Brexit - the next steps

[Harrowby Hall]

      ... a few xenophobic arseholes.

What an interesting concept.  Are such ... err ... individuals constipated when abroad?

[Walter]

Too late. Brexit never fails to trigger me because of the way the people were swindled by a few xenophobic arseholes.

Sadly Jezza, you can't change what IS but you can change what you think about it.

Good luck !

[ProfessorDavey]

Sadly Jezza, you can't change what IS but you can change what you think about it.

Good luck !

You could have made the same point to europhobes prior to the 2016 referendum.

The whole point is that you can, potentially, change what IS but you have to work to make that happen. And while we continue to be in the EU there is all to play for.

[ippy]

So UKIP Peer quotes right wing think tank to support the notion that the BBC is biased - what will you be telling me next? That the Pope's a catholic or that bears do their number twos in the woods.

I do love this bit from the Civitas 'report':

'During the same period, two strongly pro-EU Conservatives, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine, made between them 28 appearances, with contributions totalling 11,208 words – over nine times the amount of airtime allocated to all left-wing withdrawalists.' - the period being 2002 to 2017.

Failed to mention that Nigel Farage has appeared 33 times on Question Time over a similar period at a rate of appearance per year higher than any other regular panelist in the programme's 40 year history.

I wouldn't argue with your figures about Nigel's appearances only surprisingly enough he was significantly outnumbered on Q T every time in the same way  EU leavers whoever they were, were outnumbered.

Even the RT television news shows less bias about brexit than the BBC. 

ippy

[ProfessorDavey]

I wouldn't argue with your figures about Nigel's appearances only surprisingly enough he was significantly outnumbered on Q T every time in the same way  EU leavers whoever they were, were outnumbered.

Even the RT television news shows less bias about brexit than the BBC. 

ippy

Since the referendum (and in it's immediate run up) I believe the BBC has moved to unbiased panels with regard to brexit position. Prveiously (and not unreasonably) the panel make up reflected party political support, such that panelists were invited on the basis of party electoral support.

Why should a panel in 2010 involve equivalent panelist with regard to their position on the EU, when the EU was considered to be an important issue facing the country by less than 10% of the population.

You could pick any other number of minor concerns of the public and demand that QT should have equal numbers of people on either side, but ultimately it would be impossible to pick a panel.

[Stranger]

And while we continue to be in the EU there is all to play for.

It's not like it's all going to go away if we leave, especially without a deal.

If we crash out, the full consequences will be all too apparent to everybody and will probably appal all but the extreme xenophobes and europhobes into realising what an idiotic and pointless act of national self-harm it was. Either way, we will still have to try and negotiate a future trading relationship with the EU.

I for one would vote for any party that pledged to reverse the idiocy and I doubt I'd be alone. The demographics are such that the country is almost certainly pro-EU by now, so the Reverse Brexit campaign starts the moment we leave...

[ProfessorDavey]

It's not like it's all going to go away if we leave, especially without a deal.

True - actually it will be just the start of years and years of challenging negotiation and grid lock even once the worst immediate effects of no deal have worked through

I for one would vote for any party that pledged to reverse the idiocy and I doubt I'd be alone. The demographics are such that the country is almost certainly pro-EU by now, so the Reverse Brexit campaign starts the moment we leave...

Me too and there are millions like us.

The point is that it is easier to remain in the EU while we are still in - presumably revoke after a referendum. Once we have left there will be a different, and more challenging, conversation - in other words to rejoin. But perhaps the consequences of not being in the EU need to be apparent to get the population to wake up to the imperative of being a member.

[Stranger]

The point is that it is easier to remain in the EU while we are still in - presumably revoke after a referendum. Once we have left there will be a different, and more challenging, conversation - in other words to rejoin.

This is true - and it's very unlikely we'd get the rebate and opt-opts back. The upshot of leaving is that we'd end up with a worse deal than we had, even if we rejoined. Even so, rejoining would probably be the best deal available.

But perhaps the consequences of not being in the EU need to be apparent to get the population to wake up to the imperative of being a member.

I fear so - unfortunately the cost, to people, livelihoods, and the country as a whole, wouldn't really worth the pleasure of being able to say "we told you so".

[Gordon]

I wouldn't argue with your figures about Nigel's appearances only surprisingly enough he was significantly outnumbered on Q T every time in the same way  EU leavers whoever they were, were outnumbered.

Even the RT television news shows less bias about brexit than the BBC. 

ippy

The question of 'balance' is a curious one since it assumes that the 'balance' of the numbers of advocates for each proposition means that the arguments they each advance are of equal merit and are deserving of equal emphasis and air-time.

In the case of Brexit, given what is now known about both the actual consequences and that it is being led by a bunch of incompetents infected with Brexit zealotry but with no realistic plans from the outset, giving more coverage to the crap arguments of these so-called 'Brexiteers' won't improve the quality of their arguments. Their media appearances may well expose their idiocy, but since 'Brexit' has now become an article of faith for its enthusiasts I suspect they are well past being able to grasp the lunacy that, in their naivety and ignorance, they voted for.

 

[jeremyp]

Sadly Jezza, you can't change what IS but you can change what you think about it.

Good luck !

Why would I change my opinion on Brexit when it is right?

[jeremyp]

Sadly Jezza, you can't change what IS but you can change what you think about it.

Good luck !

Actually, let us look at this seriously.

In what way has Britain being a member of the EU harmed you? I'm looking for specific policies that have been detrimental to your life in some quantifiable way.

[ippy]

Since the referendum (and in it's immediate run up) I believe the BBC has moved to unbiased panels with regard to brexit position. Prveiously (and not unreasonably) the panel make up reflected party political support, such that panelists were invited on the basis of party electoral support.

