UK Politics Thread VIII—Can't Let EU Go

[Hurdergaryp]

The Times, two years ago:

(Image)

Hahaha

Schadenfreude strikes once more.

[Hrythingland]

Bowmore is a decent dram though I'll usually opt for a Laphroaig. If you want to get really fucked (and ill) is to have a pint glass of port and baileys. I've pretty much lost all hope in any of this. Maybe May will surprise me, but I doubt she will. Ah well, Burn's Night approaches so that's as good an excuse as any to drown failed Brexit sorrows, especially my unit's Burn's supper and ceilidh.

Not such a fan of Baileys, port however could be a workable solution. I'd be hopeful for any surprise at this stage, at the moment we are still facing Brexit Plan A being put in microwave for 5 minutes and presented again next week. It tries to thread the needle of slightly satisfying everyone, but it's a hopeless task. France is getting tetchy about a no-deal scenario, quite rightly, but it's the Irish equation I have most concern about.
I used to preform Tam O' Shanter at my old units Burns night. At least most of the poems and songs were before they served the athel brose....

Tam O'Shanter very good. My unit actually wears the tam o'shanter, nice piece of gear so it is. Bailey's is alright but a mixed with port in a pint glass is quite a concoction. Guaranteed chunder, best for things like initiations.
Brexit was always going to have to go one way or the other. Leaving the EU can only practically mean leaving its apparata otherwise we remain in it just this time without any say at all. A deal is of course desirable and no deal is not desirable for anyone but the day Theresa May basically conceded that a bad deal is better than a no deal she allowed Brussels to begin shovelling shit into her mouth.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

The Times, two years ago:

(Image)

I remember people on here insisting that the UK would have the upper hand in negotiations.

[Hrythingland]

The Times, two years ago:

(Image)

I'm all up for a wee splash of tartan but what the fuck is she wearing?

[Hurdergaryp]

The Times, two years ago:

(Image)

I'm all up for a wee splash of tartan but what the fuck is she wearing?

The literal materialization of Brexitian optimism, if I had to guess.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

The Times, two years ago:

(Image)

I'm all up for a wee splash of tartan but what the fuck is she wearing?

A powerful argument for Scotland being separate from England.

[Hrythingland]

I'm all up for a wee splash of tartan but what the fuck is she wearing?

A powerful argument for Scotland being separate from England.

Nah, as someone who lives in Scotland most genuine Scottish people are unionist to be quite honest. The SNP is largely a bunch of metropolitan types bolstered by some frustrated rural types who just wanted more Scottish recognition. Most of the scottish independance sorts are not so much passionate about Scotland as they are simply anti-English.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

A powerful argument for Scotland being separate from England.

Nah, as someone who lives in Scotland most genuine Scottish people are unionist to be quite honest. The SNP is largely a bunch of metropolitan types bolstered by some frustrated rural types who just wanted more Scottish recognition. Most of the scottish independance sorts are not so much passionate about Scotland as they are simply anti-English.

If the Scots want to dress like clowns, that's their business, but please keep it north of the border.

[Trumptonium1]

Any reform that does not include at the very very least quitting the EU in favour of EEA makes a complete joke of the notion that Remainers would be prepared to concede to the 48% of Leavers in the same manner than Leavers should be prepared to concede to the 48% of Remainers by staying in the customs union or the single market.

You want your cake and you want to eat it too. These are not equivalent levels of compromises. At all. Not even close.

Makes a mockery of your previous point that Remainers would be prepared to compromise with leavers would they have won. These are not compromises. The EU rebate is NOT a compromise to leavers, and neither would some token six-month free movement regulations or whatever else was suggested by Cameron. But thanks for making it clear anyway, you're the first to come up with a tangible answer to the question with a relationship framework. The other blue flag just avoids the question.

So basically you're making shit up so that we would have to leave no matter what because that's what you want. Because apparently reform to address the reasons why people voted Leave is unnacceptable because it doesn't involve ragequitting.

Leave no matter what?

The claim was that Leavers should be prepared to concede to 48% of the population because "52% IS NOT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE." Asked what concessions should be made, it was admitted that remainers effectively want all the core functions of the EU, thus, quit in name only.

