Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[Aexodus]

Personally I'm a socialist so I really have no skin the game defending May

So out of curiosity I was wondering, what’s the Socialist case for or against the EU? Did you vote to remain or leave? I ask because Jeremy Corbyn is a Eurosceptic, and the Socialist wing of the PLP has always been eurosceptic afaik going right back to the 70s.

[swabian]

So out of curiosity I was wondering, what’s the Socialist case for or against the EU? Did you vote to remain or leave? I ask because Jeremy Corbyn is a Eurosceptic, and the Socialist wing of the PLP has always been eurosceptic afaik going right back to the 70s.

Why is this even relevant? I'm asking because you're giving leeway to a dead religion.

[TheLeft]

Why is this even relevant? I'm asking because you're giving leeway to a dead religion.

And the greatest trick the rich disaster capitalists ever pulled was to persuade the ordinary, working classes that Socialism wouldn't benefit them...

[Aexodus]

Why is this even relevant? I'm asking because you're giving leeway to a dead religion.

Chill out I asked a question.

I did nothing of the sort.

[Cope]

So out of curiosity I was wondering, what’s the Socialist case for or against the EU? Did you vote to remain or leave? I ask because Jeremy Corbyn is a Eurosceptic, and the Socialist wing of the PLP has always been eurosceptic afaik going right back to the 70s.

The European Union's economic platform is like the international manifestation of George Osborne's financial policies. Watching self-professed "socialists" rabidly defend it is as amusing as it is tragic.

[Basil II the B.S]

Wh*te liberal journalist rages that Farage's crowd is not ethnically diverse enough for his standards:
https://twitter.com/mk1969/status/1127985914238636035

[mongrel]

Wh*te liberal journalist rages that Farage's crowd is not ethnically diverse enough for his standards:
https://twitter.com/mk1969/status/1127985914238636035

Pointless .

It is indeed an all white audience, because said meeting was held in the arse-end of Yorkshire. The Brexit process doesn't involve Farage, nor does the ethnic make-up of a working mens club have any bearing on proper issues like the Irish backstop, customs union and so forth.

Back to the process, I see that the 1922 committee has told Mrs May not to give any ground to Corbyn. Looks like a negotiated deal is dead.

[Aexodus]

And the greatest trick the rich disaster capitalists ever pulled was to persuade the ordinary, working classes that Socialism wouldn't benefit them...

m

Yea, but I’m wondering why Socialists defend the EU (John McDonnel etc) whereas some like Corbyn are sceptics.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Just to provide context to the discussion about 'The Brexit Parties' ability in any actual Parliamentary elections-
https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

All polls currently. They are getting in terms of vote share 10-20% of the vote (Indeed they are only 10% in the latest poll yesterday), this is eating directly into the Tories indeed, but the vast majority of polls still have the Conservatives as the second largest (ranging from 19-25% recently).

The big winners are Labour who are polling 29-34% recently (34% being the latest). So consider what that means for brexit and who is supporting them (though of course domestic issues play a massive part in a GE too), but its likely the future post-brexit (or if the Tories are insane enough/somehow forced into an early GE brexit itself) is currently most likely Corbyn's customs Union/Second Referendum (though less likely). The WTO brexit has split from the Conservatives... well factionated model of some kind of closer association/deal, so its benefiting Labour in a big way. The only thing that might challenge this is if the Lib-dems start getting serious traction as well, and are perhaps able to split off some of Labours vote share, though the fact that according to the latest poll for instance shows they are the third largest party in the UK again based on vote share (15%) and that still has Labour polling at 34%, i can't see anymore traction really happening.




@Basil- I'm interested in the notion of Farage adopting a mixed market model, opening up his potential to a great percentage of the vote share- In the best case (though unlikely scenario) it essentially means Britain has a reset on neoliberal politics and we go back to the pre-1972 (and certainly 79) 'Social Consensus' of both parties broadly supporting varying levels of state intervention, the disagreements ranging about its extent, not if it should be at all. Which could be economically very interesting going into the automated era. However, whether Farage's brexit party could capitalize on that potential, i'm not sure- the Brexit party itself ranges from from very left-wing individuals to libertarians and traditional right, as well as neoliberals. They are quite open about only being united by brexit, so i suspect it'll be a hell of a struggle (even without FPTP and Westminsters constitution) to gain a serious presence (the crafting of a manifesto and policy framework would be very difficult without brexit to unify, not to mention they are not currently a 'party' at the moment, but a company technically- With 'supporters', not members and Farage directing personal control, something that iirc makes it impossible in this current form for them to even actually stand at a GE as a part for government). So i can't currently see them being able to exert much influence (falling as UKIP did previously- significant support, but unable to turn that into seats), the current list of polls rather shows this issue.

Essentially even if the Conservatives now offer a WTO brexit as policy, it won't pass parliament, moreover if they call a GE (or they simply try and run the clock down, which i can't see anyone doing now..at least intentionally, through screwing around maybe ) i can't see the momentum Farage has made (10% is important) being dissipated until 'a brexit' has been achieved. Thus we get instead seemingly from the polls potentially a Labour majority that potentially is fairly clear. So we're back into soft-brexit (or if Corbyn loses control to the Tom Watson group of 150, a second referendum). The Conservatives though will still be a force, i can't see Farage being able to formulate the sustainability needed to actually topple the Tories for second largest party (Going much the way of the SDP or indeed UKIP), not sure if that's good or bad. But this i think is something Farage in his most recent interview has realized by his if i read it right, calls for FPTP to change.

