Brexit

707 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

I read an interesting factoid about the now-famous online petition demanding a higher standard of consensus for the EU referendum. 

It's now got over 4 million signatures.

Prior to the referendum, it had 22 signatures.

Evidently a higher standard of consensus is very important to voters... who just lost.

quizzical

Mr.Magoo wrote:
  Or does "the status quo" naturally win when a mandate for change doesn't?

yup. because the 18-24 year olds said so.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Well, I suppose I'd agree with them.  Seems to me that nearly any referendum is a choice between doing something new, and not, so:

Should we:

a) increase taxes/change our electoral model/sign the agreement/leave

b) same taxes/same model/not sign the agreement/stay

I can't see how it could work to impose a supermajority on BOTH sides when there's a possibility of neither side ever meeting that supermajority.  How is any goverenment supposed to solve the problem of not being mandated to change things (because that side didn't hit 60%) but also not being permitted to not change things (because that side also didn't reach 60%)?

That isn't to say that a supermajority for the "change" side is or isn't appropriate.  Personally, speaking for just me, I'm inclined to agree that for huge decisions it kind of makes sense, but others may disagree.  The UK went with 50%+1 (totally ignoring the wishes of those 22 petition signatories!) -- I think that's the same threshold that the Sherbrooke Declaration specifies, for pretty much the same sort of choice.  As a non-Quebecois, non-Briton I'll stay agnostic on both.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I think that the only "natural" decision point is 50% plus one. Any other, higher number is clearly arbitrary. And it is a movable goal post. Therefore, I propose that any given super-majority requirement should only be created by a prior referendum which is subject to the proposed super-majority to pass. Thus, if we wished to place a super-majority of 60% on referendum X, we would need to pass an authorizing referendum first, with a 60% majority. If this pre-referendum should fail, then referendum X would succeed at 50% plus one.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

I'm not sure that everyone would love to need two referendums, but other than that... geez, that's actually a pretty good idea.

NDPP

Brexit: A Different Democracy, A Different Future  -  by Christopher Black

http://journal-neo.org/2016/07/02/brexit-a-different-democracy-a-differe...

"A shft has occurred in the economic and political power structure in Europe and it has implications for the whole world. Produced by failure of the EU's version of 'democracy' and by its neo-liberal economic model, they have only themselves to blame for the British vote.

The world finance capital is now readjusting, trying to save its position. We can expect that, whatever they do, it will not be for the benefit of the majority but only for themselves, unless the left wakes up - to the opportunity to demand a different future, a different democracy - and unless the people wake up to the left."

 

Dead Brexit Walking  -  by Pepe Escobar

http://sptnkne.ws/b9Pc

"This is all about no more American Trojan Horse in Brussels. No more TTIP. Germany and France making all big European decisions without a Five Eyes looking in.

Exceptionalist shills immediately started spinning that the only solution for Brexit is more NATO and its corollary: further demonization of Russia.

Occult by all these machinations is the stark fact that the sole purpose of NATO now, - apart from losing wars in Central Asia and destroying nations in Northern Africa - is to perpetuate the military occupation of Europe.

And for that, NATO badly relies on anti-Russia hysteria..."

 

 

mark_alfred

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I read an interesting factoid about the now-famous online petition demanding a higher standard of consensus for the EU referendum. 

It's now got over 4 million signatures.

Prior to the referendum, it had 22 signatures.

Evidently a higher standard of consensus is very important to voters... who just lost.

Utter hypocritical stupidity, IMO.