The claim was that this is the moral thing to do because Remainers would have done the same to concede to the 48% of leavers if they had won. Asked what concessions should be made, it was admitted that remainers would effectively not give a shit about the core arguments for leave, beyond 'fixing the causes' like income disparity. Bullshit.

Let me illustrate it for you so you can understand it better.



You people want your cake and you want to eat it too. You want zero compromises if you won, but you basically want us to agree to stay in the EU if we win.

You are politically despicable and I take no shame in saying that 48% of the country should have zero input in deciding what to do next.

[Thermodolia]

So, it is starting to sound more and more like Brexit is going into the 'too hard' basket and is not happening at the end of March as planned. Since Parliament says 'no' to leaving without the withdrawal agreement, and also says 'no' to the withdrawal agreement, the UK has its shit very much the opposite of together. Word on the grapevine is that the EU will accept an extension to September, but there's zero chance of negotiations being reopened on anything substantive.

So I'm not entirely sure what that an extension is supposed to fix. The UK government is in serious banana country territory at this point, and no amount of proceduralism is going to get around that. Really the only thing that might get a parliamentary majority at this point is a 'Soft Brexit' (i.e. EEA membership, Norway- or Swiss style), and that only if it turns out to be correct that the DUP is now on board with the Customs Union and Labour and the remain-leaning part of the Tories can scrounge together the numbers. If that seems unlikely, that's because it is. Surely not, after the country's elites have dreamed up and then obsessed over an interpretation of the vote as being about free movement for this long.

Which brings up the question of taking the question to the public once again. A general election is one way, which might just be enough to secure the 'Soft Brexit' majority... but with Corbyn as PM. And that's a best case scenario. It might also just turn out to not change much from the last time, with neither side having a majority and all that was achieved re Brexit is more wasted time. The latter seems more likely, regardless of which side ends up forming a minority government.

A referendum is the other. But I was wondering... what do you put on the ballot paper? 'Remain' is obviously one choice. But what's the other? Leaving without a withdrawal agreement has effectively been rejected by Parliament, and rah-rah ERG Brexiteers have been exposed as the loud but powerless minority that they are. The available withdrawal agreement is, obviously, even more dead. So what is the 'non-remain' option? How do you not just ask for a re-appearance of charlatans like BoJo or Farage who campaign on 'if someone like me had negotiated, the contradictions of Brexit wouldn't exist' and promise unicorns again?

So in short, my question: what do you think would be the options on the ballot paper for a second referendum? I'm not asking what you want the options to be. I'm asking what you think the options will be.

Oh just kick the UK out already. I want my United Ireland

[Trumptonium1]

So, it is starting to sound more and more like Brexit is going into the 'too hard' basket and is not happening at the end of March as planned. Since Parliament says 'no' to leaving without the withdrawal agreement, and also says 'no' to the withdrawal agreement, the UK has its shit very much the opposite of together. Word on the grapevine is that the EU will accept an extension to September, but there's zero chance of negotiations being reopened on anything substantive.

So I'm not entirely sure what that an extension is supposed to fix. The UK government is in serious banana country territory at this point, and no amount of proceduralism is going to get around that. Really the only thing that might get a parliamentary majority at this point is a 'Soft Brexit' (i.e. EEA membership, Norway- or Swiss style), and that only if it turns out to be correct that the DUP is now on board with the Customs Union and Labour and the remain-leaning part of the Tories can scrounge together the numbers. If that seems unlikely, that's because it is. Surely not, after the country's elites have dreamed up and then obsessed over an interpretation of the vote as being about free movement for this long.

Which brings up the question of taking the question to the public once again. A general election is one way, which might just be enough to secure the 'Soft Brexit' majority... but with Corbyn as PM. And that's a best case scenario. It might also just turn out to not change much from the last time, with neither side having a majority and all that was achieved re Brexit is more wasted time. The latter seems more likely, regardless of which side ends up forming a minority government.

A referendum is the other. But I was wondering... what do you put on the ballot paper? 'Remain' is obviously one choice. But what's the other? Leaving without a withdrawal agreement has effectively been rejected by Parliament, and rah-rah ERG Brexiteers have been exposed as the loud but powerless minority that they are. The available withdrawal agreement is, obviously, even more dead. So what is the 'non-remain' option? How do you not just ask for a re-appearance of charlatans like BoJo or Farage who campaign on 'if someone like me had negotiated, the contradictions of Brexit wouldn't exist' and promise unicorns again?

