United Kingdom 2

849 posts / 0 new
Last post
MegB
United Kingdom 2

Continued from here.

Issues Pages: 
josh

Just to respond to epauolo’s lasts posts in the closed thread, the arguments against Brexit are all well and good, but the vote was held and the public voted otherwise.  And if you’re worried about Tommy Robinson, negating that vote is the one way he could end up being PM.  And I really hope that it’s not true that Corbyn is going to whip the vote for a new referendum.

cco

I'm sure it wasn't deliberate, Meg, but the history nerd in me got a kick out of you closing the UK thread after 1,066 posts.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

To defeat an insurgent far-right, Labour must resist Brexit with all its force

“This is the worst night of my life”, wrote Twitter user Mark C, after MPs took control of the Brexit process on Monday. “I feel like everything I held dear, as a citizen in a democratic country, has been crushed. My vote crushed, even though it won. My morale crushed. My belief in who I am crushed.”

To which I say, rejoice. For Mark C is a Ukip member and self-described “Tommy Robinson supporter”, and has Tommy’s mug emblazoned on his Twitter masthead. Some of his mates are not happy either. The alt-right Twittersphere are now, variously, predicting civil war, threatening to withhold council tax, to occupy parliament and to never vote again. The trouble is scheduled to kick off at 4pm this Friday outside Westminster.

While the press is mesmerised by parliament, the real action of this week is going on inside the brains and social networks of Britain’s emergent fascist movement. It is still possible that, through the venality of the DUP, the careerism of Boris Johnson and the cowardice of a few Labour MPs, Theresa May will get the Withdrawal Agreement through. But what is clear already to Britain’s far right is that Brexit as a project of xenophobia and white supremacy is over.

The best they’ll get is what their own parliamentary avatars describe as a “vassal state”. At worst they’re staying in Europe, albeit after a second referendum in which they get, once again, to pump racist lies into our civil society.

As a result, though many variables remain in play from the Brexit crisis, one thing is already clear. There is no avoiding the culture war. It is here.

When Conservative MP Suella Braverman insulted the Remain camp using the anti-Semitic “cultural Marxism” trope, she was immediately defended by voices as varied as Leave.EU and the Spectator editor Fraser Nelson. But this is only the start. Boris Johnson has already railed against the “deep state”. And this is just the tip of a whole iceberg of far-right paranoia that is about to be unleashed.....

 

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..more from the above piece.

quote:

There is a perfectly good argument for a left-wing exit from Europe: to regain sovereign space for the actions of radical left government against a superstate with neoliberalism written into its constitution.

The problem is, first, the Withdrawal Agreement is not that: it is a shabby compromise whereby Britain actually cedes sovereignty to the EU in return for a temporary customs union. As John McDonnell’s former economic advisor James Meadway recently wrote in the NS, the detail of the Withdrawal Agreement allows the EU to pull Britain’s access to European financial markets at will, and would be a powerful tool of statecraft for the EU’s neoliberal centre against an incoming Corbyn government.

Secondly, and more importantly, this Brexit – the actually existing crisis we are living through – is a project entirely designed and implemented by a racist, xenophobic wing of British neoliberalism, linked to a global alliance whose project is to smash the multilateral system.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

James Meadway recently wrote:

Theresa May's Brexit deal would be disastrous for a future left government

quote:

But a rare point of harmony between EU and UK governments has been on the continuation of EU State Aid and competition law provisions – even in the event of a “no-deal” Brexit. These significantly restrict the ability of democratic governments to intervene in their economies – potentially even including parts of Labour’s 2017 manifesto. But the restriction is not absolute, and the real question is the degree of interventionist freedom that a domestic government can win. The aim for a future Labour government, in particular, should be to win as much freedom as it can, while recognising that as long as a close, collaborative arrangement with Europe is desired, this will never be absolute.