 

CBC Radio had an interesting interview with one of the very few pollsters who correctly called a win for Exit.  The pollster said that after the murder of Jo Cox there was a rash of judgemental comments being directed toward the Exit side from the Remain side.  So, those with sympathies to Exit became silent and resentful of being tarred and feathered due (according to the pollster) to the tragedy, and thus became silently determined.  This led pollsters to wrongly believe that Remain was polling ahead.  Others on the fence who had doubts about the EU but were leery of leaving due to potential financial repercussions became resentful that their doubts were being mocked so vociferously by the Remain side after the tragedy (according to the pollster).  Thus Exit won.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Everyone got Brexit wrong because they didn't want it to happen. All the big money was riding on remain, but the number of punters betting on Leave outnumbered the ones betting on Remain. When they give odds on political events they only match up the money. The average bet for Remain was £470 while the average bet for Exit was £72. It is no wonder the odds for Remain were around 80%. At the end of the day the betting shops have to make money, which is the main deal about odds. When it came down to one person one vote, Exit won. 

Brexit was a f*** you to Europe, a f*** you to the bankers in London, a f*** you to the Canadian running the Bank of England, a f*** you to David Cameron and George Osborne, and a f*** you to the Tory and Labour parties. The closest thing to this deal in Canada was Charlottetown which had many of the same strains of f*** you discontent. 

Now it looks like a lady named May will become Prime Minister, but just not in this country.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

The EU has a history of ignoring referenda and/or electoral outcomes they don't like. It's worth mentioning ...

 

1. Greek Referendum on financial bailout, etc. - ignored;

2. French vote on the EU constitution - ditto;

3. Irish vote on the Treaty of Nice - ditto;

4. Netherlands vote on Ukraine ascension to EU - same.

Anyone else notice a pattern here? [details may not be exact]

Secondly,

I've seen a few posts drawing attention to the expansion of EU and that of NATO as linked; these organizations are really in lock step and, in cases like Ukraine, etc., the EU is really being used as a instrument to militarize and entangle countries into the predatory NATO US-run Empire.

Cody87

mark_alfred wrote:

CBC Radio had an interesting interview with one of the very few pollsters who correctly called a win for Exit.  The pollster said that after the murder of Jo Cox there was a rash of judgemental comments being directed toward the Exit side from the Remain side.  So, those with sympathies to Exit became silent and resentful of being tarred and feathered due (according to the pollster) to the tragedy, and thus became silently determined.  This led pollsters to wrongly believe that Remain was polling ahead.  Others on the fence who had doubts about the EU but were leery of leaving due to potential financial repercussions became resentful that their doubts were being mocked so vociferously by the Remain side after the tragedy (according to the pollster).  Thus Exit won.

In other words, all the accusations of "racist" and "bigot" succeeded in getting people to shut up, but didn't actually change their opinion?

And further, that when these accusations were levelled unfairly, it alienated those it was levelled against, and made them determined to "leave"?

(sarcasm) Funny, I always thought name calling and mocking people was an effective way to change hearts and minds. (/sarcasm)

I'm still waiting to see a good pro-Remain argument. I am flabbergasted that some people here are still claiming that "old people who don't have to suffer the consequences [subtext: because they'll die soon] voted to leave and ruined it for the youth!" Ruined what? Being ruled by an unaccountable, unelected body that frequently ignores the will of the people and works to enrich the very richest members of society at the expense of everyone else? Are working class people in Europe better off than they were before the trend towards globalization?

It is the youth who have fallen for the disgusting, dangerous diversionary tactics of the plutocrats who are desperately trying to preserve their globalist agenda by playing the racism card.

Also, I should give a shout out to Orange Crushed - I agree with #533 completely.

NorthReport

Post-Brexit, Britain may need "Hotel California" model

After the self-inflicted wound of voting to quit the European Union, Britain's best option to limit the mutual economic and political damage could be called the "Hotel California" model.

As in the 1977 Eagles hit, "You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave".

Once the dust settles, Britain could "check out" of the EU by handing in its notice, but effectively stay half-way in the world's biggest trading bloc by joining the European Economic Area along with Norway. It could negotiate enhanced political cooperation in foreign policy and security, and might even get a voice, though not a vote, in some EU deliberations.