So in short, my question: what do you think would be the options on the ballot paper for a second referendum? I'm not asking what you want the options to be. I'm asking what you think the options will be.

Oh just kick the UK out already. I want my United Ireland

United Ireland my arse, if Sinn Fein kicks up a fuss it's time to arm the DUP.

[Thermodolia]

Oh just kick the UK out already. I want my United Ireland

United Ireland my arse, if Sinn Fein kicks up a fuss it's time to arm the DUP.

26+6=1!!! Kick out the invaders!!

Tbh I would love nothing more than to see a United Ireland, an Independent Scotland, the city state of London, the commonwealth destroyed, and the monarchy crushed.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

...and the monarchy crushed.

Prince Philip had a good go at that.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

United Ireland my arse, if Sinn Fein kicks up a fuss it's time to arm the DUP.

26+6=1!!! Kick out the invaders!!

Tbh I would love nothing more than to see a United Ireland, an Independent Scotland, the city state of London, the commonwealth destroyed, and the monarchy crushed.

Wales and New South Wales forming a new United Kingdom.

[Ifreann]

So, it is starting to sound more and more like Brexit is going into the 'too hard' basket and is not happening at the end of March as planned. Since Parliament says 'no' to leaving without the withdrawal agreement, and also says 'no' to the withdrawal agreement, the UK has its shit very much the opposite of together. Word on the grapevine is that the EU will accept an extension to September, but there's zero chance of negotiations being reopened on anything substantive.

So I'm not entirely sure what that an extension is supposed to fix. The UK government is in serious banana country territory at this point, and no amount of proceduralism is going to get around that. Really the only thing that might get a parliamentary majority at this point is a 'Soft Brexit' (i.e. EEA membership, Norway- or Swiss style), and that only if it turns out to be correct that the DUP is now on board with the Customs Union and Labour and the remain-leaning part of the Tories can scrounge together the numbers. If that seems unlikely, that's because it is. Surely not, after the country's elites have dreamed up and then obsessed over an interpretation of the vote as being about free movement for this long.

Which brings up the question of taking the question to the public once again. A general election is one way, which might just be enough to secure the 'Soft Brexit' majority... but with Corbyn as PM. And that's a best case scenario. It might also just turn out to not change much from the last time, with neither side having a majority and all that was achieved re Brexit is more wasted time. The latter seems more likely, regardless of which side ends up forming a minority government.

A referendum is the other. But I was wondering... what do you put on the ballot paper? 'Remain' is obviously one choice. But what's the other? Leaving without a withdrawal agreement has effectively been rejected by Parliament, and rah-rah ERG Brexiteers have been exposed as the loud but powerless minority that they are. The available withdrawal agreement is, obviously, even more dead. So what is the 'non-remain' option? How do you not just ask for a re-appearance of charlatans like BoJo or Farage who campaign on 'if someone like me had negotiated, the contradictions of Brexit wouldn't exist' and promise unicorns again?

So in short, my question: what do you think would be the options on the ballot paper for a second referendum? I'm not asking what you want the options to be. I'm asking what you think the options will be.

Oh just kick the UK out already. I want my United Ireland

Your united Ireland?

[The Blaatschapen]

United Ireland my arse, if Sinn Fein kicks up a fuss it's time to arm the DUP.

26+6=1!!! Kick out the invaders!!

Tbh I would love nothing more than to see a United Ireland, an Independent Scotland, the city state of London, the commonwealth destroyed, and the monarchy crushed.

I can join you on the last. I'm fairly meh on the others. If that is what the actual populace of the respective territory wants, I'll support.

[Thermodolia]

Oh just kick the UK out already. I want my United Ireland

Your united Ireland?

I have brought peace and stability to my new Irish empire.

[Souseiseki]

You people want your cake and you want to eat it too. You want zero compromises if you won, but you basically want us to agree to stay in the EU if we win.

why are we wasting our time with these scenarios about what remain would do if they won? do you think that if you do it enough we will forget that brexit is crashing and burning because leave is unable to compromise with itself nevermind compromise with remain? even if we accept that remain are all absolute shitters who would have declared themselves the embodied will of the people and told anyone that voted leave to eat some bratwurst if they complained in the same that way leave have attempted to do in this timeline, this does not change the situation we are in. the fact of the matter is that leave have failed to build a workable vision for brexit that has the consistent support of public and parliament, and compromising with remain is now an absolute necessity as opposed to a moral one. perhaps if the people that were talking about this kind of thing, remain and leave, were listened to in the first place we wouldn't be in this situation but alas.

