Yes, I agree. What James is doing is on the phone radio format, so he is discussing the arguments for and against and fending off some attacks from leavers. What I'm doing is looking into the issue with some philosophical objectivity and political enquiry.

I sympathise with your view here, I used the word mistake rather than wrong. I realise that politically the leaver ideology is not in and of itself wrong other than were it is incoherent and/or has no relation to reality. However there are real hard consequences to political choices on the ground, something which we have to bare in mind in our analysis.

As I pointed out yesterday there is a real material consequence for the half of the population who is being forced to leave against their will. At least if Brexit is cancelled, or neutered, that half of the population who wish to leave will not have any material consequences imposed on them. They may feel hard done by, or betrayed, but that is only in terms of their aspiration, not their material circumstances and if they take it hard, that is their intellectual choice, because in reality nothing on the ground would have changed. Perhaps they could say but what about the unicorn I was expecting, look I even provided a stable for it and now you have taken it away from me.

Unicorn.... Its hard to drop the tropes of oppositional discourse, isnt it?

Its easier, perhaps I could say the Flying Spaghetti Monster, an old friend of mine. One I have encountered after half a bottle of proseco.

Unicorn is appropriate to illustrate the point. What does the independent UK look like? Perhaps there are many images, some with one horn, some where the grass is greener. I remember Johnson saying something about " the sunlit uplands", " we can have our cake and eat it", I can't remember who said "the exact same benefits".

Exaggerated claims and counter-claims have been made by both sides. There's a lot of uncertainty concealed on both sides by unwaranted confidence. The dismal non-science of economic forecasting has been given undeserved importance by both sides. I'd suggest that the best (and least gratuitousy confrontational) argument for Remain is that it's worth surrendering some sovereignty for frictionless trade with our near neighbours.

So a proportion of "leavers" are actually mistaken, rather than having well thought through legitimate concerns. Indeed he would go further and point out that there aren't any legitimate concerns about the EU which necessitate leaving the EU. — Punshhh

Some leavers justify their stance as 'to get our country back'. It's hard to fight against such meaningless generalisations, which are based on 'feelings' that the EU tells us what to do; we don't have control over immigration, our laws etc. Describing the reality doesn't counter gut-instincts, based not on hard evidence but everyday experience of life - a life surrounded by and informed by the uninformed. This is 'identity' politics, where logical arguments don't work..

Didn't Farage use to be a City trader before he came into politics? I think it's great that he's not going to stand as an MP. He knows the Tories will mobilise all their forces to keep him out - as has happened for the last SEVEN times I hear! A politician who can't get elected shows his worthlessness..

Farage has been an elected member of the European Parliament (MEP) for South East England since 1999. Gut feelings exist on both sides and can't be dismissed as unimportant. The case for Remain (and for future national harmony) isn't helped by binary absolutism, I'd say.

I'd suggest that the best (and least gratuitousy confrontational) argument for Remain is that it's worth surrendering some sovereignty for frictionless trade with our near neighbours

Yes I agree with this, however I don't find the opportunity arises. The few people I know who voted leave don't discuss it with me and I avoid discussing it with them. We just pretend it's not happening. I suspect this approach is common place, a sign of the division. I find myself discussing it a lot with people I know who voted remain, I suppose we are simply reinforcing memes etc. We are all stuck in these positions relying on the media to mediate. Fortunately the TV media that we all watch is reasonably objective and impartial, with the biased media restricted to print media. I don't know what effect it is having on the constituency which will due to their particular demographic be important in determining the course we take, the swing voters in marginal seats "Workington man". They seem remote to most of us, on both sides, it feels as though we are in a boat without a paddle drifting towards a waterfall. We (99% of us) are powerless to prevent it happening and then we see on the TV Trump talking to Farage over the phone about how great Johnson is. The three stooges, Johnson, Farage and Trump, all duplicitous playing with media, populism and powerful divisive memes. Corbyn the only leader, potential leader who is trying to compromise and bring the country back together being smeared and discounted out of hand by both sides based on outdated prejudice about his policies and what he represents.

Someone in my position is well aware of what these three stooges are doing, what they represent and what motivates them. I don't see much concern for the country there.

I agree, it looks like divide and rule. The degree to which logical argument is meaningless can be evidenced by the outrageous behaviour of Johnson and the group around him and how the supporters jump to justify every action.

I can't work Farage out, he is the Tory's Achilles heal, but why is he gunning so hard? I can only come up with two alternative goals, one he is bluffing while holding a secret pact with the Tory's. Two he would rather be in the EU with Corbyn in power and retain his mantle as Mr Brexit. Rather than help deliver The prize while Johnson takes all the glory.

