Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[Wilf]

I have a third of a past its sell by date bottle of Oramorph in my shed if anybody in dire need of pain relief. I've kept it a bit like how spies keep a capsule of cyanide in their cheek

Think big. In 6 months I'm expecting the heads of blue chip companies offering me 10 grand for a couple of tramdols to sort their bad leg.

 

[isvicthere?]

I know some people who've done it, mostly because they've got access to trade accounts anyway, but don't really see the point of stock piling. If there are major issues it won't be a matter of shortages for a week or two - it'll be a major national supply issue. As with medicines it's not something we can really insulate ourselves against. Unless you've got a warehouse and some industrial freezers going spare.

Indeed! The BBC coverage, which presents a catastrophic, no-deal crash-out as one blithe option out of several, seems to be underpinned by the notion of 3 to 6 months inconvenience, after which "everything" will be "sorted out". My view is less sanguine.

 

[redsquirrel]

It was these words that led me to believe that a 'No-Deal" exit was being advocated/preferred:
Any exit based on a WA & Future relationship deal would certainly involve engagement with the treaties, institutions and laws of the neoliberal supra-state.

Well it's a statement for people to rally around so it is (purposely) ambiguous. I think you could just as easily interpret it as a political demand that the LeFT pushes forward, rather than a legal demand. There is a very bad tendency on the left to put the technical/legal ahead of the political - one example that I've personal experience of is the dispute of the UCU re pensions, rather a than political resistance to the slashing of pensions the fight quickly dissolved to a technical dispute about whether the "correct" implementation had been used. And a point which also leads nicely to ->

Me too. Delighted to see it published.

Just read first part of Lenin in England on the train back home and it's amazing how many sentences jump out

And yet, precisely at the points where capital’s dominion appears most dominant, the deeper the working-class threat penetrates.

We too saw capitalist development first and the workers second. This is a mistake. Now we have to turn the problem on its head, change orientation, and start again from first principles, which means focusing on the struggle of the working class. At the level of socially developed capital, capitalist development is subordinate to working-class struggles

But the working-class point of view seeks a political explanation.

the workers have already gone beyond the old organisations, but they have yet to arrive at a new one.

While it is true that the working class objectively imposes precise choices on capital, it is also true that capital then completes these choices in such a way that they work against the working class. Capital, at this moment, is better organised than the working class, and the choices that the working class imposes on capital risk strengthening it. Hence, it is in the working class’s immediate interest to challenge these choices.

Prophetic in all senses of the word (and truly brilliantly written)

 

[elbows]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the public information stuff on how people can prepare for Brexit will be starting soon. I can hardly wait. Although it does occur to me that if they want to save some money, just reuse this classic from 1949:

Public Information Films | 1945 to 1951 | Film index | What A Life!

 

[brogdale]

Well it's a statement for people to rally around so it is (purposely) ambiguous. I think you could just as easily interpret it as a political demand that the LeFT pushes forward, rather than a legal demand.

Well, interpretation is obviously a matter of personal perception, and I have to say that if a "No-Deal" Brexit = leaving the single market & customs union, institutions such as the ECJ & Europol, other EU regulatory bodies and ceasing to contribute to the supra-state's budget, then the LeFT position looks pretty clearly "No-Deal" to me:

the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU

As such, this is aligned closely with the Brexit Party's key objective:

We stand for a clean-break Brexit, by the new deadline of 31st October, that will enable us to take control of our laws, borders and money

All perfectly fine, but I'm not sure why statist democratic socialists would seek such an outcome or why their supporters would seek to deny that it is a call for a "No-Deal" exit.

 

[Pickman's model]

Well, interpretation is obviously a matter of personal perception, and I have to say that if a "No-Deal" Brexit = leaving the single market & customs union, institutions such as the ECJ & Europol, other EU regulatory bodies and ceasing to contribute to the supra-state's budget, then the LeFT position looks pretty clearly "No-Deal" to me:



As such, this is aligned closely with the Brexit Party's key objective:



All perfectly fine, but I'm not sure why statist democratic socialists would seek such an outcome or why their supporters would seek to deny that it is a call for a "No-Deal" exit.

