Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[Supine]

Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.

I can't see Brexiteers going for Clarke. It'd be ace to see Boris quickly deposed by somebody though.

 

[Pickman's model]

Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.

anyone but the leader of the largest opposition party

 

[andysays]

I can't see Brexiteers going for Clarke. It'd be ace to see Boris quickly deposed by somebody though.

I don't think it's really about who Brexiteers would go for, it's more about finding someone that the whole opposition and a handful (because that's all that would be needed) of Tory Remainers could get behind, in order to ensure that a VoNC was successful.

 

[binka]

Corbyn can't abrogate responsibility and allow someone else to lead a short term unity government. He's leader of the opposition of course it has to be him

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't think it's really about who Brexiteers would go for, it's more about finding someone that the whole opposition and a handful (because that's all that would be needed) of Tory Remainers could get behind, in order to ensure that a VoNC was successful.

yeh but they're lumbered with corbyn as it's frankly very hard to see how the labour party membership could be kept in any way onside if the elected leader, the leader of the opposition, was junked on the say-so of minor parties like the lib dems.

 

[andysays]

yeh but they're lumbered with corbyn as it's frankly very hard to see how the labour party membership could be kept in any way onside if the elected leader, the leader of the opposition, was junked on the say-so of minor parties like the lib dems.

Again, I'm not sure that the Labour party membership are relevant to what is basically a bit of parliamentary manoeuvring, a way of blocking the current government and substituting another one.

 

[Pickman's model]

Again, I'm not sure that the Labour party membership are relevant to what is basically a bit of parliamentary manoeuvring, a way of blocking the current government and substituting another one.

you're missing the point, which is that while in the short term you're right, what it would do to the labour party would be of longer-term interest. the left v the right fighting over the way auld corby was royally fucked.

 

[andysays]

you're missing the point, which is that while in the short term you're right, what it would do to the labour party would be of longer-term interest. the left v the right fighting over the way auld corby was royally fucked.

Maybe we're talking at cross purposes then.

I agree that there would be wider and longer term political consequences to the parliamentary manoeuvring we're seeing, assuming they were successful, and that they might be differences in the consequences of Corbyn becoming caretaker PM compared to, say, Clarke.

But that's quite a different question from the one of whether they will be successful in stopping a No Deal Brexit by a VoNC followed by a caretaker govt asking the EU for another extension.

It's the latter which is what I think most people are focused on ATM, and what my recent posts have referred to.

 

[Pickman's model]

Maybe we're talking at cross purposes then.

I agree that there would be wider and longer term political consequences to the parliamentary manoeuvring we're seeing, assuming they were successful, and that they might be differences in the consequences of Corbyn becoming caretaker PM compared to, say, Clarke.

But that's quite a different question from the one of whether they will be successful in stopping a No Deal Brexit by a VoNC followed by a caretaker govt asking the EU for another extension.

It's the latter which is what I think most people are focused on ATM, and what my recent posts have referred to.

i think it might be an ask to get it past the plp in sufficient numbers to make it workable - dump your leader so a soft tory can have a go for a bit

i think there'd be a split - even if of 80/20 - which would hamper such a manouevre

 

[andysays]

i think it might be an ask to get it past the plp in sufficient numbers to make it workable - dump your leader so a soft tory can have a go for a bit

i think there'd be a split - even if of 80/20 - which would hamper such a manouevre

I agree that's a significant potential obstacle

 

[treelover]

In terms of the last GE the Labour surge was wholly linked to desire for 'change'. Adopting the role of the elderly titular head of a rabble of neo-liberals and failed pols engaged in an naked power grab, with profound democratic consequences, would be a very bad look especially in the seats labour needs to win. In fact it would be the end of the project.

It is threads and contributions like this that can make someone, change their mind.

 

[kabbes]

The only reason brexit is even a thing is because of a disagreement in the UK ruling class over whether the UK should align with US or EU style capitalism. The relative sizes of the pro-brexit and pro-remain factions of capital are kind of moot since the pro-Brexit lot have forced and won the referendum, currently form the government and just have to sit it out until Halloween to get the no deal brexit they want.

I've been thinking about this, and this:

I’m not contesting this point, but I’m wondering right now why capital isn’t screaming it’s lungs out in opposition to no deal - is this acceptance, not wanting to lose favour with government, or just that the larger trans-national elements of capital will just shrug and move factories elsewhere without feeling much pain? It seems weird that the CBI types aren’t having very public spats with the administration, unless this isn’t being reported. I guess it might be that they just want it out of the way so some element of certainty returns and they can then adapt to the new environment, the limbo situation of the last couple of years can’t have offered much benefit to them either.

And I've been thinking about how it relates to this:

I find myself wondering what recession even means now. Whose recession? Do we have sufficient shared interests across a society to even understand what the concept means any more?