However, Brussels officials have cited the “threat” of a Jeremy Corbyn government as driving their determination to keep existing restrictions firmly in place. The EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement observes the existing rules, as does the customs union “backstop”, but of more concern is the insistence in the (less-discussed, but ultimately more important) Outline Political Declaration that the UK will build on the “level playing field” of the Withdrawal Agreement. Even worse, the final arbiter on interpretation of those rules will still be the European Court of Justice – only now the UK would have no say over the making of those laws.

More insidiously, the loss of passporting rights for UK financial services, granting them the right to trade in European financial markets, creates another bulwark against a future government of the left. The replacement of passporting with the (less-comprehensive) “equivalence” regime grants financial market access to non-member states only at the EU’s discretion, and this discretion can be removed with just 30 days’ notice. Discussions on “enhanced equivalence” are highly unlikely to alter the fundamentals. For countries with large, internationally-focused financial service sectors, the threat of losing access to their main market abroad creates a gaping economic wound waiting to be poked.

The EU will not hesitate to use the leverage this creates, as Switzerland has recently discovered. Jean-Claude Juncker asked for a “stick” to use against the Swiss government, and control over financial market access has proved perfect in negotiations.....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

josh wrote:

Just to respond to epauolo’s lasts posts in the closed thread, the arguments against Brexit are all well and good, but the vote was held and the public voted otherwise.  And if you’re worried about Tommy Robinson, negating that vote is the one way he could end up being PM.  And I really hope that it’s not true that Corbyn is going to whip the vote for a new referendum.

..maybe. but i believe, if brexit goes through, the uk public will punish all who played a part in allowing brexit to move forward. once the reality sets in and folks understands they were manipulated and lied to. better for labour, strategically and for the long game, to go this way.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..you can literally watch the numbers climb on the site. as i write this the end numbers are 959

Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.

5,881,791 signatures

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..from post #6

quote:

There should be no debate for the left about any of this. May’s deal is an abomination that, if ever passed, would represent a major defeat for the left, and all those who support an open society in a sovereign country. Remain is unambiguously better than what is on offer: better for democratic rights, better for economic democracy, better for sovereignty. If it takes a second referendum to defeat it, that option should be taken.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
5,881,791 signatures

But 16 million voted against Brexit on the referendum.  Why is it supposed to be impressive or meaningful that a third of them still want to stay?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..because it is in the here and now. pogo pointed out that the pro brexit forces were 25.

josh

Wasn’t there a vote on this?  Remainers next move will be to convince the public that a vote never took place.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i've just argued that the brexit proposed isn't what people voted for. meaning not leaving the clutches of eu but weakening the uk position against it. yet you hold the original vote as sacrosanct no matter what comes out the back end. that doesn't make any sense.

josh

Sure it does.  They should have left on Friday, deal or no deal.  It’s coming up on three years.  It’s past the point of ridiculousness how the voters’ decision has not been carried out.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..no they could not without addressing why the vote was held. out of the clutches of the eu means out of the clutches of the eu. no deal brexit does not do that. you hold the vote sacrosanct without holding it's intent sacrosanct.

josh

How does it not do that?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..post #6

quote:

But a rare point of harmony between EU and UK governments has been on the continuation of EU State Aid and competition law provisions – even in the event of a “no-deal” Brexit.

These significantly restrict the ability of democratic governments to intervene in their economies – potentially even including parts of Labour’s 2017 manifesto.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
..because it is in the here and now.

Uh, so??

Why should we expect they wouldn't still prefer -- "in the here and now" -- what they preferred when they voted??  This petition says nothing more than that a third of "remain" voters haven't changed their position.

Quote:
pogo pointed out that the pro brexit forces were 25.

LOL.  Maybe nobody told them that battling petitions are some kind of competition somehow.  Or maybe, since this was officially voted on, the Leavers don't feel any special need to recast their vote on petitionmonkey.com.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..things have changed. people have had a couple years to become informed, debate and refect on brexit.

..i believe that 25 were the forces out in the street while people's vote was a million. that matters to politicians.