The BP desire such a situation as a permanent state of affairs, at least some lexiteers see it as a preliminary to greater societal change

 

[brogdale]

The BP desire such a situation as a permanent state of affairs, at least some lexiteers see it as a preliminary to greater societal change

Possibly, but it's also true to say that the BP claim to see a "No-Deal" Brexit as the beginning to political, if not societal, change, albeit very different in nature:

This is not only about the EU. It is about what sort of democratic country we live in.
We’re out to challenge the self-serving two-party system, make the people sovereign, and restore trust in our democracy.

 

[Pickman's model]

Possibly, but it's also true to say that the BP claim to see a "No-Deal" Brexit as the beginning to political, if not societal, change, albeit very different in nature:

Strange. I could get on board with challenging the self-serving two party system and making the people sovereign, but they've lost me with "restoring" the trust in "our democracy"

 

[brogdale]

The BP desire such a situation as a permanent state of affairs, at least some lexiteers see it as a preliminary to greater societal change

Is there anything within the LeFT statement to suggest that they don't see a 'clean' Brexit as anything other than permanent?

Unless I'm mis-reading completely, LeFT appear to see a "No-Deal" Brexit as integral to...

a rupture with a system of global capitalism that is irreformable and rotten to its core

Which, to my eyes, looks like a call for Socialism in one country?

 

[butchersapron]

Why does arguing for socialism to happen somewhere first entail arguing that this exactly where it should stop? That it should have no international impact, that it cannot then be in a position offer help to socialists in other places, that it can foster and enables a real internationalism on a basis other than shared neo-liberal interests from a far more secure platform? To say that calling for socialism outside of bosses clubs can only mean socialism in one country is absurd and basically says the choices are only stalinism or capitalism. And that this is all they can ever be.

 

[philosophical]

To me the LeFT statement approving of the leave result is basically useless because it avoids my obsession as to what does 'leave' look like on the Irish border. There is a time limited situation where ideology clashes with practical reality which LeFT seems to be ignorant of. Worse for me is that LeFT seem to axiomatically associate with the racist brexit nutters like Priti Patel who thinks the Irish can be starved into submission.

 

[brogdale]

Why does arguing for socialism to happen somewhere first entail arguing that this exactly where it should stop? That it should have no international impact, that it cannot then be in a position offer help to socialists in other places, that it can foster and enables a real internationalism on a basis other than shared neo-liberal interests from a far more secure platform? To say that calling for socialism outside of bosses clubs can only mean socialism in one country is absurd and basically says the choices are only stalinism or capitalism. And that this is all they can ever be.

You're right, arguing for socialism here, does not limit the internationalist scope for change.
But, unless I'm mistaken, these are basically statist, democratic socialists (not revolutionaries) who are arguing that a "No-Deal" exit from the bosses supra-state, is a prerequisite for democratic socialism to flower in the UK. If we do leave the EU on the 31/10/19 we'll be in a bosses state (not supra-state) with the very real chance of a period of depressed wages, living standards, employment opportunities, and even more accelerated neoliberal calls for state shrinkage.
Maybe just me, but I don't see why democratic socialists would be so keen to align themselves with the oligarch interests of a 'clean' Brexit in order to promote their agenda. Were I in their position I think I'd be very tempted to portray the process as an intra-capital battle to effect variants of neoliberalism, let the right party of capital take the blame for the impending shit-show and then talk up the opportunities for democratic socialism that will open following their actions.