[Basil II the B.S]

@Basil- I'm interested in the notion of Farage adopting a mixed market model, opening up his potential to a great percentage of the vote share- In the best case (though unlikely scenario) it essentially means Britain has a reset on neoliberal politics and we go back to the pre-1972 (and certainly 79) 'Social Consensus' of both parties broadly supporting varying levels of state intervention, the disagreements ranging about its extent, not if it should be at all. Which could be economically very interesting going into the automated era. However, whether Farage's brexit party could capitalize on that potential, i'm not sure- the Brexit party itself ranges from from very left-wing individuals to libertarians and traditional right, as well as neoliberals. They are quite open about only being united by brexit, so i suspect it'll be a hell of a struggle (even without FPTP and Westminsters constitution) to gain a serious presence (the crafting of a manifesto and policy framework would be very difficult without brexit to unify, not to mention they are not currently a 'party' at the moment, but a company technically- With 'supporters', not members and Farage directing personal control, something that iirc makes it impossible in this current form for them to even actually stand at a GE as a part for government). So i can't currently see them being able to exert much influence (falling as UKIP did previously- significant support, but unable to turn that into seats), the current list of polls rather shows this issue.

Essentially even if the Conservatives now offer a WTO brexit as policy, it won't pass parliament, moreover if they call a GE (or they simply try and run the clock down, which i can't see anyone doing now..at least intentionally, through screwing around maybe ) i can't see the momentum Farage has made (10% is important) being dissipated until 'a brexit' has been achieved. Thus we get instead seemingly from the polls potentially a Labour majority that potentially is fairly clear. So we're back into soft-brexit (or if Corbyn loses control to the Tom Watson group of 150, a second referendum). The Conservatives though will still be a force, i can't see Farage being able to formulate the sustainability needed to actually topple the Tories for second largest party (Going much the way of the SDP or indeed UKIP), not sure if that's good or bad. But this i think is something Farage in his most recent interview has realized by his if i read it right, calls for FPTP to change.

The real possibilities of Farage's Brexit depend heavily on how badly Theresa May continues to mismanage and the inability of Tories to remove her. This counts more than Farage's platform. If Tories get a grip, then they'll quickly regain their voting base. If they keep messing up, then Farage can get 30% at the general elections. As I mentioned, the thresold for Brexit to become a national party is at roughly 23-24%, after which they eat up the Tory vote and you'll see major shifts. If that happens then Farage has indeed to come up with a platform that's not just ''Theresa May is a traitor, let's go WTO''. It's not an immediate thing, nor even that needed. People are going to vote Brexit out of frustration and that can only happen if Theresa May continues to mess up.

The mixed platform? That's also up to Farage. I think his idea to recruit every single Brexiteer regardless of their ideological background is brilliant and that's something I saw Salvini did in Italy and worked great. He picked up the anti-Euro leftists and put them in lists in the ''red regions'' of Italy, meaning the regions that voted leftwing consistently from 1945 to today. They won him 3 out of 4 regions and even in the 4th the center-left barely made it because they held Florence, but lost all the medium cities. This is because the center-left campaigned with an ordoliberal economic message which obviously does not resonate with voters who grew up with bread and Marx, while the anti-Euro leftists campaigned with class discourse. The parallel counts because the voting patterns are the same: the establishment wins the big cities (London/Rome/Milan/Florence) or in the UK the elite university ones (Cambridge/Oxford), the protest wins the countryside. You get the same in France with Macron and in the US with Hillary, but also the V4 blocs where pro-EU candidates win in Budapest, Warsaw, Prague and Bratislava, while the nationalists win the rest in a landslide. The city/countryside divide is the real deal.

If Farage figures that out and voters are even more frustrated than May, then he can seriously consider the deal: he has to offer something in economic terms to the 1/3 of Labour voters that voted for Brexit. Corbyn, for now, might have missed his chance even if he's leading in the polls. The main reason is that the UK economy in terms of wage growth and unemployment is doing good enough, while the Remain field is heavily fragmentated. We'll see. The situation is highly volatile. I'm baffled by the idea of ''Farage can't make it''. Farage, until two months ago, had gone into irrelevance. The streets were filled with EU flags. Now he leads the polls for the European Parliament with a newly, ad hoc created party, trouncing his own old UKIP and a centuries old one.

There's only so much FPTP can do to prevent change. It's a dam, if it breaks, you get an avalanche.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

The real possibilities of Farage's Brexit depend heavily on how badly Theresa May continues to mismanage and the inability of Tories to remove her. This counts more than Farage's platform. If Tories get a grip, then they'll quickly regain their voting base. If they keep messing up, then Farage can get 30% at the general elections. As I mentioned, the thresold for Brexit to become a national party is at roughly 23-24%, after which they eat up the Tory vote and you'll see major shifts. If that happens then Farage has indeed to come up with a platform that's not just ''Theresa May is a traitor, let's go WTO''. It's not an immediate thing, nor even that needed. People are going to vote Brexit out of frustration and that can only happen if Theresa May continues to mess up.