Yet that next-best solution seems unlikely to prevail.


http://news.trust.org/item/20160703080058-mbhli

NorthReport

It would not surprise to see Mark Carney bail on the Brits now, as there is little chance of an improved financial situation for the foreseeable future.

Intrigue and betrayal stalk UK’s corridors of power

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1e4bc772-3f71-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html

NDPP

Blaming Brexit on Putin and Voters (the People) (Stephen F Cohen)

http://eastwestaccord.com/podcast-blaming-brexit-putin-voters-people-ste...

 

NorthReport

This is only going to get worse. Much, much, worse.

Brexit campaign ‘criminally irresponsible’, says legal academic

Liverpool University professor says claims were ‘at best misrepresentations and at worst outright deception’

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-mich...

NorthReport

It's a wee bit late, doncha think!

Brexit research suggests 1.2 million Leave voters regret their choice in reversal that could change result

The research suggests that if a second referendum were held, the vote would be much closer

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-second-eu-refe...

NorthReport

The big problem the Brits now face is that they have a bunch of affluent right-wingers in charge of the country who are there to strictly line their own pockets, and don't give a twit about the future of the country. No matter what happens in England, these Conservatives, Cameron, Johnson, May, Gove, etc. will still be able to fly off to their favourite vacation spots in their private jets, etc., unlike Joe and Jane worker who need to work to put a roof over their head, and food on the table. Don't worry though, as class war is alive and well.

NorthReport

From what I have seen Juncker certainly has not helped matters.

Angela Merkel 'to oust Jean-Claude Juncker' as Europe splits deepen over Brexit response

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/03/angela-merkel-to-oust-jean-cl...

NorthReport

The European Union and the Misery of Bigness

Brexit voters should recognize Leopold Kohr's belief that large institutions concentrate power and ignore local needs.

 

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/06/23/EU-Misery-of-Bigness/

NorthReport

Harry Smith: This Is Not the Britain I Fought For

Once united in purpose against terrible threats, my nation dissolved into selfish factions.

 

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/06/29/Harry-Smith-Not-Britain-I-Fought-For/

brookmere

ikosmos wrote:
The EU has a history of ignoring referenda and/or electoral outcomes they don't like. It's worth mentioning ...

The EU has no mandate to recognize any referendum by a member state. Relations between the EU and member states are conducted as specified by treaty. It's up to the member state to decide how to act on the results of any referendum.

As for ignoring electoral outcomes... are you suggesting the EU does not recognize the results of elections in member states as conducted under their own laws? That's news to me.

 

josh

brookmere wrote:

ikosmos wrote:
The EU has a history of ignoring referenda and/or electoral outcomes they don't like. It's worth mentioning ...

The EU has no mandate to recognize any referendum by a member state. Relations between the EU and member states are conducted as specified by treaty. It's up to the member state to decide how to act on the results of any referendum.

As for ignoring electoral outcomes... are you suggesting the EU does not recognize the results of elections in member states as conducted under their own laws? That's news to me.

 


Ask Greece.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

I assumed he meant "countries in the EU".

NorthReport

Now this is what is significant to Canadians about Brexit. Sure beats going to the USA and getting hosed on the massive exchange rate ripoff there.

Brexit vote sees Canadians eye U.K. vacations amid weakened pound

Cheapflights.ca says it experienced a 50% spike in searches for flights from Canada to the U.K.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/brexit-travel-uk-cheaper-for-canadians-1...

 

NorthReport

Yes for many of the Leave supporters, many of whom appear now to be having second thoughts. Oops! 

Is the Brexit vote nostalgia for the bygone glories of the British Empire?

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/who-s-voting-trump-nostalgia-fo...

NorthReport

U.K. Tory leadership candidate Theresa May won't invoke Brexit legal process this year

Front-runner says Britain needs clear negotiating stance before triggering Article 50

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/theresa-may-brexit-1.3662647

Geoff

Apparently, the EU is going to change its name after the UK leaves. From then on, it will be known as "Germany".

