Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[Wilf]

I'm unclear about what you're saying here. Is it that backing Brexit is the only way of avoiding agreeing with a bunch of wankers?

I think we've reached the point that danny la rouge has been making, that we need to quote SpineyNorman 's words on each page.

I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.

 

[teuchter]

As I've tried to explain, there are more than 3 viewpoints.

Yes, and your viewpoint seems to be one which sees a leave vote as something that makes a left-wing government more likely. I'd say that sits within the category of viewpoints described as 'Lexit'.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yes, and your viewpoint seems to be one which sees a leave vote as something that makes a left-wing government more likely. I'd say that sits within the category of viewpoints described as 'Lexit'.

you're all over the shop on this one

 

[Wilf]

There are certainly “things that can be done”. But there are also things that can’t be done in the timescale, because there isn’t, and hasn’t been, the organisation in place preparing for it. There is no realistic chance of a “hard Lexit”, for example.

I agree with Costas Lapavitsas that WTO rules could provide significant opportunities for a left inspired restructuring of the UK economy. The hit we’re (the working class, and more) going to take is based on the way the situation at 11:01pm will impact the future of the economy, but beginning with the economy as it is structured now; the way it has been shaped over the last few decades. It has been deindustrialised and financialised by neoliberalism. It needn’t be that type of economy that the UK responds to Brexit with.

However, there has been no groundwork, there is no organisation, there is no preparation, to get us there by 29th March.

So, yes, the UK is Brexiting by some kind of right wing map, still being drawn, and the options open to us now are reactive.

That gets to the heart of it for me. Brexit isn't the defeat, Brexit is a consequence of those decades. And those decades have left us weaker in the bigger fight, they have affected patterns of class struggle. Those are the real issues. All of that imprints onto how we face the reality of Brexit, certainly, but doesn't add up to some desperate attempt to get back into the EU. What we need is the fight, is the organisation, to fight neo-liberalism from wherever it hails. That's not complacency about Brexit, I suspect things will be worse as the map is redrawn further. But ultimately, in the context of those left structures organisations not existing or functioning, it's still a mistake to think the EU, People's Vote and the rest are some kind of 'next best thing'.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Agree completely Wilf and danny la rouge . That's exactly how I see it too.

Whilst we're at it, I don't think this post can be repeated too many times:

My pure guess is there will be some kind of downturn and loss of jobs, though equally, there may be some kind of temporary Brexit bounce if an agreement is ultimately signed. Yeah, there may be a downturn, there may be a loss of jobs. Whoever is in government in a couple of years may also find it is easier to make things worse in all kinds of areas. Specific groups may be hit. But again, how to respond to that? Campaign for a 'people's re-vote', give our support to the neoliberal EU, line up, support one of the key institutions of capital? The EU isn't 'ours'. To fight for communities, fight for communities. To fight deportations, fight deportations etc. Don't keep asking me to line up with Juncker et al.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Yes, and your viewpoint seems to be one which sees a leave vote as something that makes a left-wing government more likely. I'd say that sits within the category of viewpoints described as 'Lexit'.

Well then Lexit is a pretty fucking broad term isn't it?

Which is why I don't use it. You're not sticking me in a pigeon hole with the CPB and their British Road to Socialism nonsense.

 

[Wilf]

Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh.

https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/

Her husband was also involved in a discrimination case at work. He is, somewhat inevitably, a senior officer at an investment bank and distributed photos of a naked painting of his wife to junior female colleagues. A female lawyer at the firm objected and was sacked, leading to a tribunal. I'd link to the story, but its in the Mail, so won't.

 

[brogdale]

Well then Lexit is a pretty fucking broad term isn't it?

Which is why I don't use it. You're not sticking me in a pigeon hole with the CPB and their British Road to Socialism nonsense.

Not only broad, but essentially redundant and meaningless. The challenges facing the 'Le' bit of 'Lexit' remain unchanged though, perhaps, seen in greater clarity as a result of the whole process?

 

[killer b]

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.

Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any distinctive alternative would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative has been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.

I've seen people - usually those agitating for remain - say Labour should be prepared to take the damage: that a politician with a clear view of the way forward should show leadership and take the party and country with him. I think this ignores reality. There isn't the time or political space for any party or politician to change enough minds in the places they need to be changed for such a project to result in anything but a crushing defeat at the general election which would surely immediately follow, to an even more right wing, more brexity Tory party.

Both parties are in a similar bind, with forces within and outside Westminster making the ground they have to maneuvere almost non existent - their only hope of a way out which doesn't see their party destroyed involves making sure the other one is blamed for whatever happens.

The final paragraph of Stephen Bush's latest morning mail out is pertinent:

...the biggest reason that a no deal exit might happen: almost everyone is convinced that when push comes to shove, a no deal scenario is so catastrophic that someone will take political damage to prevent it. Up until the point where a majority of MPs are ready to say "and that someone is me", the chance of a no deal exit remains very real.

 

[Pickman's model]

Which is why I don't use it. You're not sticking me in a pigeon hole with the CPB and their British Road to Socialism nonsense.

when i win the euromillions a portion of it will go on buying a pub which i will rename 'socialism' at the end of a road i will rename 'british road' which is the only way the cpb will ever go down a british road to socialism

 

[danny la rouge]

Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh.

I think that’s probably fair, as it happens. I did nearly expand on the way the forces lay within the PLP. It doesn’t stop me from feeling disappointed though.

In fact disappointment is one of the overarching emotions the whole thing has left me with.

(I could go on about the situation here in Scotland, but I don’t have the strength this morning).

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Her husband was also involved in a discrimination case at work. He is, somewhat inevitably, a senior officer at an investment bank and distributed photos of a naked painting of his wife to junior female colleagues. A female lawyer at the firm objected and was sacked, leading to a tribunal. I'd link to the story, but its in the Mail, so won't.

Not to judge a book by its cover, but he looks like a right scum-fucker...

 

[Pickman's model]

Not to judge a book by its cover, but he looks like a right scum-fucker...

View attachment 161716

that's a face orwell would have taken a boot to

 

[danny la rouge]

Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh.

https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/

I’d seen headlines about someone challenging Rees Mogg to “a naked debate”, but didn’t read on because I didn’t feel there was anything else I needed to know on the topic. Having been informed by this thread a little more about the background to those headlines, I also read a little more about the “naked Brexit professor”. It turns out that my first instinct had been correct: the initial headline was already as much information as I needed.

 

[Wilf]

Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any distinctive alternative would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative has been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.

I've seen people - usually those agitating for remain - say Labour should be prepared to take the damage: that a politician with a clear view of the way forward should show leadership and take the party and country with him. I think this ignores reality. There isn't the time or political space for any party or politician to change enough minds in the places they need to be changed for such a project to result in anything but a crushing defeat at the general election which would surely immediately follow, to an even more right wing, more brexity Tory party.

Both parties are in a similar bind, with forces within and outside Westminster making the ground they have to maneuvere almost non existent - their only hope of a way out which doesn't see their party destroyed involves making sure the other one is blamed for whatever happens.

The final paragraph of Stephen Bush's latest morning mail out is pertinent:

...the biggest reason that a no deal exit might happen: almost everyone is convinced that when push comes to shove, a no deal scenario is so catastrophic that someone will take political damage to prevent it. Up until the point where a majority of MPs are ready to say "and that someone is me", the chance of a no deal exit remains very real.

I've been very critical of Labour and Corbyn's inaction, though I agree with you about the problem Labour has had, about the coalition(s) that make up Labour. Also, we are certainly in a position now where Labour has just about no chance to influence anything. But what remains in terms of criticism is what Labour should have been doing over the last couple of years. There may never have been a way of squaring the circle of it's remain voting and leave voting areas. But Labour should have been resisting austerity, fighting atos and the rest. Creating a better context for facing up to Brexit.