The mixed platform? That's also up to Farage. I think his idea to recruit every single Brexiteer regardless of their ideological background is brilliant and that's something I saw Salvini did in Italy and worked great. He picked up the anti-Euro leftists and put them in lists in the ''red regions'' of Italy, meaning the regions that voted leftwing consistently from 1945 to today. They won him 3 out of 4 regions and even in the 4th the center-left barely made it because they held Florence, but lost all the medium cities. This is because the center-left campaigned with an ordoliberal economic message which obviously does not resonate with voters who grew up with bread and Marx, while the anti-Euro leftists campaigned with class discourse. The parallel counts because the voting patterns are the same: the establishment wins the big cities (London/Rome/Milan/Florence) or in the UK the elite university ones (Cambridge/Oxford), the protest wins the countryside. You get the same in France with Macron and in the US with Hillary, but also the V4 blocs where pro-EU candidates win in Budapest, Warsaw, Prague and Bratislava, while the nationalists win the rest in a landslide. The city/countryside divide is the real deal.

If Farage figures that out and voters are even more frustrated than May, then he can seriously consider the deal: he has to offer something in economic terms to the 1/3 of Labour voters that voted for Brexit. Corbyn, for now, might have missed his chance even if he's leading in the polls. The main reason is that the UK economy in terms of wage growth and unemployment is doing good enough, while the Remain field is heavily fragmentated. We'll see. The situation is highly volatile. I'm baffled by the idea of ''Farage can't make it''. Farage, until two months ago, had gone into irrelevance. The streets were filled with EU flags. Now he leads the polls for the European Parliament with a newly, ad hoc created party, trouncing his own old UKIP and a centuries old one.

There's only so much FPTP can do to prevent change. It's a dam, if it breaks, you get an avalanche.

Indeed, but the hurdle being the General Election itself to grab that 30%. It depends when that GE happens, if its 2022 as is currently set we're talking about the resurgence of domestic issues as the main goal (also i'm not sure where you're getting the UK is economically doing 'well enough' mate, we've just had this dominate today's news cycle- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ing-inequality, its been on the Guardian, Telegraph, FT, Sky and BBC too so far, that's essentially holed the Conservatives 'low unemployment'- which most people now finally know doesn't mean sod all. Add to this the major issues surrounding cuts to local councils leading to their dismantling of services and you have even in affluent councils the very real effects of a squeeze continuing. Its why alongside Brexit, the domestic economy is still a leading issue- this is an area where if Farage want's to succeed, he'll need to make a dent, and relying on his traditional neoliberal model as he skirted around in an interview yesterday (essentially arguing for the NHS to stop being universalist) will not cut it, given the voting preferences of both left and right for greater state intervention as i sourced earlier.

The second thing is at a GE he will need a manifesto and to restructure his party (again iirc his current structure can't actually run for government as it's not a political party yet). While the European elections, his broad church appeal and unifying factor of one drive is indeed very sensible, a GE he will need to have policies, His front runner in the South-East for MEP has been very vocal she is only with him for brexit, not anything else (She's a former communist now libertarian). This is the problem Change UK have run into, ironically even though they are all essentially on the same page, but the slight differences matter apparently. So Farage offers a libertarian platform for a post-brexit UK GE, there is little to no support even among traditional right-wing voters for that, let alone the Conservative base. If he instead offers elements of a Corbyn lite platform, these policies poll well typically among the electorate, but the issue is Corbyn is already there (or worse, Labour but who have kept the policy platform), Farage can offer indeed a mixed market approach, that might attract centrist voters and the Conservative traditionalists, but he's then competing directly with a Conservative party that won't have May in place in 2022. I think he'll still nab some of the vote sure, but i think all it will do unless he can have a coherent and fully fledged manifesto that is popular, and somehow the Conservatives continue to melt down even post-May, is essentially ensure a Labour win by splitting the right (Which i'm not against, the British left has always been split between Labour and Liberals so its even ground somewhat ). But Farage as second largest party- has too much to climb, and by 2022 (or even a post-brexit GE) has lost his time-slot to have any impact.

I'd also question the vote share model, bearing in mind UKIP got a not too insignificant 14-15% of the vote share at their height, but this translated into essentially no Parliamentary seats, so i'm not sure if merely polling similar to the Conservatives current share is enough, as it depends on how this is spread out geographically. I know some of the UKIP polls had issues, because while it was 12 or so percent, the pollsters had geographically concentrated on the South-West iirc, so there was a mismatch. Its why with the current polling today, with 10%, and lib-dems having actually increased to 15% its likely the lib-dems will get around a few more seats (last GE they got 8% of the vote share for 8 seats, while Labour got 30% for 232 seats and the SNP 4% of the vote share for 56 seats) but the Brexit party will like UKIP found, be on 0 or 1-4 GE seats in practice (The poll that had them on 20% with the articles stating how that translated into seats was it seems merely a direct translation of 20% of the vote, with no regard to actual constituencies- so it can as previously found by UKIP create very high expectations that FPTP prevents from being actualized).

However, i think quite rightly the scenario here you identify is a snap GE, before brexit is 'done', in which case May will still probably be at the head indeed. This is as far as i can see his only 'window' to make some impact in a GE before he loses momentum (2022 is too distant, and too post-brexit for that card to run on...unless somehow we're still talking about the divorce deal of course with a by now Robot May repeating 'Brexit means brexit' on repeat) though in these circumstances there will still be an issue for Farage as he'll have even less time to come up with a coherent party who will follow him (Most currently are only joining forces for brexit), and a policy platform they can all get behind and that is realistically popular and addresses the domestic situation in detail.