 

[butchersapron]

You're right, arguing for socialism here, does not limit the internationalist scope for change.
But, unless I'm mistaken, these are basically statist, democratic socialists (not revolutionaries) who are arguing that a "No-Deal" exit from the bosses supra-state, is a prerequisite for democratic socialism to flower in the UK. If we do leave the EU on the 31/10/19 we'll be in a bosses state (not supra-state) with the very real chance of a period of depressed wages, living standards, employment opportunities, and even more accelerated neoliberal calls for state shrinkage.
Maybe just me, but I don't see why democratic socialists would be so keen to align themselves with the oligarch interests of a 'clean' Brexit in order to promote their agenda. Were I in their position I think I'd be very tempted to portray the process as an intra-capital battle to effect variants of neoliberalism, let the right party of capital take the blame for the impending shit-show and then talk up the opportunities for democratic socialism that will open following their actions.

They are a mix of people across the spectrum, there is no single position - there are stalinist nutcases like eddie dempsey and libertarian socialists and anarcho-syndicalists to straight up trad-unionists, to trots and republicans etc. I cannot see your reading as simply calling for a no-deal as correct. I can see that some my welcome it, some may not see it as the bogeyman and some opposed to that version of leaving the EU. I don't see why breaking with something cannot entail agreements as to how that break occurs where and when.

And if we don't leave we will be facing the same people in their liberal guise, with us defeated and weakened, beaten by a coalition of the left-capital with no path out of it for the forseeable, nothing opened up, in fact closed down. All opposition to the EU and its neoliberalism across europe crushed for the foreseeable future - a modern day massacre by the political descendants of MacMahon and the murderers of the communards. Whereas leaving (or just the threat of) has brought the delegitmation here of the status quo, of the political class, of the way things are run, the ongoing polarisation etc that all lead to potential crisis - and options. Recomposition that people on the far left have been calling for for so long.

So the same as them then? But they are trying to do it right now or at least proposing to start collective project to do just that. I think that you are losing sight of the fact that the EU is bad here and becoming bit too focused on the tories to the detriment of the wider picture. And make no mistake, the left party of capital is going to pay if they get this wrong. Which is what this is designed to highlight and then oppose.

 

[Pickman's model]

Is there anything within the LeFT statement to suggest that they don't see a 'clean' Brexit as anything other than permanent?

not relevant - i'm not speaking for the LeFT people, i am saying there is a set of people who voted brexit for left reasons who - while seeing the departure from the european union as permanent - see the status quo post exit not as a permanent thing but as a preliminary stage to further greater and permanent social change. they are a subset of all the people who voted brexit for left reasons. the brexit party stand for a permanent little england mentality

 

[brogdale]

not relevant - i'm not speaking for the LeFT people, i am saying there is a set of people who voted brexit for left reasons who - while seeing the departure from the european union as permanent - see the status quo post exit not as a permanent thing but as a preliminary stage to further greater and permanent social change. they are a subset of all the people who voted brexit for left reasons. the brexit party stand for a permanent little england mentality

I really don't think the forces/drivers of the BP actually hold any truck with the 'little England' tosh; that's just the false consciousness stuff. Those behind "No-Deal"ism are solidly wedded to post-Brexit political, economic and social change...just not the sort we'd like to see.

 

[brogdale]

They are a mix of people across the spectrum, there is no single position - there are stalinist nutcases like eddie dempsey and libertarian socialists and anarcho-syndicalists to straight up trad-unionists, to trots and republicans etc. I cannot see your reading as simply calling for a no-deal as correct. I can see that some my welcome it, some may not see it as the bogeyman and some opposed to that version of leaving the EU. I don't see why breaking with something cannot entail agreements as to how that break occurs where and when.

And if we don't leave we will be facing the same people in their liberal guise, with us defeated and weakened, beaten by a coalition of the left-capital with no path out of it for the forseeable, nothing opened up, in fact closed down. All opposition to the EU and its neoliberalism across europe crushed for the foreseeable future - a modern day massacre by the political descendants of MacMahon and the murderers of the communards. Whereas leaving (or just the threat of) has brought the delegitmation here of the status quo, of the political class, of the way things are run, the ongoing polarisation etc that all lead to potential crisis - and options. Recomposition that people on the far left have been calling for for so long.

