The Brexit Thread

[ad hoc]

Who are the defensive Corbynites?

Anyway as the opposition Labour's job is to act in opposition to the government. Not in opposition to Brexit. Obviously as Brexit is one piece of government policy (albeit an unusual one in that there is actual evidence that a majority of voters specifically voted for it), and as such they are opposing it. Not in the way perhaps that all of us would like, but they are doing that. We can imagine that Brexit is the only thing happening right now but in truth it isn't

Anyway, as ever this thread depresses the fuck out of me and I regret even contributing to it I don't agree with Labour's approach to Brexit, but (a) I can at least see what they're up against and what they are trying to balance in their opposition;and (b) the fact that so many on here just spend post after post obsessing about what Labour are doing and not what is being done by those with the actual ability to make change is at best depressing and at worst deeply infuriating. If I occasionally respond with sarcasm to this painful truth rather than ALL CAPS SCREAMING then I guess I'll live with the anger that causes others.

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

Who are the defensive Corbynites?

(b) the fact that so many on here just spend post after post obsessing about what Labour are doing and not what is being done by those with the actual ability to make change is at best depressing and at worst deeply infuriating

Considering the malevolence of most Tory policy is pretty much taken as read on here, both on Brexit and more generally, there is, if anything, more text typed by posters on all sides of the debate on here highlighting that malevolence in the Brexit context than one might expect. There's a limit to the value of a fifty-fold repeat of our pretty much universal OTF concensus that May is a ghastly xenophobic catastrophe for the country, that B Johnson is a ruthlessly cynical opportunist lying piece of shit etc etc etc. Labour's policy gets a lot of attention and argument on here because it's the subject of major disagreement amongst us. What is there to get depressed about from observing that issues we disagree on get more text than those wa all agree on?

And as for the "with the actual ability to make change" thing, that is such a cop out. Every MP should be voting with his or her conscience in the interests of the country, and appropriately discounting the bullshit about "will of the people" based on a super-thin majority which probably doesn't exist 30 months on, due to both changes of mind and for the passing of generations given the collosally age-skewed voting pattern, and was secured by a probably Kremlin-subsidised pack of lies. But for some MPs that is rather easier than others. No Labour MP is going to get deselected for opposing Brexit, as the party membership are on balance heavily Remain. A Tory MP opposing Brexit runs a real risk of deselection given that Tory activists are majority Leave. More than a dozen of them (my own MP Heidi Allen foremost among them) are doing that anyway. It is just killing me that their rebellion is likely to be wasted because the official Opposition is willing to support Brexit.

[ad hoc]

Except that the only Labour MPs who have voted for pro Brexit positions in Parliament have been people like Hoey. Time after time after time .

I'd still like to know who the Corbynites are on here .

[Nefertiti2]

Labour may or may not be able to stop Brexit, in conjunction with the other non-Tory/DUP parites and with the significant number of Tory Remainer rebels, who collectively would have a majority in the absence of the Labour Brexiters such as Hoey, Flint, Skinner et al. Snake can shout as many times as he likes that Labour "can't stop Brexit", that doesn't make it true. The truth is, they won't know unless they try.

The shame and disgrace of it is that Corbyn is not even trying to stop Brexit, apart from a half-hearted token effort or two. Because, just as much as May, he totally buys into (a) the lies about the "will of the people" and (b) the fantasies about what kind of Brexit is possible. The Labour leadership have absolutely no excuse for letting the majority of their voters and their members down by colluding in Brexit as they are doing, even if the Tories and the Labour Brexiter rebels are even worse.

Labour's excuses are pathetic.

They've repeatedly tried. Conservatives who are opposed to brexit but won't stop the MAy ERG runaway train are people you should spend yourt time dealing with. and HOW SHOULD CORBYN STOP BREXIT?

[Nefertiti2]

I'm a "much happier that the left is in charge of the Labour party instead of the Spads, privatisers, warmongers, torturers and jobsworths"-ite @adhoc.

[Nefertiti2]

I could imagine a different leader- but Corbyn's the one we've got. Was just in the Netherlands and thinking about how British cities have been fucked up inthe last thirty years made me so angry.

[Nefertiti2]

https://twitter.com/HuffPostUKPol/status/1094730323278159875

Blame Corbyn

[Lucy Waterman]

I am a Corbynite. Tubby is a Militant entryist. Snake is I believe vice-chair of Progress.

EEG is Rebecca Long-Bailey.

[Tubby Isaacs]

a super-thin majority which probably doesn't exist 30 months on, due to both changes of mind and for the passing of generations given the collosally age-skewed voting pattern

I think the demographic point might be overdone, but you might well be right about the electorate. Corbyn and activisits he motivated (to the immense credit of each) spurred a lot of people to register in 2017.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7777931.html

My impression is that these are new voters who didn't vote in the referendum and mainly young/ progressive. Some will be people who turned 18 in the interim, but lots won't.

[ad hoc]

I'm a "much happier that the left is in charge of the Labour party instead of the Spads, privatisers, warmongers, torturers and jobsworths"-ite @adhoc.

Yes that's about my position too. Sometimes it seems that anyone who doesn't utterly loathe Corbyn and everything he stands for is by definition a "Corbynite".