NDPP

The entire history of the EU is one of various pretexts being used to secure repeat votes etc until capital and the neoliberal EU machine enforces its way. That the two main political parties seem determined to collaborate in this subversion of the people's vote, the most massive UK vote for anything or anyone, is appalling and outrageous.  See the excellent analyses of Economist and former Syriza MP Costas Lapavitsas in the end of the previous thread. Nothing good can come to the people of UK in the EU. Nor can Jeremy Corbyn implement his manifesto within it either. 

josh

epaulo13 wrote:

..post #6

quote:

But a rare point of harmony between EU and UK governments has been on the continuation of EU State Aid and competition law provisions – even in the event of a “no-deal” Brexit.

These significantly restrict the ability of democratic governments to intervene in their economies – potentially even including parts of Labour’s 2017 manifesto.

That’s not the result of a clean break.  That was a policy set forth by the government.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..there has never been a clean break on the table. that is my point. brexit doesn't honour the vote. eta: it's a manipulation. a big fucking lie.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

cco wrote:
I'm sure it wasn't deliberate, Meg, but the history nerd in me got a kick out of you closing the UK thread after 1,066 posts.
Well, one mustn't be Hastings about such things.

JKR

josh wrote:

Wasn’t there a vote on this?  Remainers next move will be to convince the public that a vote never took place.

Who voted for Theresa May’s Brexit deal? Shortly she won’t even be PM anymore because she has lost the confidence of  most everyone.

JKR

josh wrote:

Sure it does.  They should have left on Friday, deal or no deal.  It’s coming up on three years.  It’s past the point of ridiculousness how the voters’ decision has not been carried out.

Maybe the voters voted for a unicorn that never existed?

Pogo Pogo's picture

When people march what multiple of the general population do they represent? Apparently Magoo thinks it is 1:1 but I think that this becuase he is basing his logic on his support for Brexit rather than his support for critical thinking.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
When people march what multiple of the general population do they represent?

They don't "represent" anyone.  Of course there will be others who agree with them but did not choose to march, but are we really going to pick some arbitrary number (say, 100x) and then extrapolate from there to pretending that somehow nullifies the 17 million counted and verifiable votes for Brexit?

Quote:
Apparently Magoo thinks it is 1:1 but I think that this becuase he is basing his logic on his support for Brexit rather than his support for critical thinking.

And apparently your support for Remaining is making you prepared to grasp at just about anything.

What about the dead?  Has anyone considered that angle?  How would Great-great-grandma have "probably" voted?  Maybe it would be enough to tip the balance!  We've already seen silly-talk about how the 18 year olds today would have "probably" voted, and why that's supposed to be meaningful, so why not?

 

Sean in Ottawa

I think that it is now clear that parliament as it is cannot choose among the options available. It is also clear that representatives disagree over what Brexit means as there are different types of arrangements.

I disagree with the focus on respecting a vote that is open to interpretation over finding out what the population would like now.

However, it does not make sense to put to the people the same question as last time. The same result could happen: people stampeded to either Leave or Remain becuase there is no agreement on what Leave actually means.

There are two options I can see:

First is an eleciton -- I suspect that this would not be as clean and could still produce a deadlocked parliament.

The other option which may be fairer to the Brexit option is to use a ranked ballot instant run-off system. My suspicion is that if you put Remain up against any one individual Brexit option, Remain would win becuase the others are divided -- this could be true even if the majority want some form of Brexit. Using such a system where people could rank their options including brexit options and remain we could see right nowwhere the consensus would lead. This is not an insult to the simpler referendum -- it is an important clarification. There may be some that would choose a mild Brexit but if that does not prevail opt to either for a more extreme version of Brexit or remain. There may be people now who want Remain given polarized options but in a more full process may choose a moderate version of Brexit.

I think it would be unfair to take any major option off the table -- or to make presumptions about how voters may rank their second options.

I think using a ranked ballot system the UK would be able to settle on a majority.

It is possible that the best way to proceed is with a delay and this ranked referendum. There can be a centralized summary of arguments from proponents and opponents for each option.