So the same as them then? But they are trying to do it right now or at least proposing to start collective project to do just that. I think that you are losing sight of the fact that the EU is bad here and becoming bit too focused on the tories to the detriment of the wider picture. And make no mistake, the left party of capital is going to pay if they get this wrong. Which is what this is designed to highlight and then oppose.

Thanks for the input about the make-up of LeFT; that's helpful.

Whether or not they fully intended the statement to come across as pro "No-Deal", to my eyes it clearly does. The specific intent is obvious:

...the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU...

As you probably know, I'm very happy that the vote to leave has delegitimised the political status quo, set capital against itself and opened up the potential for recompositions. But I'm still not convinced that 'the left' has to actively support the mechanism responsible for capital's crisis of confidence in order to benefit from it.

The LeFT position as outlined in the statement looks like it could easily be interpreted as socialism will only be possible if we align with the oligarchic faction of capital to transition from supra-national shared sovereignty to full-fat, national sovereignty. This emphasis on the political superstructure machinations of capital is in danger of relegating the crucial message about the transformations needed in the economic base.

 

[Pickman's model]

I really don't think the forces/drivers of the BP actually hold any truck with the 'little England' tosh; that's just the false consciousness stuff. Those behind "No-Deal"ism are solidly wedded to post-Brexit political, economic and social change...just not the sort we'd like to see.

i think we agree on that though we may express it differently

 

[teuchter]

As you probably know, I'm very happy that the vote to leave has delegitimised the political status quo, set capital against itself

What does this mean, exactly?

 

[Pickman's model]

What does this mean, exactly?

caused dissension in the ranks of the capitalist pigs

remedial english beckons, teuchter

 

[brogdale]

What does this mean, exactly?

Two schools of capitalist 'thought' in conflict; those who see supra-national bodies as a way of legitimising & institutionalising neoliberal processes against those oligarchic, free-market fundamentalists who see the regulatory functions of supra-national bodies as inimical to the acceleration of those same trends.

 

[teuchter]

Two schools of capitalist 'thought' in conflict; those who see supra-national bodies as a way of legitimising & institutionalising neoliberal processes against those oligarchic, free-market fundamentalists who see the regulatory functions of supra-national bodies as inimical to the acceleration of those same trends.

What's the beneficial consequence of these two schools of thought being in conflict though (or in other words - so what)?

 

[brogdale]

What's the beneficial consequence of these two schools of thought being in conflict though (or in other words - so what)?

You can't see the benefit(s) of having your class enemy divided?

 

[Pickman's model]

You can't see the benefit(s) of having your class enemy divided?

he should have gone to specsavers

 

[sleaterkinney]

The left has no means of carrying out that statement, the Brexit party on the other hand are the ones calling the shots, that's the recomposition.

 

[teuchter]

You can't see the benefit(s) of having your class enemy divided?

I don't see that it particularly stops them doing their thing. One half of the 'divide' will be a bit happier than the other, depending on the outcome of Brexit, that's all.

 

[brogdale]

I don't see that it particularly stops them doing their thing. One half of the 'divide' will be a bit happier than the other, depending on the outcome of Brexit, that's all.

Interesting take on an existential threat to late capitalism.

 

[Supine]

Interesting take on an existential threat to late capitalism.

Existential threat to late capitalism is over egging it a bit. There is always a tension between free market libertarianism and regulated industries and bodies but that has nothing to do with capitalism itself being replaced by something else. There is never even a proposal about what post capitalism would like like.

 

[brogdale]

Existential threat to late capitalism is over egging it a bit. There is always a tension between free market libertarianism and regulated industries and bodies but that has nothing to do with capitalism itself being replaced by something else. There is never even a proposal about what post capitalism would like like.

The triumph of unleashed, full-fat Randist Oligarchy could easily see any legitimacy that neoliberalism claims undermined to the extent that the manufactured consent dissolves.

 

[Proper Tidy]

There is never even a proposal about what post capitalism would like like.

Who from?

 

[teuchter]

Interesting take on an existential threat to late capitalism.

Well, my take is that there is zero existential threat to late capitalism posed by Brexit. I've yet to find anyone who can explain why there would be.