Also, perhaps a bit hypocritical of me to say this, given that I've said we shouldn't be seeking salvation in the EU, but maybe Labour should have used the points it sent to May last week as a public position on Brexit. I don't think things like remaining in the single market and keeping alignment over workers rights and the rest would be much of a victory, but it was at least a political position that allowed the party to respect the original vote and give a kind of second prize to its remain voters/members. [Edit: it would at least have been a strategy, something to take out on the road. Better than not having a strategy]

 

[brogdale]

Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any distinctive alternative would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative has been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.

I've seen people - usually those agitating for remain - say Labour should be prepared to take the damage: that a politician with a clear view of the way forward should show leadership and take the party and country with him. I think this ignores reality. There isn't the time or political space for any party or politician to change enough minds in the places they need to be changed for such a project to result in anything but a crushing defeat at the general election which would surely immediately follow, to an even more right wing, more brexity Tory party.

Both parties are in a similar bind, with forces within and outside Westminster making the ground they have to maneuvere almost non existent - their only hope of a way out which doesn't see their party destroyed involves making sure the other one is blamed for whatever happens.

The final paragraph of Stephen Bush's latest morning mail out is pertinent:

...the biggest reason that a no deal exit might happen: almost everyone is convinced that when push comes to shove, a no deal scenario is so catastrophic that someone will take political damage to prevent it. Up until the point where a majority of MPs are ready to say "and that someone is me", the chance of a no deal exit remains very real.

Labour's problems with the whole Brexit process inevitably date back to the period preceding the 2015 GE when their response to Cameron's telegraphed, then specific commitment to hold an in/out referendum was met with the fudge of Miliband's "manifesto for business" that sought to assure capital that the UK's position in the EU would be secure in Labour's hands whilst also offering the sop to members of a referendum for any further 'sharing of sovereignty'. That triangulation never allowed a coherent, straightforward policy trajectory.

If at the time the LP had come out and said that they wanted nothing to do with Cameron's attempt to resolve his own party discipline, then their subsequent performance under Corbyn might make sense...but that's not where they started from.

 

[Pickman's model]

Not to judge a book by its cover, but he looks like a right scum-fucker...

View attachment 161716

it's a face that would send any farmer off to lock up his flocks and herds

 

[killer b]

Also, perhaps a bit hypocritical of me to say this, given that I've said we shouldn't be seeking salvation in the EU, but maybe Labour should have used the points it sent to May last week as a public position on Brexit. I don't think things like remaining in the single market and keeping alignment over workers rights and the rest would be much of a victory, but it was at least a political position that allowed the party to respect the original vote and give a kind of second prize to its remain voters/members. [Edit: it would at least have been a strategy, something to take out on the road. Better than not having a strategy]

Isn't this more or less what they did? Isn't this their public position on Brexit now (one which has seen a 5% fall in support)?

 

[elbows]

The Brexit secretary has played down a report that Theresa May could force MPs to choose between backing her deal or accepting a delay to EU withdrawal.

ITV News said chief UK negotiator Olly Robbins was overheard in a Brussels bar saying the EU was likely to allow an extension to the Brexit process.

But Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay said this did not reflect government policy.

The government is committed to Britain leaving the EU on 29 March, he added.

Brexit choice of deal v delay 'not policy'

Lock-in at the Brexit bar.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any distinctive alternative would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative has been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.

I disagree with this point. It's absolutely true that the Labour leadership have tried to balance between their coalition of interests (NuLab Remainers and working class/young people bearing the brunt austerity, with some mild crossover between the two) but I think it's important to note that they don't have to do that. Corbyn always had options - particularly immediately after the election he was expected to be destroyed at.

Genuinely democratising and transforming the Labour party was possible. It's not like he didn't have a mandate and the support of the membership. We'd be in a very different situation right now if he'd whipped votes and disciplined Blairites, brought in automatic re-selection and opened up the Labour party to the working class and the trade unions.

