There's a difference between an aim and the least miserable hope.
You’re falling into the trap of saying “something needs to be done. This is something. Therefore this needs to be done”.
We have the equivalent of two gangster families fighting over territory. We’re going to be fucked over by whoever wins. And even if one side smiles at your kids and ruffles their hair, they’re still going to be sociopathic parasites. You might say “the reality is one side is going to win; it doesn’t help to do nothing”. But ‘not picking a side to lend support to’ is not necessarily the same as ‘doing nothing’.
When Cameron decided to hold the referendum, then along with Osborne and most Tories led the Remain campaign, we had a choice between their side - the neoliberal establishment - or a campaign led by a coalition of neoconservative oddballs and opportunists. That was the choice we were faced with. I was undecided whether to vote, and if so how to vote, right up until the last minute. Because I knew that as well as the
prima facie question on the ballot paper, there were other levels of decision to be made. Debates between the lines. In the end I made my decision based on the campaign run by Leave. I decided to vote
against that. In particular, on polling day, I saw again online the infamous dog whistle queue poster. I decided to vote Remain. Not wholeheartedly. Not even half-heartedly. But in the heat of the moment.
Nor was I happy with the Remain campaign. There was a lot I didn't like about it. A lot. I didn't like the story they told that went "if you don't vote for our option, you're being ignorant and aren't understanding the realities". That's a story you can sell to people who are already onside, but to people who are already unhappy it's a red rag. And it's a mistake that 2nd referendum enthusiasts are repeating. In fact, it's been repeated recently on this very thread (eg
here). Hoping that people will "come to their senses" will never happen if your message is predominantly "surely you've come to your senses by now?" Even if there was a 2nd referendum, I really can't see any sign that the Remain camp are going to do anything but repeat those mistakes.
We need to survey the scene in front of us. Where does the balance of possibilities and probabilities lie? Well, in the political classes, we know it's stalemate. The ragtag of neoconservative oddballs and opportunists won the day, but it turns out they have no sway in parliament. In addition, they are poor strategists, and overplayed their hand in the House. So the neoliberal establishment have mainly fallen into a position of finding the most neoliberal way that they can make Brexit work, hoping to find a way that is just neoconservative enough to carry the oddballs, and that the EU will agree to, and that the supporters of the neoliberal project outside of the House will swallow (ie, the CBI, the British Chambers of Commerce, the financial institutions, etc), and that looks enough like Brexit to satisfy the Leave vote in the population.
I can't see the cancelling of Brexit by the establishment doing anything but creating more social problems. I think in addition, it'd open the door to the far right in a disastrous way. (Not that I'd back away from a straight fight with the far right if that was what was required, but I see no reason to drive millions into their clutches).
Nor do I think Labour have covered themselves in glory. They had an opportunity to present a distinctive alternative, but chose instead to say as little as possible and wait to see what mistakes the government made. An understandable tactic, but one that has deprived us of a social democratic alternative.
And as I said in a previous post, there has been insufficient groundwork to organise for Lexit. (Not that I think "socialism in one country" is achievable, but I do think there were possibilities for a left-inspired restructuring of the economy under WTO rules. But that won't just happen by magic).
So, what is there on the Brexit table for me to support? Nothing. Only things to oppose.