I can't see either of these as very plausible, so what is he up to?

I don't despair about the populist right. It appeals to the neglected precariat. They could be rescued from neglect, and the means is practical rather than ideoligical. If I despair, it's about climate crisis. Corbyn might take on the neo-liberalism driving us over that cliff. I rather like his Brexit ambivalence, and I think voters, tired, like me, not so much of delay but of division, might give him a majority.

Likewise I'm not that bothered about the populist right. I'm more concerned about the Conservative party turning in on itself and defacating on the rest of us. Why don't they go off into a corner and do it there, rather than taking a wrecking ball to our country. It's interesting when I look back to my political development. I started out a Tory, as a teenager, ushering Thatcher in to office, my house was the local conservative Election Day headquarters. I was a Thatcherite through and through, I only saw positive developments. Then from that day forward, we have inexorably drifted apart, until now they are reviled in my eyes. It's a two pronged attack, climate change, I went Green in the 1980's, and the social contract. Two things which don't seem to concern the Tory's, it just gets lip service.

This is not a climate change thread, but I am equally alarmed and feel powerless on this. There is a good Attenborough documentary at the moment, I think he spells it out very well.

Yes, back to Brexit. (Except there is a connection between Brexit and the climate crisis: the super-rich, who benefit from neo-liberalism and presumably hope to ride out any insurrection or environmental destruction.) Working class Conservatives seeking support for Powelite views on immigration were bound to be disappointed. The Tories have always represented the rich. The current disintegration of the Conservative Party is probably nothing more than a superficial cracking of the surface, with Johnson, Cummings and co. reaching for the super-rich with a hard or no-deal Brexit, whereas "one-nation" Tories rightly see their merely rich constituents better served by Remain.

I agree about the super rich seeking to ride out the climate crisis, this may be contributing to the acuteness of neo-Liberalism.

Yes I can see how the cracks might be just on the surface, but as I see it there is an existential crisis in the Conservative party due to two factors. The demographic, they have very little support amongst the young, which runs into the consequences and concerns of a more bleak economic future over the next generation. The turning point as I see it was the financial crisis of 2008, they have been reeling from the fallout since then and the younger generation among their base has financial and social concerns which are outside the traditional remit of the party.

I can see them coalescing around the privelidged classes again once the dust settles, but probably smaller and struggling to get into office, as their base will have shrunk. Also if they have alienated some of their moderate base due to this sojourn to the right, their numbers will shrink more. I think a lot will depend on whether Corbyn gets into office, but I do see a swing to the left due to the state of the country.

A swing to the left is perhaps inevitable in the face of ever-increasing inequity. Corbyn says:

I understand why people voted remain - I live in a constituency which is heavily remain. I understand why people voted leave, out of anger. We have to bring people together, and our party is the only one that will offer people the final choice. — Guardian, 4 Nov

His "anger" explanation for the leave vote is wrong, but I think his hope to bring unity is genuine.

Yes and yes, I think unity and the social crisis is more important for Corbyn than how Brexit is resolved. Which Is evident in his speeches in the house over recent months. He refused to be drawn into the Tory Brexit psycho drama, not because he wasn't tempted, I expect, but because these issues are more important and pressing.

I wouldn't say Corbyn is a master strategist or a great leader, but somehow he stays upright, like that toy.

Corbyn might take on the neo-liberalism driving us over that cliff. I rather like his Brexit ambivalence, and I think voters, tired, like me, not so much of delay but of division, might give him a majority. — Chris Hughes

Nice as it would be I fail to see how Labour's Brexit policy (or anyone else's) can bring about a national healing process. Brexit is so divisive precisely because the country is split more or less 50 - 50, and however it's resolved, the 'wronged' half are going to be unhappy. If we leave Remainers will probably knuckle under and get used to it longer term, as I'd guess they're more tolerant and adaptable people. If Brexit is cancelled I doubt the Leavers will stop rioting, demonstrating etc for years. Farage will be talking about overthrowing the govt..

I can't work Farage out, he is the Tory's Achilles heal, but why is he gunning so hard? I can only come up with two alternative goals, one he is bluffing while holding a secret pact with the Tory's. Two he would rather be in the EU with Corbyn in power and retain his mantle as Mr Brexit. Rather than help deliver The prize while Johnson takes all the glory.