The irony is that those who voted to remain will not be as negatively impacted by the Brexit vote as those who voted to leave.

Scotland would do well to hold its second referendum ASAP, so the Scots can extricate themselves from the mess that the UK has created for itself.  

NorthReport

The Guardian is probably too busy with their Corbyn bashing so they missed this.

As I have suspected all along, Brexit will not impact on these wealthy right-wingers one iota, except perhaps to make themselves richer with all these golden new business opportunities, so they just used the poor Brits once again.

Andrea Leadsom under pressure to 'come clean' amid offshore tax havens claims

The Tory leadership contender has been urged to publish her tax returns

Quote:
Andrea Leadsom, a contender for the Tory leadership, is facing demands to give a complete account of her tax affairs, including her family’s use of trusts and of bank loans raised via a tax haven.

As a former banker with 25 years’ experience, Mrs Leadsom understand finance better than almost any other MP – but her family's past use of legal methods of minimising her family’s tax liabilities could prove an embarrassment in hard fought leadership contest.

She was visibly caught off guard when questioned on BBC 1’s Andrew Marr programme whether , if elected, she would follow David Cameron’s example and publish her tax returns.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-leadership-election-a...

 

 

 

 

NorthReport

Germany should offer young Britons EU citizenship after Brexit, says German Vice-Chancellor

German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel said British people living in Germany should have the right to dual citizenship, as thousands of young people voice their uncertainty in the wake of the Brexit vote

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germany-should-offer-youn...

meanwhile

Theresa May warns future of EU citizens living in the UK is uncertain

'The position at the moment is as it has been, there's no change at the moment, but of course we have to factor that into negotiations'


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-immigration-eu-citi...

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Apparently, the EU is going to change its name after the UK leaves. From then on, it will be known as "Germany".

This is new?  During the Greek meltdown, I don't recall hearing anything of any substance coming from (or being addressed to)  Slovenia, or Malta, or Luxembourg.  It was all Germany, Germany, Germany.

NorthReport

Barack Obama was right – Britain will be back of the queue after Brexit, says US Ambassador

US Ambassador to Britain Matthew Barzun echoes the warning first issued by Barack Obama in April 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-barack-obama-was-ri...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

If that means they avoid T-TIP, the next generation of corporate rights agreement, then maybe Brexit will be good for them.

NorthReport

London Law Firm Says Brexit Can’t Happen Without Parliament Vote

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-03/london-law-firm-says-b...

NorthReport

Brexit has exposed how ignorant the educated and cosmopolitan have become about modern Britain

The gravitational pull of aspiration, central to Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan’s brand of conservatism, has faded as trickle-down economics betrayed so many people

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-eu-referendum-ignorant-educat...

Rev Pesky

For the conspiracy buffs, a conspiracy theory about Brexit.

As we know, Boris Johnson has just pulled himself out of the Conservative leadership race, a great surprise to many who thought he would use the Brexit campaign as a springboard into the Prime Minister's chair. So what happened?

Michael Gove, that's what happened.

Michael Gove and David Cameron were great friends, to the point of having family vacations together, and even 'shared tables at their children's school quizzes.'

Cameron, facing a possible defeat in the 2015 election decides to add a referendum promise to his election campaign. Unfortunately, he wins a majority, and the Liberal-Democrats, coalition partners who might have vetoed the referendum, were gone. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to imagine that one of the people who pressed Cameron to go ahead with the referendum was Gove. I won't go into his history here, but he a Thatcher Tory, with that same combination of ignorance and aggressiveness. I might add vindictiveness, as Gove didn’t take it kindly when he was publicly demoted by Cameron.

So Gove convinces Cameron he has to hold the referendum, and then, well, well, well, Gove comes out in favour of the 'Leave' side. a public repudiation of his old friend Cameron. So far so good. But Gove is no dummy, he realizes that he doesn't want to be the face of the 'Leave' campaign, and casts about for a likely candidate. Enter Boris Johnson.