Again on the Corbyn-Economy point, i'm not sure where your getting that the UK economy is perceived domestically to be doing well, between todays very public report that wages have actually stagnated and equality risen, to discussions around the pointlessness of low unemployment when its increasing the poverty levels of those in work (there has been major uproar as Whitehall even now has a foodbank), the issues of the economy are still very much big domestically and on the agenda.

The local elections which saw the Lib-dems make massive gains, while UKIP and the Tories collapsed, and Labour essentially remained the same (Though it did directly steal a Tory stronghold council) was not to do with Brexit (Unless we take the lib-dems interpretation of Remain being in ascendancy...which is a huge strech), but with the economy and the impact its been having, both in terms of austerity, but rising inequality, schools begging for funding from parents for the basics that the state should provide, the failure of academies, Councils being unable to provide basic services and a kick against poor growth prospects. Conservative voters switched to the lib-dems (And indeed the lib dems seized a fair number of Conservative councils), because they offer investment and intervention and an alternative that Tory inclined voters could accept, that wasn't going so far as the traditional platform for Labour. In this context a GE with its propensity for domestic issues, you might even see a repetition of the Conservative voters, who voted for brexit, going instead to the Lib-dems for the mixed market model to sort out the very public economic issues, that isn't quite as far as going for Corbyn. The issue then is that for Farage to make headway, its not just judging from the LE results, the Conservative party he'll need to be competing against for what is effectively a very contested vote share.

So while the Conservatives are not secure on this economic front at all, hence partly why their performing so badly, and Labour and the lib-dems so well, despite its brexit 'organized confusion' and 'bollocks to brexit' messages respectively. Their is more than just brexit to consider for Farage. he didn't help himself earlier indeed by also by attacking the 'sacred cow' of the NHS, beloved by left and right wing voters through comments implying a more privatized model (or indeed comments that can be spun thus), isn't so far helping his cause here.

It is true though this a volatile political situation, and indeed i'll agree we need to wait and see (Popcorn at the ready, whatever else, its pretty exciting ). However, while Farage will i'm sure perform incredibly well at the European elections, this also like the local elections doesn't tend to translate well at GE level when domestic issues dominate (as seen in 2017). Take UKIP previously who did very well at the EU elections, but could not turn that into Parliamentary representation. I suspect this might be the same story of Farage. I'm not going so far as to say he can't make it, but it would be absolutely a historic moment if from outside the Westminster system he managed to successfully topple one of the big two at a GE, its not impossible, but the very fact that he has a lot of traction in such a short time, in my opinion (could be wrong ) shows that much of this support is a protest vote against May and her brexit- change May, its gone, Post-Brexit (no matter even if May's deal passes somehow) its also going to dissipate (many people we've had on the bbc today are saying they'll vote for Farage's brexit party, but then at a GE will not vote at all). Farage might be able to get seats, maybe even in double figures, but that then is Labour government for the next 5 years, and five long years for the Conservatives, still the second dominant party by far to get their house in order (Courtesy of Cameron and the fixed term act). The only equivalent i can think of would be the rise of Labour as a political force, and that took essentially 60 years from start, and two world wars, plus a permanent party split from the Liberals that was significant in scale enough to actually have two or three schisms depending on how we count.

We essentially need to see the Conservative party on this parallel properly implode itself, that's why while indeed FPTP is a damn, it does need an avalanche, but also the dam needs to be properly rotten too. The Conservative party have not split yet (certainly not in the liberal fashion that 50 or so years on allowed Labour to finally take its place in government and again it needed a radical change in the UK- this being post ww2). If that's not going to happen, I can't see Farage gaining many, if any seats (Manifesto and party forming hurdle pending too) at a 2022 GE, or even an earlier one, while i can see him getting into the double figures, not enough to be sustainable, and not enough once brexit is done with. That's at least my thoughts currently, who knows Farage might be the man to provide a First in British political history by ousting a party purely from the 'outside', but i don't see the circumstances being right for that just yet.

EDIT: A small but important point i should have clarified way back, but its not simply FPTP that is an obstacle for Farage, other states run on it to, but its also the entire 'Westminster system' that makes it difficult for small parties, FPTP is part of this, but its also a political and social culture among political elites, their relationship to other power-brokers and the electorates own conception of identity and their relation to British political elites (The class system indeed and its persistence is part of this for instance). Its a system that historically has meant that while during the 1840s Europe was seized by revolution, with changes made, Britain avoided most of it and remained comparatively stable, when trouble reared its head with the Chartists, the Westminster system saw what should have been a wide-scale revolution, stopped dead in its tracks and then killed off. During the interwar era, it prevented the political instability of Europe with its rise of extremes (despite the Great Depression hitting Britain harder than some of its counterparts) from being a serious element. During the Cold War it kept radicals on both sides essentially limited and a social consensus. Changes come from within the Westminister system, responding, but mostly actually leading public debate. While brexit indeed has presented a new challenge to this (Its the first time the question of if 'People Power' should have equal weight to Parliamentary sovereignty, or indeed be the basis of the UK's unwritten constitution as opposed to Parliament) and that could be the thing that does indeed 'over-do' it, i'm not underestimating the type of Managed democracy we have in the UK . This isn't me preaching British exceptionalism either, all states have their very individual contexts, the USA has its quirks- for instance see how its essentially tamed a formally radical president Trump into a President whose policies in practice (beyond the Twitter) look no different than a long line of Republican Presidents from the past- he doesn't look out of place. But i think, and this is something Farage i suspect recognizes by his support for a 'change' to the FPTP, that it's a heck of a battle for a small, new and dynamic party to make head-way from 'outside' Parliament (if however it can get a significant number of MP's and established party mechanisms on side though...for instance how many Tory activists and local Party groups are refusing to go and campaign for the Conservatives in the upcoming EU elections- there might be some chance, though of course that's the EU elections and not a GE).