I can't see either of these as very plausible, so what is he up to? — Punshhh

What is the mystery? He wants a fast no deal Brexit and thinks Boris is conning people, who don't realise nor want the years of delay and EU fees we'll incur by negotiating a trade deal. However, he knows his only chance of winning seats is via a pact with the Tories. He can't beat them and they won't let him 'join' them, so he's a bit miffed.

Don't you think Labour's six-month plan - get a new deal, followed by a second referendum - would take a significant amount of heat out of the dichotomy?

He's miffed, well I can understand that. I was expecting some sort of strategy from him. Even if he gets a pact,the Tory's won't grant him any seats, they'll ask him to stand down his candidates. At the moment he's set to split the vote and let Corbyn in. Perhaps that is a better outcome than having to gift Brexit to Johnson and eat humble pie.

Or is it world domination?

I hear Sinn Fein is doing a pro-remain pact now.

Don't you think Labour's six-month plan - get a new deal, followed by a second referendum - would take a significant amount of heat out of the dichotomy? — Chris Hughes

As I said in an earlier post. No. Corbyn's renogiated withdrawal deal will include the customs union, single market etc, and for leavers be akin to no Brexit at all, so ref2 will not be viable..

Some leavers justify their stance as 'to get our country back'. — Tim3003

I never quite understood why making trade deals with the US constitutes getting our country back from the EU deals that have taken it away...

↪Tim3003
He's miffed, well I can understand that. I was expecting some sort of strategy from him. Even if he gets a pact,the Tory's won't grant him any seats, they'll ask him to stand down his candidates. At the moment he's set to split the vote and let Corbyn in. Perhaps that is a better outcome than having to gift Brexit to Johnson and eat humble pie. — Punshhh

He wont get a pact, the Tories have made that clear. I doubt he'll stand down his candidates either. So they'll be demonised over and over as risking letting Labour in by splitting the Tory vote, and almost all Tory voters will stay loyal. The question is whether enough Labour leavers will back him to lose Labour some of its marginals to the Tories..- I'm sure I've heard Farage say he's targetting Labour leavers, not Tory hard Brexiteers.

@Baden

Sinn Fein has announced it will not stand in three constituencies in Northern Ireland to help other pro-Remain candidates defeat DUP Brexiteers.

The party is standing aside in south and east Belfast and North Down - a move that puts the republicans in the highly unusual position of explicitly urging supporters to vote for a unionist, in the form of incumbent North Down MP Lady Sylvia Hermon.

https://www.irishnews.com/news/generalelection/2019/11/04/news/sinn-fe-in-will-not-contest-election-in-three-seats-1756091/

I never quite understood why making trade deals with the US constitutes getting our country back from the EU deals that have taken it away... — unenlightened

I think they mean: taking back control of immigration, law-making, saving the money we pay the EU etc. Trade deals are surely a huge red herring in the whole Brexit debate as they take forever to negotiate and their effects can be expected to balance out - if not, why would both sides agree?

As I said in an earlier post. No. Corbyn's renogiated withdrawal deal will include the customs union, single market etc, and for leavers be akin to no Brexit at all, so ref2 will not be viable..

It depends if there is a meaningful vote or what the balance of MPs in the house is after the election. Perhaps the referendum result will be binding. If Corbyn can get it through these hurdles there is no reason to presume that the electorate will choose the leave option. The mood and demographic has changed a lot since 2016.

In respect of Farage, there is a hard core of support who will not vote Tory, because it is not a true Brexit. I can't predict the numbers though. It's going to be unpredictable.

Re Labour’s planned deal: customs union, probably: single market, definately not (unless you count "close alignment").

Anything they can do, we can do better. We can be done by anyone better than you.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/04/no-10-blocks-russia-eu-referendum-report-until-after-election?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0cAeEtsNn7jPPSZbv4QrOQVWuWFujgktVzBdVmojEGcs-JrQFbJUmVXCM#Echobox=1572872454

Good agreements are win-win propositions for the parties. So no, it doesn't balance out.

Yes, an important story. The government will have read it and for some reason decided to sit on it. Typical of the ram it through policies of Cummings. The BBC will probably ignore it as it could bring the referendum result into doubt. Let's see if Channel 4, or Sky News pick it up.

An interesting side issue, which illustrates how out of touch members of the government are. Rees Mogg (mewling pencil), said on LBC yesterday that it was common sense that the people trapped in Grenfell Tower should have ignored the fire brigade and left the building. So in essence blaming the victims and undermining the integrity of the fire service.

But of course a person of such privelidge and high demeanour with a posh voice must be right.