I'll just digress here a bit. Gove has always denied he had any dreams of leading the Tories. Certainly this is well known in Tory circles. So...

When Gove visits Johnson and convinces Johnson to join, and in fact lead, the 'Leave' campaign, Johnson sees the potential for himself as the potential future leader of the Tory party. Gove, with his long history of denial of leadership apsirations, is not a threat. And so off Boris goes, leads the 'Leave' campaign to victory, Cameron announces his resignation, and Johnson is home free.

Except for one small detail. Michael Gove, the person who has been the brains of the 'Leave' campaign, calls a press conference just hours before the deadline to enter the Tory leadership race arrives. Before Johnson can announce his own very much expected candidacy, Gove announces that he no longer backs Johnson as the leader-to-be of the Tory party, but that it is himself, Michael Gove, who will be running.

Johnson realizes that he has no chance of winning (partly because he is hated by the ‘Remain’ Tories, and partly because Gove was his support on the ‘Leave’ side), and drops out.

Gove makes a snide comment about the fact Johnson dropped out after his own 'droppng in', saying, 'well, the fact Boris dropped out when faced with a little competition is telling...'

So here is the theory. Michael Gove, in a move to enact revenge for Cameron demoting him in Cabinet, talks him into adding the referendum idea to the campaign. Then, without the moderating influence of the Liberal-Democrats, talks Cameron into actually holding the referendum, realizing that Cameron can’t win no matter what. If ‘Remain’ wins, Cameron keeps his support in the business community, but loses most of his support in the Tory ‘heartland’. If ‘Leave wins, Cameron loses his support in the business community, and any support he may get from the working class will most likely not translate into votes come election time.

Then Gove seeks out Johnson, and convinces him to be the public face of the ‘Leave’ campaign. Again, despite what Johnson might think, there’s no winning for him either. He will be seen as a grasping politician, trying to use the campaign to further his own career (which, of course, is exactly what it was, courtesy Michael Gove’s whisper in his ear), and not likely making many friends within the Tory party or the business community.

The stage is now set. The media, especially the one Gove used to work for, Rupert Murdoch (and where Gove’s wife still works), concentrate on Johnson as the ‘Leave’ head man. If ‘Remain wins, Gove’s plans are delayed a bit, but Cameron will most likely lose out no matter what, so the chances are there will be a leadership opening whether ‘Remain’ wins or loses.

As it turns out ‘Leave’ wins in a close vote, but before Johnson can announce his run for the leadership of the Conservatives, Gove intervenes and cuts him off. Now Cameron is gone, and Johnson is gone, and Gove has the opening he was looking for, and a reasonable chance to step into the Prime Minister’s residence.

Or, in as few words as possible, the whole referendum thing had nothing at all to do with the EU. It was a plot conceived and executed by Michael Gove to unseat the man who had shamed him publicly, and put himself into the prime minister’s chair. Machiavelli would have been in awe...

NDPP

You Voted For A Revolution...You Got A Blair Robot  -  by Peter Hitchens

https://t.co/Y7XVmg9nPg

"So 17 million people voted for a revolutionary change in the way we are governed, and the result is going to be Theresa May. Those ignored multitudes were not, I think, hoping for yet another Blairite robot, a living symbol of everything that is wrong with our political system. But this is what they are going to get..."

 

Chunky Mark: Cruel Britannia - Theresa May: 'The Future of EU Citizens is Not Guaranteed'

https://youtu.be/rVza_qju9OM

Rev Pesky

And another party leader goes:

Nigel Farage resigns

Quote:
..."I have never been, and I have never wanted to be, a career politician. My aim in being in politics was to get Britain out of the European Union," the 52-year-old said.

"So I feel it's right that I should now stand aside as leader of UKIP."

One might wonder what's going on. Cameron is gone, Johnson is gone, Farage is gone. I suspect these guys are reading polls that tell them getting out of town for a while might be a good idea.