[Basil II the B.S]

The ''good'' is in context of Western countries. Look at Germany, which is a reasonable comparison in terms of size, they have been posting horrible numbers for the past 6 months. Now, growth isn't strong in either country, when it comes to unemployment being low, what you want to do (especially if you are left-leaning) is look at wages. One thing that the neoliberal right does is flood the market with low paying jobs to fill unemployment. Wages are up:
https://www.theguardian.com/business...eekly-earnings
Now, wages reward labour at the expense of capital, so from your perspective this should be good. Could it be better? Sure but the places that are posting strong data are not Western developed countries. France is doing bad, Germany too, Italy isn't even moving anymore...Want solid growth and decreasing inequality? You have to look at Eastern Europe. A note on inequality: it is important only if the low income perceive the system as rigged (there's plenty in favour of that argument in the UK, starting with education), so in this context, it is. Finally, most predictions by ''experts'' suggested that by now the UK economy should be collapsing, with soaring unemployment etc. It's clearly not happening at all. There are serious problems, yes, but you aren't facing the predicted catastrophe. This is why I say ''good''. The one thing about ordoliberalism is that one underlying idea that it really doesn't matter who's in government because external rules constrain government intervention, de-facto preventing it and it's clearly showing. The UK political scene is complete chaos, there's no leadership, the economy is doing ok.

Manifesto wise, you are right and I agree, but again this isn't an immediate necessity. It really depends on how badly May destroys Conservatives and let's be clear here, Boris Johnson and the rest don't have much to offer either. Farage clearly can't run for the GE with a libertarian platform. Geography/FPTP wise, here's what you need to keep in mind:
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/st...06589447516161

(And I actually did my own calculus wrong, I had calculated 24%, the thresold is actually 22%).

Also yes, I'm thinking about a snap GE scenario, which can easily happen if Tories sink too low. You can argue: but if Tories sink too low, then they'll delay the GE to the latest possible. Yes.... if they were united and they are not, at all. What can happen is that if Tories sink to low 10s, then many will start worrying about their re-election possibilities, jump ship to Farage's party and the government will crash. This isn't unrealistic, but again it's really up to Theresa May and the Tory leadership. Can you say that at any point in the future she'll get a grip of reality? I don't see any evidence in favour, and I see plenty of evidence against it. She's an awful, completely out of touch leader. This is why the chances are real.

EP elections wise, keep in mind that Macron has won the argument and the consensus is that the UK must leave by October 2019, deal or no deal, because by then most of the institutional positions in the EU will have to be appointed and noone in the EU wants to see Farage's smug face backed by 30% seats from a large country. The UK gets (or would get) numbers equivalent to those of Italy (where Salvini peaked at 37% before retracting and M5S should get 22%) and in France the collection of anti-establishment parties might as well get 40-50%. This hampers the decisional process because they are all big countries with a lot of influence.

What about the Remain forces? Too much ego, too many interests behind them. ChUK which I suspect is funded by Soros, very much like our own +Europe in Italy is confirmed to be funded by him, is a joke of entitled wannabe technocrats and political extremists. They are ordoliberals to the core and FPTP will crash them without mercy. They think they'll be like Macron, but the conditions are completely lacking and they won't even meet the thresold for a seat in the European Parliament. It's certainly ironic because they are incredibly influencial within the restricted circle of media (Financial Times/Economist) and academia, but polls show how much those views reflect the country. LibDem have capitalized a bit thanks to former Tory remainers, but I'm not sure how far they can go. The problem is that they all steal each other votes and those who are the most ardent remainers are upper class individuals with huge ego, so they can't even work together. Honestly, I find it a good way to wash away people who are grossly undeserving of their status.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

The ''good'' is in context of Western countries. Look at Germany, which is a reasonable comparison in terms of size, they have been posting horrible numbers for the past 6 months. Now, growth isn't strong in either country, when it comes to unemployment being low, what you want to do (especially if you are left-leaning) is look at wages. One thing that the neoliberal right does is flood the market with low paying jobs to fill unemployment. Wages are up:
https://www.theguardian.com/business...eekly-earnings
Now, wages reward labour at the expense of capital, so from your perspective this should be good. Could it be better? Sure but the places that are posting strong data are not Western developed countries. France is doing bad, Germany too, Italy isn't even moving anymore...Want solid growth and decreasing inequality? You have to look at Eastern Europe. A note on inequality: it is important only if the low income perceive the system as rigged (there's plenty in favour of that argument in the UK, starting with education), so in this context, it is. Finally, most predictions by ''experts'' suggested that by now the UK economy should be collapsing, with soaring unemployment etc. It's clearly not happening at all. There are serious problems, yes, but you aren't facing the predicted catastrophe. This is why I say ''good''. The one thing about ordoliberalism is that one underlying idea that it really doesn't matter who's in government because external rules constrain government intervention, de-facto preventing it and it's clearly showing. The UK political scene is complete chaos, there's no leadership, the economy is doing ok.