It's also not as if Corbyn couldn't have come out several times strongly in favour of Brexit, and put that in socialist terms. The *only* coherent political response to the threat of no deal is to radically transform our economy and decisively reject neoliberalism, privatisation and austerity. The majority of passionate Remainers were passionate because they were opposed to the nationalism and racism of UKIP/Tories. Promising a 'Brexit' with no new immigration controls, a Britain that accepts refugees, and linking that to an anti-austerity program would have had an appeal for many of them. It would be interesting as well to see how the media and the EU would respond to Corbyn going on the telly and saying well if no deal is a real possibility we'll have to nationalise everything and bring in capital controls in order to ensure the stability of the country.

I think this would have meant that he didn't have to placate the NuLab liberals any more, because he'd have other sources of support to draw strength from, not least a lot of disillusioned former Labour voters who aren't convinced he's different from Milliband.

I'm not saying he would ever have done it you understand - him and the rest of the Labour left wouldn't even believe it was possible. But if we fall into the trap of saying he didn't have a choice, then we fall into the trap of shit reheated social democratic rubbish.

"It doesn't have to be like this" is pretty much always a relevant slogan.

 

[Wilf]

Isn't this more or less what they did? Isn't this their public position on Brexit now (one which has seen a 5% fall in support)?

Yes, it is their position on Brexit now, put together seemingly as a Parliamentary strategy, a way of ambushing May. But for too long it's been little more than 'the five tests' and saying that May is fucking things up. There hasn't been an active strategy to get out of Westminster and push a distinctive social democratic take on Brexit (whatever that might be, again, it's not my bag). I'm a bit of a broken record on this,, but that in turn reflects Labour's parliamentary cretinism and also its lack of real links to working class voters.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Yes, it is their position on Brexit now, put together seemingly as a Parliamentary strategy, a way of ambushing May. But for too long it's been little more than 'the five tests' and saying that May is fucking things up. There hasn't been an active strategy to get out of Westminster and push a distinctive social democratic take on Brexit (whatever that might be, again, it's not my bag). And - I'm a bit of a broken record on this - that in turn reflects Labour's parliamentary cretinism and also its lack of real links to working class voters.

Excellent use of 'parliamentary cretinism'. I just wrote a long post and missed a great opportunity to use it.

 

[Wilf]

Excellent use of 'parliamentary cretinism'. I just wrote a long post and missed a great opportunity to use it.

I tend towards the verbose, but for once managed to be pithy.

 

[Sue]

Personally, I think we should just put danny la rouge in charge of stuff in general.

(Sorry to make you blush but I agree with pretty much everything you say on this and you express it very clearly, fairly and reasonably* too.)

*Not sure what you're doing on urban with an attitude like that though.

 

[Pickman's model]

Personally, I think we should just put danny la rouge in charge of stuff in general.

(Sorry to make you blush but I agree with pretty much everything you say on this and you express it very clearly, fairly and reasonably* too.)

*Not sure what you're doing on urban with an attitude like that though.

i think we should put teuchter in charge so we can rip the piss out of him when he buggers it all up

 

[Sue]

i think we should put teuchter in charge so we can rip the piss out of him when he buggers it all up

Tbf, it's already all buggered up.

 

[Pickman's model]

Tbf, it's already all buggered up.

yeh but to paraphrase brendan behan, i cannot conceive of a situation so dire it couldn't be made worse by putting teuchter in charge

 

[SpineyNorman]

I think I should be in charge really

 

[Pickman's model]

I think I should be in charge really

yeh but people like you so i don't think we'd want to give you such a poisoned chalice.

 

[killer b]

Yes, it is their position on Brexit now, put together seemingly as a Parliamentary strategy, a way of ambushing May. But for too long it's been little more than 'the five tests' and saying that May is fucking things up. There hasn't been an active strategy to get out of Westminster and push a distinctive social democratic take on Brexit (whatever that might be, again, it's not my bag). I'm a bit of a broken record on this,, but that in turn reflects Labour's parliamentary cretinism and also its lack of real links to working class voters.

I'm talking about Labour as it is, rather than how I'd like it to be though.