the many other possibilities, then as I said you've got an inflated sense of the left's position. That's not necessarily tangible organisation & leadership but ideas and presence in any kind of discourse. It's not a prerequisite for a fight but it might be a prerequisite for an outcome that isn't, as just one example, factional nationalism.

If he’s not arsed about the left’s health then I daresay he feels the same about the left’s position.
Collective organising, building confidence, solidarity etc is a way of living, not a position. And it’s a way of living that could feasibly be achieved whilst individual people have very conflicting stances- left and right.
One of the things that fucks up the sort of cohesiveness that can often be seen in WC communities or workplaces is the left’s dogged persistence in reducing everything and everyone to what their stance is on this and that and who they voted for.
And I know; we all do this at times. I know I do.

 

[Pickman's model]

Sadly we have seen examples in the past how easily the WC step to the Right when democracy fails.

need i remind you we do not live in a democracy?

 

[Sprocket.]

need i remind you we do not live in a democracy?

Without doubt. Just clarifying for those who still believe we do.
This country has been moving to the right since 1971.

 

[Pickman's model]

Without doubt. Just clarifying for those who still believe we do.
This country has been moving to the right since 1971.

leaving the likes of col sir edward heath (ret) and auld 'red' lt jim callaghan (rn, ret) to the left of the likes of jeremy corbyn

 

[flypanam]

His route map to how May might get it through (at the second time of asking) is just about my prediction as well. By that I don't mean she necessarily will get it through - I'm aware of the reported numbers - but that's the plausible map as to how she might do.

Haven't got time to dig out the figures at the moment, but I read her popularity figures have gone up in the last few days, as have those in favour of her actual deal. If that is the direction of travel over the next days and she then beats Corbyn in the debate *, then there's a potential for MPs to have their revolt in the first vote and then 'reluctantly' fall into line for the revote.

* Doesn't really have to beat him performance wise, just portray his line about opening up the negotiations again as unrealistic. She can quite easily point out that it's a bit late in the day for Labour to bring anything to the table.

I'm wondering if she will get through because the Labour right will see the opportunity to be like the US Dems and actually do that bi partisan bullshit in the 'National' interest and vote with the May faction and rupturing Labour, in the hope that it either builds a new centre and /or gets rid of Corbyn?

eta, I haven't been following the parliamentary machinations much so if my question is pure horseshit please ignore.

 

[AnandLeo]

Theresa May rules out Norway-style Brexit compromise with Labour
Theresa May should deal with the UK parliament to reach a successful deal with the EU. That’s the crux of the matter. All parties have red lines. That’s the difficulty in negotiation, collaboration, and compromise. UK parliament should negotiate a Brexit deal internally, and externally with the EU.

 

[ska invita]

I saw that as well, but the trouble with his prediction is that it relies on MPs finding it plausible that the government will allow a no deal exit rather than going for an art 50 extension. It didn't work on the EU and it won't work in the HoC either.

Not sure i follow Raheem - he explicitly says No Deal is IMplausible to the commons, hence bouncing off it quickly and on to the last option standing, May's Deal.
Art 50 extension, even if it does happen, buys between 2 to maybe 4 months, going on accounts in the press, and runs into the problem of the UK getting drawn into the next wave of EU fees. It doesn't magic away having to choose one of the inevitable conclusions.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

So-called 'Norway-plus' now being advocated as a deal that could win the Commons. May continues with the line that not ending free movement from the EU means not honouring the referendum, but I didn't see immigration on the ballot paper. She really needs to be called on this line, which she's been parrotting for two years now.

The Norway plus deal would be an 'improvement' on the current situation because EU citizens would now be required to register as residents, so could be monitored and 'removed' if they're not working. Yay, more controls and state power over us!

 

[danny la rouge]

I didn't see immigration on the ballot paper. She really needs to be called on this line

I think that's right. And I think this is precisely one of the areas that Labour ought to be speaking on, but isn't because it doesn't really have a handle on what its constituency now is.

Labour could easily be making a case similar to the one you go on to make: that if immigration was indeed one of the concerns people had, there's more than one way to address that.

 

[ska invita]

I think that's right. And I think this is precisely one of the areas that Labour ought to be speaking on, but isn't because it doesn't really have a handle on what its constituency now is.

Labour could easily be making a case similar to the one you go on to make: that if immigration was indeed one of the concerns people had, there's more than one way to address that.

I think Labour knows its constituency, but it knows its constituency is split on the issue, hence triangulation and lack of conviction politics

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think that's right. And I think this is precisely one of the areas that Labour ought to be speaking on, but isn't because it doesn't really have a handle on what its constituency now is.

Labour could easily be making a case similar to the one you go on to make: that if immigration was indeed one of the concerns people had, there's more than one way to address that.

Labour are in a mess over immigration. They made some horrible pledges in 2015, and they still haven't found a way to row back on that.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

fwiw, while I still don't like it, I have always thought that something like Norway-plus was realistically the only kind of deal that could possibly work. It's a lot of hassle for not very much, but it is still brexit. Those saying it's not brexit are talking out of their arses - Norway and Switzerland are not in the EU.

 

[danny la rouge]

I think Labour knows its constituency

I don't think it does. It seems not to know whether to mollify the swing voters in the handful of marginal seats, or whether it has a Corbyn factor, or whether the "red UKIP" vote in the North of England will come back, etc. You just have to look at Labour's approach in Scotland: they haven't a clue what their message is.

 

[ska invita]

I don't think it does. It seems not to know whether to mollify the swing voters in the handful of marginal seats, or whether it has a Corbyn factor, or whether the "red UKIP" vote in the North of England will come back, etc. You just have to look at Labour's approach in Scotland: they haven't a clue what their message is.

These are all different part of the Labour constituency no?

 

[ska invita]

A party representing the majority of people is always going to run up against difference of opinion amongst their constituents - what we've had for years now is Labour pandering itself into oblivion. What Corbyn is meant to be is a change in that culture - conviction politics where you say what you mean and you lead by meaning it, and hopefully changing attitudes of voters in so doing. If you lose votes then tough. Brexit and immigration seem to have put that to the test and the results aren't great so far.

 

[danny la rouge]

These are all different part of the Labour constituency no?

Ah, well. That's a slightly different point. I think it needs to decide. And I think that's allied to the need for it to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project. It still hasn't worked that out.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Ah, well. That's a slightly different point. I think it needs to decide. And I think that's allied to the need for it to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project. It still hasn't worked that out.

Shifting decisively on immigration (meaning coming out strongly against the notion that housing shortages and pay cuts are the fault of immigration) has to include a decision to come out and blame the Blair/Brown years. The continuation and deepening of Thatcherism through those years is a crucial part of how we got to where we are now. They appear to have moved on somewhat from the Blair/Brown wars, but not so much from this.

I think the ambivalence is partly due to the reasons Blair/Brown showed enthusiasm. They cheered as house prices went through the roof, and there is still a chunk of people who feel they did well out of that and who vote Labour. Now those people's children are growing up, perhaps they can now be persuaded that the collective madness they think they benefited from was fundamentally wrong.

 

[ska invita]

Ah, well. That's a slightly different point. I think it needs to decide. And I think that's allied to the need for it to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project. It still hasn't worked that out.

I agree. But sounds like you think freedom of movement is an acceptable part in reckoning with the neoliberal project. Some on the left, including on these boards, don't agree.
Labours relative silence leaves a vacuum for others to fill the narrative