Fair point in those parameters, however as you rightly say perception is key, and the 'low unemployment' argument is not cutting it politically, especially when its now workers who are struggling to make ends meet, even those in ostensibly 'full time' status. Thus i would say it is a big political issue. In terms of economic catastrophe though, i don't think as we we've currently the UK needs to be in one (Its arguable if we've ever recovered from 2008 in a meaningful way, the latest think tank report on wage growth highlights how we're just now back to the levels of the 1970s...which is trash considering the UK economy at that point) as its already a big political issue that does need to have a firm action-plan for it. But i take the comparative point you present and the point that Political chaos has not led to economic catastrophe as was the case in 1970s Britain.

Manifesto wise, you are right and I agree, but again this isn't an immediate necessity. It really depends on how badly May destroys Conservatives and let's be clear here, Boris Johnson and the rest don't have much to offer either. Farage clearly can't run for the GE with a libertarian platform. Geography/FPTP wise, here's what you need to keep in mind:
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/st...06589447516161

(And I actually did my own calculus wrong, I had calculated 24%, the thresold is actually 22%).

Firstly, kudos for the calculations there +rep when i can, as that's both impressive and very interesting. Though again the model used i don't think shows 'new' parties too well (Hence the UKIP issue). But i'd need to re-look to be certain. I also do agree that Boris doesn't offer anything tangible either, however he 'might' be able to tap into the 'traditional core' who vote blue because its blue which is still a significant presence in British politics, as well as personality wise being a potential 'match' for Farage and Corbyn (i'll be honest that the three of them on the campaign trailer against one another would be something to behold, as all are very good at rallies, campaigning and speeches/charisma), but in realistic terms, the Tory party does need a root and stem reform with backbenches hiked in who do not suffer the 'Thatcher effect', they need a new batch if nothing else so that they can finally challenge the parts of their previous policies that they know are wrong, but politically cannot admit thus yet (We've seen backbenchers start to critique austerity, Universal credit reforms, Foreign policy etc). The question indeed would be if they have time.

In terms of May and 'when will she go'- good question. There has been this today, essentially pushed by Cabinet-
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1SK0MC

This is the most solid date set so far, It also means that if May keeps her word, she will be gone in two months. Is this enough to change the EU elections? Probably not, but it could IF it happens (Big if - a cynic might say this is just fuel for the EU elections for the Tories to try and stave off a humiliation) start the process that would shore up the party from Farage. The question of course is would the Tories then still delay a brexit referendum until 2022... i think they'll try (and the fixed term act will ensure they can essentially) and they'll legitimize it with 'post-brexit context- need a strong stable government at the helm blah blah we're here for another 3 years). This way i think they can dodge the traditional challenge of 'no mandate'.

However it should be noted that this commitment is made with May's deal entirely in mind. I wouldn't put it past Parliament to pull it, if it looks like she's not going to get it (like last time).

Fair point to the snap election, however the caveat i would add, even with that internal collapse facing them it would be dicey if any split, currently the ERG has had three opportunities to split and force a GE, they've backed down every time and even reversed their positions to essentially suit May. I did at the beginning take your current view that a split would be likely, but it just hasn't materialized yet, and the Tories who have a significant 'remainer'/soft presence and who are mostly neoliberal in outlook failed to jump to ChUK (which at the time hadn't made the screws it had now and was being heralded as the 'new' center-right essentially. So while not impossible again for internal changes to bring about a new party (This is exactly what happened to the Liberals), it does take a lot. In regards to May- heck no can i see her changing tune and dealing with any reality, but the one she seems to live in, the fact she's essentially not bothered to compromise with Corbyn for a deal (which would have been politically sensible- no EU elections then, no platform for an easy political victory to start any Farage surge) and is bringing back her same. damn. deal. to parliament for its 4/5th time (i've genuinely lost count) highlights the kind of leader she is... terrible and unchanging.

EP, i do agree and have for some time considered that Brexit will not be decided by Britain, but by the EU for us. I would hope we'd actually even started proper no deal preparations, but apparently we're still not at all ready, and nor even have we sorted Russia, the USA, Australia and co from blocking (or potentially in the case of Australia and the USA- they've threatened) our WTO trade schedules. So pending some kind of Parliamentary agreement (we've so far squandered the extra time with beyond today's announcement 0 brexit movement...they even actually went on holiday...) the EU saying 'sod off' is probably a very likely event now (which would also most definitely see the UK break-up with N.Ireland becoming an Issue, and the Unionists losing the key platform they have to keep Scotland part of the UK). Just as an aside, but Brexit resulting in the collapse of the UK as we know it (Scotland leaving or other radical constitutional changes) would indeed probably be a big enough 'shock' to see the Conservative government finished as a viable political force, internally fracturing as its a political failure they'll never get over. The 'blame' from any economic damage caused by brexit will also be a factor (This is something Farage has played well, by essentially arguing their will be short term chaos, he essentially can distance himself from any accusations he was responsible for it that might be spun his way, and so the blame falls squarely on Boris and the Conservatives for not preparing).