 

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

For someone that has, in most of what I read about him, been described in unflattering denunciations, Farage showed a remarkable integrity in his recent decision to step down. He achieved what he set out to do and (so he claims) wants his life back now. Interesting.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The right knows it needs a new face to promote the old lines. Otherwise someone who isn't bought and paid for by the people who run the "Square Mile" might get elected and their corporate sponsors would not be pleased.

Rev Pesky

ikosmos wrote:

For someone that has, in most of what I read about him, been described in unflattering denunciations, Farage showed a remarkable integrity in his recent decision to step down. He achieved what he set out to do and (so he claims) wants his life back now. Interesting.

Except he hasn't achieved it. The UK is still in the EU, and isn't showing any signs of leaving, despite the vote. One would think that Farage would be, along with the EU leaders, pressing to get the divorce under way.

NorthReport

Gotta love the British right-wingers
Their health care system is buckling financially at the knees and Osborne and the Tories have decided to make England a tax haven and are cutting corporate taxes

swallow swallow's picture

There's no integrity in what Farage or Johnson have done. They tried to make a campaign against the EU a vehicle for personal self-gratification and their lust for power and/or attention. I don't beleive it occurred to either of them that they;'d win. They planned to lose narrowly and ride the wave of resentment. The vote in their favour dashed their hopes, and they were left to try to do somethign with the consequences of their actions, and they fled the scene. 

The Brexiters will turn on their 'leaders' next (Farage admitted the health care money was a lie; Johnson says Britain could ahve the common market without the EU, etc.), and deservedly so (just as Cameron deserved his fate). Neither Johnson nor Farage had the courage to stick around and try to make their promises into reality. 

NorthReport

Families of Jewish refugees who fled the Nazis want to leave UK for Germany after Brexit

Germany has special citizenship rules for descendants of those who fled HItler's Reich on political, racial, or religious grounds

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-germa...

sherpa-finn

In an omnibus reflection on what the Brexit vote means for the different parties, John Gray argues in The New Stateman (a moderatly left-wing journal) that for their own different reasons, neither Corbyn, Labour moderates or Blairites, both as MPs or general membership, seem capable of addressing the core issue that is actually costing them the electoral base of the Labour Party: immigration. 

The strange death of liberal politics: The world is changing in ways the British left cannot comprehend.

... Clearly Jeremy Corbyn must accept responsibility for Labour’s referendum debacle. Following Hilary Benn’s departure there was a mass resignation of shadow cabinet members and, at the time of writing, the party’s MPs have backed a vote of no confidence by an overwhelming margin. As Tom Watson – in some ways the pivotal figure in Labour – is reported to have told him, Corbyn has lost his authority among MPs. Yet it remains unclear how any coup mounted by MPs could succeed if, as he has repeatedly said he will, Corbyn turns for support to party activists, now the ultimate arbiters of Labour’s fate. The new rules for party membership and leadership elections framed by Ed Miliband (which were supported by the party’s Blairites at the time) may have created an insoluble problem for Labour.

It may not have been Corbyn’s much-criticised detachment from the Remain campaign that led to the haemorrhage of Labour voters to the Leave camp. On the contrary: what sealed Labour’s fate was more likely his only meaningful intervention, when he pointed out that there could be no cap on immigration as long as Britain remained in the EU. Leading Labour figures have denied adamantly that the party’s stance on immigration is central to the collapse of its working-class base. It was a complex of issues to do with de-industrialisation, they repeat, that led to mass desertion by Labour voters. There is some force in this, but it is essentially a way of evading an inconvenient truth.

Free movement of labour between countries with vastly different wage levels, working conditions and welfare benefits is a systemic threat to the job opportunities and living standards of Labour’s core supporters. Labour cannot admit this, because that would mean the EU is structured to make social democracy impossible. This used to be understood, not only on Labour’s Bennite left but also by Keynesian centrists such as Peter Shore and, more recently, Austin Mitchell. Today the fact goes almost unnoticed, except by those who have to suffer the consequences. Figures such as Gisela Stuart, Frank Field and Kate Hoey, who recognise the clash between EU structures and social-democratic values, are a small minority in the party.