The advantage of this is that Parliament woudl have not only a clear direction but also a clear roadmap to what the population wants to negotiate.

This result would hand a considerable mandate to the government in negotiation with the EU and it would provide a backup plan B should the first option for any reason prove impossible.

voice of the damned

QUOTE:

Apparently Magoo thinks it is 1:1 but I think that this becuase he is basing his logic on his support for Brexit rather than his support for critical thinking.

You can count me as one person who thinks that Brexit is an absolutely awful idea, but also that the British are more-or-less stuck with the referendum results, regardless of how many people show up at demos or tell pollsters they wish they had voted differently.

The only really valid point that the Ignore The Vote people have is that the referendum was never binding in the first place, so therefore the government has no legal obligation to enforce its results. But you don't need a second referendum to do that, all the government has to do is just act as if the first one never happened, and hope the voting public shares their contempt for the original verdict.

BUT THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS...

Would the EU also agree to carry on as if the refenedum never happened?

  

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Brexit indicative votes: results and rebels

quote:

Vote results

John Baron’s no deal motion (B): Ayes 160 – Noes 400

Nick Boles’ Common Market 2.0 motion (D): Ayes 188 – Noes 283

George Eustice’s EFTA and EEA motion (H): Ayes 65 – Noes 377

Kenneth Clarke’s customs union motion (J): Ayes 264 – Noes 272

Jeremy Corbyn’s Brexit motion (K): Ayes 237 – Noes 307

Joanna Cherry’s revocation motion (L): Ayes 184 – Noes 293

Margaret Beckett’s public vote motion (M): Ayes 268 – Noes 295

Marcus Fysh’s preferential arrangements motion (O): Ayes 139 – Noes 422

 

NorthReport
josh

Who’s allying with them?  Lots of people, who you wouldn’t want to be in the same city with, vote the way you do and you’ll never know.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Labour won’t support “the blindest of blindfold Brexits”

quote:

There will be a vote in the House of Commons tomorrow on the legally-binding part of Theresa May’s Brexit deal only, rather than the whole agreement.

This complies with the Speaker’s recent ruling, which ruled out another vote on the same motion, as it is a substantially different proposal from the one considered in the second meaningful vote.

But many MPs – including Keir Starmer – have raised concerns about the move, with some querying whether it is legal.

Starmer said: “Following the Prime Minister’s commitment yesterday to resign before the next phase of negotiations begin, it’s even more of a blindfold Brexit – because we now know that the outcome of our future relationship with the EU is not going to be determined by her.

“My biggest fear is that unless Parliament takes a stand now, the outcome of the negotiations is going to be determined by the outcome of next Tory leadership contest.

“It could be a Boris Johnson Brexit. A Jacob Rees-Mogg Brexit. Or a Michael Gove Brexit. That should give anyone considering supporting May’s deal on Friday serious concern.

NorthReport

May has to be one of the worst PMs ever She needs to resign this weekend, let the Cons choose a new leader, have an election and then a second referendum 

United Kingdom is such a misnomer

NDPP

Unionists Against the EU

https://twitter.com/TrevorWAllman/status/1111089117729837057

"Supporting the European Union, you support the EU's austerity programme..."
 

There can be no implementation of a 'Corbyn Manifesto' inside the EU.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

May’s withdrawal agreement defeated by 58 votes

The latest vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal – this time, only the legally-binding text of it – has seen MPs reject the withdrawal agreement by 58 votes, with 286 in favour and 344 against.

Five Labour MPs – Kevin Barron, Rosie Cooper, Jim Fitzpatrick, Caroline Flint and John Mann – voted in favour, and two Corbynite Brexiteers – Dennis Skinner and Ronnie Campbell – abstained.

Gareth Snell, who considered voting for the deal today, ultimately voted against, as did Lisa Nandy. 34 Tory, all 10 DUP and 16 Independent MPs also helped to defeat the withdrawal agreement.