In terms of Remain, if we're talking EP elections, i think as i've mentioned in another thread, commentators and people have difficulty really using the EP elections as a gauge, simply because where do you place Labour, who are set to be second- are they remain or leave? Its not a criticism of their policy, indeed it is one that if a snap election happens has essentially ensured at worst a minority Labour Government, but if they do half-well, they'll have a solid majority. However it does make it hard, especially as Corbyn's core support who will vote for him in a GE and EP elections are remainers, despite him being essentially a brexiter, so i can't really deign to say what a Labour vote means. But yes, the Lib-dems at the EP will do better than they expected i think, ChUK i think are essentially dead in the water and have been since conception (they've even refused to fight the Peterborough by-election...god knows why, the SDP made their influence felt by steadily fighting and winning by elections, and they still ended up annihilated), so i'm very much agreed with your analysis of them there. But spot on that a key feature of the 'core remain parties' (i.e. not Labour included), is that they have spectacularly failed to work together. I was listening to a Politics Live programme that Aexodus had posted in the Cambridge academic thread- apparently ChUK have rejected the Lib-dem and Green offer to work together strategically (i.e. not compete but pool resources) and Labour hilariously for one candidate in the South-East who they did managed to agree on, in a very Machiavellian way pressured him to step down, so the brief ChUK-Lib-Dem alliance splintered as the Lib-dems went for plan B, and ChUK apparently had no back up, and are now short a candidate. So their attempts have been marred by indeed competing with what should be allies.

In terms of a GE though, we're still currently looking at Labour in power polling wise, Then Tories (with as we've discussed i think the potential, though i maintain very unlikely pending as you've outlined a Tory internal splintering paving the way for the Brexit party to start to maintain a parliamentary presence and battle them for vote share) and then the Lib-dems (who i think will drop back to around 12%, or may even benefit from any internal Conservative split). We may even see a return to 'traditional' UK politics, of a Socialist Labour party, a mixed-market paternalesque Farage and Tory splinters in a new right party, and then liberal democrats as a slightly larger, though still third 'New Liberal' platform.. or still flying the banner of neoliberalism but with their 'human face' aspect- i don't know. It'll be interesting if such a change does happen. Again though all eyes will have to be peeled for as you've identified- What May does, and if the Conservatives split in a meaningful way, and where those splitters go for Farage to escape the 'UKIP trap'.

[QuintusSertorius]

May is a pathological liar; anyone who relies on her to keep her word is a fool.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

May is a pathological liar; anyone who relies on her to keep her word is a fool.

Indeed, though its less about if she keeps her word or not and more how this statement might change (essentially you're right to ask who would be the fool' ), if at all the current political landscape. For instance will the implication of her 'leaving soon' be enough to stop Conservative activists and local groups from striking and not helping their own Conservative party in the current EP elections, will it be enough to convince key voting blocks? I don't think so, but then this is the same context in which May managed to get the ERG and co to back-down, twice and toe her line (arguably three times), so while we sit here going 'How can you fall for it/Show us the proof', it might have some tangible impact upon the political landscape.

[Basil II the B.S]

Lmao, I even gave her the benefit of the doubt at the beginning and supported her to some degree. I'll give you a longer reply tomorrow when I have time.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Lmao, I even gave her the benefit of the doubt at the beginning and supported her to some degree. I'll give you a longer reply tomorrow when I have time.

Haha don't worry me too She gave on taking office her now infamous 'Burning injustices' speech for those 'just about managing', and after a dose of coalition and then Conservative austerity cock-ups, i genuinely was almost grateful that here was a sane PM with a clear domestic picture that i could finally feel a bit better about the governance of the UK.

...Teach me to be so easily lulled . But aye, that's cool mate i'll look forward to it , and take your time if need be. I sorta need to withdraw back on my posts (much to everyone's joy i'm sure, their eyes won't be so hurt by horrid blocks of text ) as i've essentially spent most of the day following brexit related stuff and posting in a few threads, when i should be researching geopolitics and not procrastinating away my paper-writing time, so i apolgize if i'm not fully 'with it' in my reply. I'll be reading with interest everyone's further thoughts on all brexit related stuff though, this thread has, and i'm sure will continue to keep me sane over the semester .

EDIT: Just as its not been mentioned yet but-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...xit-vote-claim

Boris Johnson's court case is to get a second public hearing. He's being prosecuted by a businessmen who crowdfunded the costs for 'misconduct in public office'- the charge being he lied to the electorate during his time as Mayor of London and as an MP. It's the culmination of 3 years of work being put into the prosecution, and is set for its second hearing on the 23rd May. The purpose of all this is that the prosecution (Who are private citizens) want to set a precedent in common law, that Politicians should be liable for prosecution if they lie to the electorate while in (or i believe seeking) office. The overall thought process is that it will essentially for the first time ever, 'ban' politicians from lying.

While many have concentrated and framed this as a remain vs leave case, it does have connotations beyond that. I have no idea honestly how it will go (Though using Boris to create a precedent is probably indeed the best test case with the best chance of success in creating a precedent against lying), but generally this could have some very interesting implications for how UK politics functions (and as rightly pointed out by some brexiter backers, this also means politicians on the 'Remain' side could going forward face prosecution, like George Osborne, or Nick Clegg). I suspect though this will be hard to prove definitively in court, however if it is proved, it will mean the end of Boris' leadership ambitions (as well as radically change British politics).

[Common Soldier]

I am.furious, does the EU have a policy on former members wanting to rejoin the EU after they have left? It sounds like it was a close vote, and it sounded like the younger generation wanted to stay, so in another decade or so, after the old timers have passed on, they might want the UK to rejoin the EU. Surely. Vote to leave isn't binding for all time.