Corbyn is not alone in passing over this conflict. So do his opponents, and this is one reason why it will be extremely difficult to reverse Labour’s slide. If Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham or David Miliband had been leader, the referendum would still have ended badly for Labour. No doubt the campaign would have been handled better. But the message would have been the same – promises of European reform that European institutions have shown to be worthless. Labour’s heartlands were already melting away. A rerun in the north and Midlands of Labour’s collapse in Scotland is now a distinct possibility. Fear of this disaster is one reason Labour is unlikely to split. With over 40 per cent of the party’s voters opting for Leave, anyone who joined a new “modernising” party would be on a fast lane to oblivion. Only a radical shift from progressive orthodoxies on immigration and the EU can save Labour from swift and terminal decline. It is doubtful whether any future leader could enforce such a shift, as it would be opposed by most Labour MPs and by activists. Yet it is plainly what millions of Labour voters want.

 

Geoff

It was the Conservatives who made the ill-fated promise to hold a referendum. It was the Conservatives, as the party in power, who led the Remain campaign. It was the Conservatives who failed. Consequently, I don't buy the argument that  Jeremy Corbyn must accept responsibility for Labour’s referendum debacle. This is an attempted rightwing coup against Corbyn. If there had been no  referendum, Corbyn's opponents would have conjured up some other reason to call for his head.

sherpa-finn

Whatever.

You will note that this is not posted in the Corbyn thread. The article is actually about how the Labour Party as a whole (Corbyn, mods, and Blairites) has not yet been able to compellingly and convncingly address the issue of immigration which (the author argues) is the main reason the traditional Labour heartland is in threat of disappearing. So it speaks to a much more existential crisis for Labour/The Left than the latest leadership squabble.   

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Because we all can use a laugh once and awhile here is Stewart Lee on UKIP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw9qN6_eXOg

Rev Pesky

from the posted John Gray article:

Quote:
...Free movement of labour between countries with vastly different wage levels, working conditions and welfare benefits is a systemic threat to the job opportunities and living standards of Labour’s core supporters. Labour cannot admit this, because that would mean the EU is structured to make social democracy impossible.

This is just outright twaddle. Number one, no leftist would agree, nor should agree with the first part of the statement. The systemic threat to the wages and working conditions of labour is, and always has been, capital. In a world where goods are transported across borders as easily as birds fly, it doesn't matter whether the workers are here or there. And in fact, it is the restrictions on movement of labour that create the possiblity of pitting one countries work force aganst anothers.

The second part of the statement seems to be a throw-away line that somehow adds to the first part. Given the first part is nonsense, the second part can't be any less nonsense.

josh

Have to disagree. The EU is a threat to the wage level of workers. It is structured to protect capital while subject workers to a free market.

NorthReport

Congratulations Brexiters, you have unleased the racists. Frown

Three race hate crimes every hour since EU referendum, say Met Police

599 incidents of race hate crime were reported to Scotland Yard between 24 June - the day the Brexit result was announced - and 2 July

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/brexit-race-hate-crime-eu-ref...

Orange Crushed

This would be a good time for the Labour party to call for a crack down on this disgusting outbreak of hate.  And encourage more people to stand up for all vulnerable minorities everywhere.  Immigration has never been the problem, immigration is not only necessary for the health of nations but only adds to its cultural fabric.  Much of what's now seen as traditional British culture was imported from abroad anyhow.  Tea anyone? 

The real underlying problem is the low wage, low tax, low job security policies enforced by global markets, supported by mass media and codified within the EU.  That needs to be explained in more detail and argued more vigorously by the UK left.  If their traditional party is too gutless to take that stand now, then activists should pick it up and force their hand.  That would clarify one of the differences between them and the Tories.    

Pages

Topic locked