The latest vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal – this time, only the legally-binding text of it – has seen MPs reject the withdrawal agreement by 58 votes, with 286 in favour and 344 against.

Today, 29th March, is the day that the UK was originally supposed to leave the EU. The deadlines set by the EU mean that the UK should now have to request a long extension, which would likely involve holding European parliamentary elections. The alternative is to leave without a deal on 12th April.

On Monday, the House of Commons will continue with the ‘indicative votes’ process in an effort to find agreement on the UK’s future relationship with the EU. MPs will consider the options that won the most support on Wednesday – customs union membership, another referendum and Labour’s deal....

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

May has to be one of the worst PMs ever She needs to resign this weekend, let the Cons choose a new leader, have an election and then a second referendum 

United Kingdom is such a misnomer

Yes they need a name change. On the bright side since shithole country has been rejected, it is still available if they want it. (Just trying to help).

In other news the freeze for those on social assistance has been continued making clear what the Brexit Conservatives social values are.

josh

Just leave on April 12 and end this farce.

NorthReport

I suppose you were against Quebecers having the chance to vote in a second referendum as well.

josh wrote:

Wasn’t there a vote on this?  Remainers next move will be to convince the public that a vote never took place.

NDPP

May Told To Quit & Call Election - EU Warns of No Deal Disaster After latest Brexit Failure (and vid)

https://on.rt.com/9r5g

"Theresa May's failure to get her EU withdrawal through parliament for a third time led to immediate demands for the prime minister's resignation, a snap general election and warnings from the EU about a no-deal Brexit. A no-deal scenario on April 12 is now a 'likely scenario'..."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Manifesto for a new popular internationalism in Europe

Collective article presented by more than 150 co-signatories including

The ReCommons Europe Manifesto has been drawn up by a group of researchers and activists from a dozen or so countries in Europe who wish to propose a plan to be carried out by the radical left forces that want to create the conditions for social change in the interests of the majority of the population after coming to power in a European country with the active support of the population. It forms part of the ReCommons Europe Project which was initiated by two international networks, the CADTM and EReNSEP, and the Basque trade union ELA, with the aim of contributing to the strategic debates taking place on the European radical left today. It was written collectively in the course of meetings which took place in 2018. It follows on from the appeal entitled “Ten Proposals to Beat the European Union”, a collective document published by more than 70 signatories in February 2017.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Ten Proposals to Beat the European Union

quote:

To avoid what we saw in Greece in 2015, here are ten proposals for social mobilization and actions to be taken immediately and simultaneously by any government that is truly operating in the interests of the people.

1. A left-wing government must disobey the European Commission in a very transparent manner and in line with its prior commitments.

The party or coalition of parties (the example of Spain comes to mind) that claim to govern should from the outset refuse to conform to austerity measures, and pledge to refuse measures aiming solely at balancing the budget. They should announce: “We will not yield to the European treaties’ diktat of a balanced budget because we want to increase public expenditures to fight anti-social and austerity measures and embark on the ecological transition.”

Therefore, the first step is to begin disobeying in a clear and determined way. The Greek capitulation has shown us why we must shed the illusion that the EC and other European governments respect the popular mandate. This illusion can only lead to disaster. We must disobey.....

voice of the damned

NorthReport wrote:

I suppose you were against Quebecers having the chance to vote in a second referendum as well.

Well, there was a 15 year gap between the first and the second Quebec referendums. And during that time, Trudeau had repatriated the constituion over Quebec's formal objections, and two attempts at rectifiying Quebec's exclusion had been defeated. None of that was really foreseeable in 1980. 

But the arguments for a second UK referendum seem to be less about unforeseen post-vote events, and more about things that happened BEFORE the vote, but that people didn't take into account, eg. the brexiteers said they could spend more money on health-care if they left the EU, and nobody really questioned that.

So to make arguments for a second Quebec vote more akin to what is being argued for a second brexit vote...

"The federalists said that if Quebec separated, there would be no more oranges imported into Quebec, and I believed that, so I voted non. But, thinking about it now a month later, that's kind of silly, so I think we should have another referendum right away."