Anyways, you Brits have a real mess on your hands, don't leave and you will upset a lot of voters, and leave, and you will upset almost the same number of voters. In the future, the British government want on similar kind of referendums to set the bar a little higher, so that a measurements want pass unless there is a 2/3 majority or more that agrees to it. I am thinkingly about something like Scottish Independence, where a 2/3 majority has to agree to accept it. Then you would not get in this kind of situation where a slim majority goes wants it, but almost as many people don't. To make a major change, you should require more than just a plain majority.

To change the US Constitution, 2/3 of Congress of both the Senate and House of Representatives have to agree and send the amendment to to the States to ratifying it, and 3/4 of the States have ratify the admendment. The British government might want to consider doing something similar similar for the really big issues like Scottish Independence, it should take more than just a different simple majority of something like 50.1% to pass. It took the 27th admendment 202 years 223 days to pass. Any rise or decrease in a Representative salary doesn't take affect until the next term of office after the next election, which is every 2 years for the House of Representatives).

For Brexit, I would also have required 3 out of the 4 countries of the UK (Scotland, England, Northern Ireland, Wales) to also have ratify it, so England couldn't puzh it through by itself. I suppose it is too late to amend the rules now, and say the Exiters also have to get 3/4 countries to ratify its well? That way England couldn't puzh it through over the objections of the rest of the UK.

[mongrel]

Haha don't worry me too She gave on taking office her now infamous 'Burning injustices' speech for those 'just about managing', and after a dose of coalition and then Conservative austerity cock-ups, i genuinely was almost grateful that here was a sane PM with a clear domestic picture that i could finally feel a bit better about the governance of the UK.

...Teach me to be so easily lulled . But aye, that's cool mate i'll look forward to it , and take your time if need be. I sorta need to withdraw back on my posts (much to everyone's joy i'm sure, their eyes won't be so hurt by horrid blocks of text ) as i've essentially spent most of the day following brexit related stuff and posting in a few threads, when i should be researching geopolitics and not procrastinating away my paper-writing time, so i apolgize if i'm not fully 'with it' in my reply. I'll be reading with interest everyone's further thoughts on all brexit related stuff though, this thread has, and i'm sure will continue to keep me sane over the semester .

EDIT: Just as its not been mentioned yet but-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...xit-vote-claim

Boris Johnson's court case is to get a second public hearing. He's being prosecuted by a businessmen who crowdfunded the costs for 'misconduct in public office'- the charge being he lied to the electorate during his time as Mayor of London and as an MP. It's the culmination of 3 years of work being put into the prosecution, and is set for its second hearing on the 23rd May. The purpose of all this is that the prosecution (Who are private citizens) want to set a precedent in common law, that Politicians should be liable for prosecution if they lie to the electorate while in (or i believe seeking) office. The overall thought process is that it will essentially for the first time ever, 'ban' politicians from lying.

While many have concentrated and framed this as a remain vs leave case, it does have connotations beyond that. I have no idea honestly how it will go (Though using Boris to create a precedent is probably indeed the best test case with the best chance of success in creating a precedent against lying), but generally this could have some very interesting implications for how UK politics functions (and as rightly pointed out by some brexiter backers, this also means politicians on the 'Remain' side could going forward face prosecution, like George Osborne, or Nick Clegg). I suspect though this will be hard to prove definitively in court, however if it is proved, it will mean the end of Boris' leadership ambitions (as well as radically change British politics).

Alas there is no governance. Both Primary and Secondary legislation programmes are stuffed with Brexit related bills and instruments and ministers seem to be more concerned about their public image than developing new policy. The fact that the Queen's Speech was deferred because of a lack of new policy to announce is an embarrassment, what would Cromwell say to this longish Parliament? Technically Britain is in anarchy.

[Basil II the B.S]

Ok Dante, back to our discussion.

I actually think that Corbyn might have missed his chance, at least for now. You'll say ''but he's leading the GE polls!'', yes but the situation is extremely volatile in those and what I look at is momentum. May is dead. She needs a miracle to make a comeback. Farage has a massive momentum. The game changer here is a new Tory leader that can kill two birds with one stone: remove May's toxicity and take Farage's momentum away. None of that is good for Corbyn and that means he, by himself, has little path forward. He is a the Tory's (incompetence) mercy. Why? Because of the fragmentation of the Remain vote. ChUK, LibDem and Greens all take more from a potential Labour vote than a Conservative one. The paradox is that while Remain voters might be more, Tories can run a platform on a Leave stance and win most of it, winning the election, because the Remain side is more fragmentated and divided than the Leave side.

What can Corbyn do? Not much at the moment. He's too far on the left for the economic neoliberal/socially liberal upper class urban dwellers who fear they'd lose out economically because of his policies (and rightfully so I might add).This is similar to the situation Bernie Sanders is right now in the US: he's losing momentum in favour of a more ''moderate'' Biden, partly because the economic situation is not as bad as it was in the aftermath of 2008, thus there's less anxiety about it. The good news for Corbyn is that he'll do good enough for the EP and there aren't immediate GE to handle, so he can sit back and watch. However, the problem remains. The hardcore Remain voters won't side with Corbyn because of his economic policies, and some moderate Remain ones would rather Leave for the same reason. By sidelining economic questions, Farage got a major advantage.

I don't think pushing for a second referendum is good at all. It's damaging to the credibility of democracy to begin with, adds further polarization, even many Remain voters think that way. You have 3 groups of people: Remain-at-all-costs, Remain-that-accept-the-referendum, Leave-at-all-costs. This favours the Leave side, because the vote has already happened. The Leave-at-all-costs side is also more united than the opposite side, which is why I think they are prevalining now.