[Nefertiti2]

Also as soon as the Labour party elected a Leader who uncodntionally supported recognition of Palestine it was going to face unceasing attacks from a coalition of the pro Likud section of the Jewish Community - linked to the right of the Conservative party and certain orthodox traditions that deny Reform and secular Judaism the right to be heard.

That's what happened to Ed Miliband, son of two holocaust survivors. It's happened to Corbyn too.

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

HOW SHOULD CORBYN STOP BREXIT?

By calling for the cancellation of the Article 50 notice and the holding of a second referendum, instead of saying we should have Brexit with some tweaks to May's plan. There are several grounds that can be invoked in support of that position (in anticipation of the "will of the people" crap that would be used to attack it), I'm sure I don't need to repeat them all here.

"It wouldn't win a majority" is absolutely not a sound justification for not calling for the right thing to be done. It would win a majority, with the support of Remainer rebel Tories, if it weren't for the likes of Hoey and Flint. It's a tough call, with cynical lying shits like Johnson and dangerous neo-imperialist fantasists like Gavin Williamson around, but I really do think the worst circle of hell should be reserved for the likes of Kate Hoey.

[Nefertiti2]

"By calling for the cancellation of the Article 50 notice and the holding of a second referendum,"

So he can't stop brexit. and in doing something whihc you ackowledge to be ineffective he wouldlose his credibility with large sections of the electorate.

Kate Hoey. Imposed on Vauxhall by Tony Blair to prevent a black woman getting the seat

[San Bernardhinault]

Did anybody say he could stop Brexit? What he could be doing, and should have been doing for the last two years, is making the case for why we should stop Brexit, for why being in the EU is way better than not, for why freedom of movement is a massive benefit and a massive human right that is being removed. For one, if someone was making that case it would be way harder for the current government to get away with so much of their bullshit and lies. And for another, it would position the Labour Party way better for when Britain does go to shit after Brexit. And for another it would make it far easier to make the case to return to the EU when it becomes apparent that Britain needs to.

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

What SB said.

[Nefertiti2]

and he should ignore the fact that the majority voted the other way

[Snake Plissken]

So basically he’s got to argue to overturn a majority decision from a minority position.

It’s almost as if people need him to fail.

I note that the Lib Dem’s and Sensible Remainers have been conspicuous by their absence in putting forward these amendments. The argument is that anything put down by the Labour front bench would be voted down but surely Vince, Soubry and Chukka would be willing to put something forward? Or are they still trying to get JK Rowling to lead their new party?

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

So basically he’s got to argue to overturn a majority decision from a minority position.

It’s almost as if people need him to fail.

Oh, he's acting from a minority position? Fair point! In that case he shouldn't try to oppose Government policy and argue a strong case for something different. That kind of action is for opposition leaders who have a parliamentary majority.

[Snake Plissken]

The words “majority decision” are conspicuousl by their absence.

[ad hoc]

SB makes a good point. .. but then you realise NOBODY is doing this. Not Corbyn, not Cable, not Blair, not Soubry. Not only is nobody doing it now but nobody did it during the referendum when it would actually have been really valuable. Saying "Brexit will be a disaster" as so many of us are (me included) is all that is being said in opposition.

Meanwhile, I recommend this piece from today's Guardian. This, I submit, is basically the starting point of the Labour front bench strategy. If Labour had simply done Brexit opposition for the last 2-3 years would it have done anything to help make anything better? Obviously we can't know, but my suspicion is that we'd currently have a Tory government with a huge majority ramming through the hardest most right wing ideologically driven Brexit imaginable. With no meaningful opposition anywhere. We can argue that Labour is doing a good or a bad job of pursuing its strategy. But deep down I think the strategy itself is almost certainly the correct one (and it took me a while to get to that realisation, because for ages I just wanted everything to be "stop Brexit").

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...y_to_clipboard

[hobbes]

Yeah. I think had Labour done what SB wants for the last couple of years, we'd have a massive Tory majority right now and the press would have eviscerated Labour completely.
And people would have gone for them as a scapegoat. As it us all the Heil and the Tory graph had was calling judges traitors which didn't sit well with anyone.
I think SB, you underestimate the febrile atmosphere back here in Blighty. If Labour had been explicitly pro reversal from the start they'd be finished. It's only in the last 3 months that it's become even slightly possible without getting destroyed.

[Snake Plissken]

Yeah but Corbyn would have been forced out and that is the main thing.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I mean where are we now? 7 weeks out?

Labour might be supporting Norway but it might not. It hasn't told anyone this comes with freedom of movement.

I think the Single Market was the thing to argue for first, rather than freedom of movement. But can't see a proper case has been made for that. Ought to have been very easy. And no fucking state aid waffle.

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

Yeah but Corbyn would have been forced out and that is the main thing.

The main thing for whom? In the context of Brexit, which is a long-term catastrophe for Britain, and the single most important thing to happen to the UK (well, jointly with EU accession I suppose) since 1945, do you have any idea just what a triviality the identity of Labour's leader in the short term is? Do you really think the 750,000 people marching for a 2nd referendum in London consider personnel changes at the head of Labour to be the big issue of the day? If so, you (and any other Corbynites who think the same) are narcissistic beyond belief. It really isn't about you. We couldn't give a flying toss.

[Nefertiti2]

SK is saying that for Corbyn’s opponents getting rid of the left leadership Is the main thing. There weren’t 750 000 -(I was there)