A recession is two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth and I sure as shit don’t have any faith in GDP to tell me anything about actual social well-being.

And even if we’re looking just at the capital part only, which strata of capital are we looking at? The FTSE 100, who are all based on owning shit worldwide? The FTSE 250, who are based on exploiting the shit out of the population of the U.K.? Or the AIM, who are a mishmash of interests? Or are we looking at industry segments and does the banking sector share interests with the manufacturing base at all any more?

I think the reason it all seems so chaotic is the it IS chaotic. Pinning down shared interests is increasingly hard

I think that what it comes down to is that serious capital doesn't care that much about Brexit because what happens within Britain is a blip within a global corporation. There's a regulatory challenge that needs sorting out and that's largely been taken care of now. Beyond that, Britain's loss is somebody else's gain and somebody playing the game globally is OK either way.

To the more UK-focussed FTSE 250 type of companies, Brexit is a much bigger deal and they have been making a fuss. They generally don't want cowboy capitalism, actually, because big companies have come to realise that they are much, much better off operating under strong corporate governance anyway -- what kills companies is when they try to take shortcuts. So they want to play by a good set of rules and they want everybody else to do so too in order to level the playing field.

It's the smaller companies outside the FTSE 350 that think that they will benefit by slacker rules, and these are the players more generally have had distinct owners keen on deregulation. There are some exceptions, of course -- Tim Weatherspoon and James Dyson spring to mind (both owners of FTSE 250 companies, although Weatherspoons is at the smaller end of the 250). Exceptions don't break the general pattern though.

The other agitators are capital vampires -- those that try to game the system. The problem with using these guys to determine what "capital" wants, though, is that their interests are generally diametrically opposite to what corporations want, and this means although they stand to gain short-term from chaos, in the long-run they are just as screwed by it as everybody else. Even a parasite needs its host to be healthy. Once you've made your money from shorting a position, you are then sitting in a world in which the corporations making the money you hope to siphon off aren't the cash cows they once were.

So what are we left with?
The big players don't care that much.
The medium sized players care quite a lot and are making their voices heard but, frankly, their voices aren't very loud. Plus they're worried about alienating their customers.
The small players want all kinds of different things, and some of them want something that will actually end up bad for them but they don't realise it yet.
The vampires want a short term gain that will hurt them in the long run.

In short, capital's interest is served by as much stability and free trade as possible but not all the players involved either realise that are incentivised to maintain the very system that allows them to thrive.

 

[hash tag]

For Pickman's model (the background changes) Brexit Countdown Timer

 

[hash tag]

Or How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer

 

[Pickman's model]

It is threads and contributions like this that can make someone, change their mind.

Not always as the poster intended tho

 

[Pickman's model]

Or How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer

I think you've confused me with Ranbay

 

[Ranbay]

I think you've confused me with Ranbay

I can see how to be honest.

 

[Pickman's model]

I can see how to be honest.

Yeh two of the most charismatic posters here, playboys of the western world

 

[hash tag]

Not always as the poster intended tho

Have I not seen you posting the final countdown on other threads (trying to put the fear of god into everyone)?

 

[Pickman's model]

Have I not seen you posting the final countdown on other threads (trying to put the fear of god into everyone)?

No

 

[Ranbay]

Have I not seen you posting the final countdown on other threads (trying to put the fear of god into everyone)?

 

[Ranbay]

Yeh two of the most charismatic posters here, playboys of the western world

With Badgers at our side.

 

[hash tag]

Forum rules...11.29 on another thread

 

[Pickman's model]

Forum rules...11.29 on another thread

Are you quite alright?

 

[Wilf]

Life in the Bubble Anti-No Deal Labour-SNP-Plaid but not Libs and other assorted Chukkist Cranks and Running Dogs Government of National Unity News:

Grauniad says 'No deal edges closer as key Tories refuse to back Corbyn'
Telegraph says key Tory rebels 'Welcome Corbyn Plan'

Two men say they're Jesus, one of 'em must be wrong...

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Thoughts on the GFPA going down the shitter with a Boris no deal/no back stop?

 

[teqniq]

Observer supporting Labour's plan. Who'dve thunk it?

The Observer view on Jeremy Corbyn and stopping a no-deal Brexit | Observer editorial

 

[sleaterkinney]

Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.

Princess Leia of the Remain Alliance.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Observer supporting Labour's plan. Who'dve thunk it?

The Observer view on Jeremy Corbyn and stopping a no-deal Brexit | Observer editorial

I didn't know this bit below. I mean it makes sense because how could they get through any meaningful policy when they're backed up by Tories and libdems but didn't know it was a commitment. I think it's a fucking terrible idea tbh

 

[Ranbay]