(The Liberal threat of no oranges in a sovereign Quebec is from Rene Levesaque's memoirs.)

NorthReport

The oranges would have smuggled in by Quebecers returning from their Florida vacations. 

NDPP

"The main parties, whatever they say, don't want a general election because if there was one Labour would say to the Tories 'it was you that couldn't get Brexit through.' Tories, flying the flag, bedecked in khaki, would say, 'we tried to deliver Brexit but Labour blocked it.'

The majority of the MPs who voted to block Brexit today were Labour MPs. And the majority of the talking heads of the FBPE soft-shoe shufflers are Labour."

https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1111718706894254081

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

NorthReport wrote:

May has to be one of the worst PMs ever She needs to resign this weekend, let the Cons choose a new leader, have an election and then a second referendum 

United Kingdom is such a misnomer

Let's call it what it is-a largely Anglo-Saxon but increasingly multicultural kingdom, with two largely Celtic, but also multicultural dominions, each of which has been given limited powers of self-government. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Ten Proposals to Beat the European Union

quote:

2. Call for popular mobilization both at the national and the European level.

In 2015, such an initiative proved unsuccessful in Greece and elsewhere in Europe. It is obvious that the European social movements did not achieve great success in calling for demonstrations, which did take place but were not at the level required by the need for solidarity with the Greek people.

However, it is also true that Syriza’s strategy did not include calls for popular mobilization in Europe, or even in Greece. And when the Tsipras government did call for mobilization by means of the referendum of July 5, 2015, the will of the 61.5 percent of Greeks who refused to accept the creditors’ demands was not respected.

Let’s remember that starting in late February 2015 and up until the end of June 2015, Yanis Varoufakis and Alexis Tsipras made statements aimed at convincing public opinion that an agreement was in sight and that the situation was improving.

Imagine that instead, after each important negotiation, they had explained what was at stake through press releases, statements to the media, and declarations in public places — in front of the headquarters of the European institutions in Brussels and elsewhere. Imagine that they had revealed what was really going on. It would have led to gatherings of thousands or tens of thousands of people, and the social networks would have relayed this alternative discourse to hundreds of thousands or millions of citizens.

3. Launch a debt audit with citizens’ participation.

The situations in the twenty-eight EU countries, and of course within the eurozone, are diverse. In some European countries — as in Greece — it is a matter of utmost necessity and priority to suspend debt repayments, in order to make the satisfaction of social needs and basic human rights an absolute priority. It is also a key element of a self-defense strategy.

In Spain, in Portugal, in Cyprus, and in Ireland, such a move depends on the balance of power and the current economic picture. In other countries, it is possible to carry out the audit first and then decide on the suspension of repayments. The specific situation of each country must be weighed before implementing these measures.

Sean in Ottawa

I object to the idea that support for the EU is or ought to be a left-right thing. I object to the notion that participation in the EU is support of a right-wing ideology.

I concede that the EU tilts right but it does so no more than individual governments do. This is the reason Euroskeptics are usually more to the right than left. I challenge anyone who suggests that the left is stronger in Britain than it is in the EU as a whole -- or that it ever was.

The UK has been historically to the right of the EU and it certainly looks like the Brexit ideal from its supports is.

The simplistic notion that since the EU is right that any left person should vote against it is reaching for a purity that does not exist. The government structures and economic advantages outside of the EU tilt more right than even the EU. Rewarding the UKIP crowd with victory supports the right in the UK and that advantage would endure there for some time.

The notion of opposing the EU is a minority one on the left, for good practical reason, even if it is held by the leader of the Labour party. It is out of touch with the people most affected by the decision. Here we can take a principled view since nobody here is actually affected by the result and we can bask in our purity.

The reality that the EU (as right as it is) remains more left than the UK's own tendencies is awkward for the movement. The reality is that the ascension of the leavers brings about more support for the right and more xenophobic tendencies that threaten minorities in the UK directly.