Why should a panel in 2010 involve equivalent panelist with regard to their position on the EU, when the EU was considered to be an important issue facing the country by less than 10% of the population.

You could pick any other number of minor concerns of the public and demand that QT should have equal numbers of people on either side, but ultimately it would be impossible to pick a panel.

Yes and I largely agree with what you say but when you add the BBC's overall remoaner policy of never missing a trick no matter how small the item and whatever the time of broadcast the sheer tenacity of their remoaner agenda which they don't even try to disguise anymore isn't quite the sort of approach I would have expected from such as the likes of the BBC.

When you add the rather obvious reluctance to do an even slightly more balanced edition of QT to all of the rest of the BBC's undisguised remoaner propaganda efforts it's not quiet the such a small item as it at first seems to be.

ippy

[jeremyp]

Yes and I largely agree with what you say but when you add the BBC's overall remoaner policy of never missing a trick no matter how small the item and whatever the time of broadcast the sheer tenacity of their remoaner agenda which they don't even try to disguise anymore isn't quite the sort of approach I would have expected from such as the likes of the BBC.

When you add the rather obvious reluctance to do an even slightly more balanced edition of QT to all of the rest of the BBC's undisguised remoaner propaganda efforts it's not quiet the such a small item as it at first seems to be.

ippy

A no deal Brexit is going to be very bad. Read this story for example

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49170387

Trying to do a balanced treatment of the Brexit process is a bit like trying to be balanced about creationism. You can't do it unless you lie.

[Stranger]

Trying to do a balanced treatment of the Brexit process is a bit like trying to be balanced about creationism. You can't do it unless you lie.

Yes - the extreme "Brexit at all costs" cult that has taken over the government has many of the reality denying characteristics of fundamentalist religions. The Tory party members are prepared to see the break up of the UK, serious economic damage, and even the destruction of their own party (source). For what? What possible rational justification is there? What is so terrible about being in the EU that we should pay any price to get out?

The argument that it's the "will of the people" is now equally an article of blind faith. What is on offer now is nothing like what was described in the referendum campaign. It is only sane to ask people if they still want it under these circumstances. If you buy something based on a description that turns out to be inaccurate, you have the right to return it - where is the equivalent right here?

Just like a cult, it's members seem to have little regard for the truth Boris "the liar" Johnson couldn't resist lying about kippers in his campaign (source) and now Dominic Raab is trying to pretend that the possibility of a no deal was made clear to voters during the referendum (source).

Anyway - here's something to watch: 'The UK is completely fucked' - John Oliver on Britain's new prime minister.

</rant>

[wigginhall]

Yes, Brexit seems like a cult or religion.   Refusing another referendum shows the rigidity that you get in cults, you can't change your mind.

Another factor in the rise of Boris, is a sense of crisis, in which the charismatic leader stands tall.  And the leader often feeds the sense of crisis.

But I don't know what happens next.   If Boris takes a big lead in the polls, an election is tempting, then right wing government. 

[ippy]

A no deal Brexit is going to be very bad. Read this story for example

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49170387

Trying to do a balanced treatment of the Brexit process is a bit like trying to be balanced about creationism. You can't do it unless you lie.

I Y O.

ippy

[Nearly Sane]

Yes, Brexit seems like a cult or religion.   Refusing another referendum shows the rigidity that you get in cults, you can't change your mind.

Another factor in the rise of Boris, is a sense of crisis, in which the charismatic leader stands tall.  And the leader often feeds the sense of crisis.

But I don't know what happens next.   If Boris takes a big lead in the polls, an election is tempting, then right wing government.

Of course a big lead might currently be getting 34% of the vote - which in other times would be a disaster.

[Nearly Sane]

I Y O.

ippy

Said the creationist

[Gordon]

I Y O.

ippy

Nope: that Brexit will be disastrous isn't just a matter of opinion, ippy, since there are ample facts about the likely consequences that support the opinion that Brexit will be disastrous.

Of course for the Brexit enthusiast facts no longer matter - they have faith now you know, and moreover a faith sustained by oodles of credulous gullibility. Try asking one what the actual benefits of Brexit are and you'll find them stuck in a loop of simplistic slogans (some of which are lies), before they eventually seek solace in the '17.4 million voted for it' ad pop.

[Stranger]

I Y O.

ippy

Except it isn't just jeremyp's opinion - pretty much everybody with any expertise in the relevant fields thinks a no-deal Brexit will be very bad - you know, just like pretty much everybody with any expertise in the relevant fields thinks creationism is nonsense.

[Udayana]

...
But I don't know what happens next.   If Boris takes a big lead in the polls, an election is tempting, then right wing government.

I can see us heading closer and closer to a no-deal brexit whilst a small group make a  lot of money betting against Sterling and the British economy. Then we exit without a withdrawal agreement for which the EU and/or Liberal/Labour "remoaners" are blamed.

If (or as) the economy then deteriorates we will get a series of increasingly right wing governments (back to blaming immigrants of-course).

[wigginhall]

I can see us heading closer and closer to a no-deal brexit whilst a small group make a  lot of money betting against Sterling and the British economy. Then we exit without a withdrawal agreement for which the EU and/or Liberal/Labour "remoaners" are blamed.

If (or as) the economy then deteriorates we will get a series of increasingly right wing governments (back to blaming immigrants of-course).

The rich will rely on the poor to help them out.  It seems to work. 

[Nearly Sane]

The rich will rely on the poor to help them out.  It seems to work.

It's the same the whole world over....

[jeremyp]

I Y O.

ippy

Yes. Did you read my link? Do you have an opinion on it.

[SteveH]

The country's going to hell in a handbasket, and it's all the fault of Cameron, May, Johnson, and Fartage (and yes, the expression is "handbasket", not "handcart").