[Ifreann]

Your united Ireland?

I have brought peace and stability to my new Irish empire.

Go home, America.

[Souseiseki]

also the "we got 50%+ so we get 100% of the power" is a political cancer that has been killing this country for decades and the way people are handling brexit is no exception to that.

[Trumptonium1]

You people want your cake and you want to eat it too. You want zero compromises if you won, but you basically want us to agree to stay in the EU if we win.

why are we wasting our time with these scenarios about what remain would do if they won?

Because it's important when answering the question "why do you ignore the 48%"

do you think that if you do it enough we will forget that brexit is crashing and burning because leave is unable to compromise with itself nevermind compromise with remain?

Huh? Where's this notion from?

All leavers want a managed no deal. There's not a single major Brexit figure which does not support this route, and I challenge you to find one. Are you judging Brexit by Theresa May and Hammond or what?

even if we accept that remain are all absolute shitters who would have declared themselves the embodied will of the people and told anyone that voted leave to eat some bratwurst if they complained in the same that way leave have attempted to do in this timeline, this does not change the situation we are in.

It does, because it means we can close the chapter on EEA and ignore what the 48% squeak.

the fact of the matter is that leave have failed to build a workable vision for brexit that has the consistent support of public and parliament, and compromising with remain is now an absolute necessity as opposed to a moral one.

It did, it does, it doesn't because Parliament is full of elitists, it isn't and it isn't too.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

So basically you're making shit up so that we would have to leave no matter what because that's what you want. Because apparently reform to address the reasons why people voted Leave is unnacceptable because it doesn't involve ragequitting.

Leave no matter what?

The claim was that Leavers should be prepared to concede to 48% of the population because "52% IS NOT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE." Asked what concessions should be made, it was admitted that remainers effectively want all the core functions of the EU, thus, quit in name only.

The claim was that this is the moral thing to do because Remainers would have done the same to concede to the 48% of leavers if they had won. Asked what concessions should be made, it was admitted that remainers would effectively not give a shit about the core arguments for leave, beyond 'fixing the causes' like income disparity. Bullshit.

Let me illustrate it for you so you can understand it better.



You people want your cake and you want to eat it too. You want zero compromises if you won, but you basically want us to agree to stay in the EU if we win.

You are politically despicable and I take no shame in saying that 48% of the country should have zero input in deciding what to do next.

As a Brexiteer, I find your argument rather pointless tbh. You're basically saying the (almost) truth but in the most coarse way possible. So calm down, breathe in and relax. I personally believe that the Turkish Bilateral (Looking at the diagram) is the best option at the moment. I'd support no deal if and only if:
-We have plans to form a second, less corrupt, EU
-We're socialist
-EU law is enshrined into UK law with some exceptions such as rules on state aid and the like, whilst many things are also given to devolved governments to sort out.
-We have the backing of a few other member states.

[Trumptonium1]

also the "we got 50%+ so we get 100% of the power" is a political cancer that has been killing this country for decades and the way people are handling brexit is no exception to that.

I agree, but it's too late to undo the damage Attlee and Blair have done to the country on the basis of those principles of absolute rule past halfway point of parliament, and it's unfair to expect either side to begin the process of compromise.

[Fartsniffage]

Oh just kick the UK out already. I want my United Ireland

Your united Ireland?

My Island

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

also the "we got 50%+ so we get 100% of the power" is a political cancer that has been killing this country for decades and the way people are handling brexit is no exception to that.

I agree, but it's too late to undo the damage Attlee and Blair have done to the country on the basis of those principles of absolute rule past halfway point of parliament, and it's unfair to expect either side to begin the process of compromise.

Attlee actually had more of a mandate than Thatcher, with Thatcher getting only 43.9% of the vote at her peak and Attlee getting 47.7% of the vote at his peak. In fact, at one point, Attlee lost to Churchill despite having more votes (1950). Blair, however, got 43.2% of the vote at his peak compared to Edward Bonar Law's 38.4%. So it really all depends.