There is a struggle in the EU on the left. People on the left in the UK can ally themselves with those on the left in the EU to try to moderate and improve the organization. Futile you may say, ignoring completely the similar futility of doing so at the national level outside the EU. The fantasy of a labour government in the UK being able to do more on its own to further the left is a Corbyn wet dream. People like this guy becuase he is more left on his own and not because he has any better chance of bringing in a government that will truly be more left than he would be able to within the EU.

People in the UK are not just struggling with political purity but also with practical mitigation of a right more powerful than a left -- in the UK as well as outside it. Winds are blowing to the right generally in Europe and the EU which may make change harder than outside it, may mitigate and do more for the people than the theoretical freedom may do where the right will also exercise more power.

No apology to the purists -- this is about making life better or worse for real people. It is possible one day that outside the EU could be a path for the left but there is not one now. Labour has a lot of work it can do within the EU.

 

 

Sean in Ottawa

And I won't even bother with this ridiculous self-dealing in the "respect the vote" stuff that suggests that it is an insult to see if the vote has changed when so much else has and the parliament is deadlocked. I do not support, as I said, a straight up Leave-Remain vote repeat since that does not offer voters a chance to demonstrate support for a Brexit option (while I do not think Brexit is a good idea, I actually do respect voters). One of the changes is that the choice is no longer a binary one. Firm leavers do not want the people offered as soft option because theya re afraid they would choose it. Firm remainers do not want a soft option becuase they are all in hoping fear of no deal will prevent Brexit. In reality it is both sides insulting the voters by denying them a real option to decide in hope that their minority opinion would hold up when options are reduced. The respect the vote side is just as bad as the side that wants a binary redo.

Instead, voters ought to have a ranked preferential ballot to allow them to choose among all the options since Parliament cannot. A ranked ballot may indicate that there is ultimately more support for a soft Brexit than either a hard one or Remain. Since a binary proposition is unreasonable when the country cannot agree on what the binary choice is and a proportional result in not feasible since you can only proceed with one, an instant runoff with all options on the table allows the country to democratically choose the option they prefer. To oppose this is to seek the advantage of not giving the people are real choice and that is more an insult than a new vote on these lines would be.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Ten Proposals to Beat the European Union

quote:

4. Establish control of capital flows.

We must clarify what this means. It does not mean that people cannot transfer a few hundred euros abroad. Obviously international financial transactions would be allowed up to a certain amount. On the other hand, it is important to enforce strict control over capital flows beyond a certain threshold.

5. Socialize the financial sector and the energy sector.

Socializing the financial sector does not merely mean developing a public banking hub. It implies decreeing a public monopoly on the financial sector, i.e. the banks, building societies and insurance companies. That is, a socialization of the financial sector under citizen control; turning the financial sector into a public service. Of course, socializing the energy sector will also be a priority during the ecological transition. Ecological transition cannot take place without a public monopoly over the energy sector, both in terms of production and distribution.

6. Create a complementary, non-convertible currency and defend the right to leave the eurozone.

Whether it is a case of exiting the eurozone or remaining in it, it is necessary to create a non-convertible complementary currency. In other words, a currency that is used locally, for exchanges within the country — for example, for paying increased pensions, salary increases for civil servants, taxes, public services, etc. The use of a complementary currency enables partial relief from the dictatorship of the euro and the European Central Bank.

Of course, we cannot avoid the debate on the eurozone. In several countries, exiting the eurozone is an option that must be defended by political parties, trade unions, and other social movements. Several eurozone countries will not be able to truly break away from austerity and launch an ecosocialist transition without leaving the eurozone. A redistributive monetary reform, or the levying of a special progressive tax on incomes above €200,000, should be implemented in the case of an exit. That proposal would apply only to cash assets, and not to personal property (principal residence, etc.).

By applying a progressive exchange rate when moving from the euro to the new currency, the amount of cash in the hands of the wealthiest 1 percent would be reduced and wealth redistributed to households.

Pages