What's new
Frozen in Carbonite

Welcome to FiC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

UK Politics The Brexit thread (or All -not- quiet on the western front)

Pretty much. Not so sure if it is just malice bred from stupidity, or stupidity bred from malice.
No, just a worship of a geopolitical mentality that had died an inglorious end a little more than a century ago within the halls of power.
 
No, just a worship of a geopolitical mentality that had died an inglorious end a little more than a century ago within the halls of power.
So, the latter. "No, duh duh duh, duhduhduh, duh, duhduh"
 
Workers' rights are at risk once the UK leaves the EU even if a Brexit deal is struck, research by a leading thinktank has concluded.

The UK and the EU are both expected to agree common minimum standards for working conditions as part of the post-Brexit deal, but the Institute for Public Policy Research warns that the non-regression clauses being proposed to ensure there will be no roll-back of rights will not be a strong enough protection for workers.

The IPPR found that other trade deals struck by the EU led to a weakening of workers' rights in places such as Peru, with the EU reluctant to get involved because it would disrupt the wider trade deal.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...isk-after-brexit-even-in-event-of-deal-report
And of course, the most likely to, be impacted are the most uninformed ones, those who voted for this.

"Colleagues will not tolerate a half in, half out Brexit," said Baker, who served as a junior Brexit minister in May's government until he resigned in protest at her Brexit proposals.

If May secures a deal with the EU, she has to get the British parliament to approve it and would need the backing of about 320 lawmakers to get approval.

If 40 of her lawmakers voted against a possible deal, the fate of the government and exit process would depend on the opposition Labour Party, which has indicated it will vote against almost any deal May might secure.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...wn-brexit-deal-ex-minister-says-idUSKCN1MJ0KL
Yeah, a deal need both party to compromise, and sadly it is more and more obvious that there is no compromising possible inside May's own party, so how could there it be any with the EU ?
 
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-is-embarrassing-for-the-brits/
When the country's top Tories compare the EU to the Soviet Union, or describe its goals as akin to Adolf Hitler's, that may be music to the ears of a handful of diehard Brexiteers who fantasize about being liberated from a Brussels-controlled gulag. But to everyone else it's ridiculous and, frankly, pretty embarrassing. Listen up, London: Most of us in Europe speak English. We hear you. And you're embarrassing yourself and your country.

[...]

After decades of lies about Brussels from opportunistic politicians in need of a scapegoat, and as many years of overwhelmingly negative media coverage, Brits decided in 2016 to leave the European Union. And that vote should be respected. But the referendum campaign and the negotiation that has followed have made it clear that the U.K. has lost its pragmatism and been taken over by hard-nose ideologues and opportunists instead. Despite the assurances of some, Brexit talks are not a negotiation among equals. It's 27 against one; hundreds of millions against 65 million. Any damage done to the EU from a no-deal Brexit will pale in comparison to the intensely focused damage done to the U.K. This seemingly obvious fact is clear as day to Europe, but still appears to escape millions of Brits.

[...]

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt thought he'd get a few laughs from the old Eton boys and make a bit of a splash at the Conservative Party conference by comparing Brussels to the Soviet Union. Mission accomplished. But at what price? Europeans were outraged. And that outrage could have serious consequences at the negotiating table. It would be petty for the EU to take offense at one poor taste remark. But Hunt's "joke" is just the latest in a long string of insults. And while these comments are clearly intended for domestic consumption, U.K. leaders should realize continental Europeans hear them loud and clear.
The comment section is hilarious, BTW. It makes for a self-demonstrating article.
 
The Brexit clusterfuck sounds so very familiar for some reason...
If you watched seaQuest, then it should but in reverse, as there was a Frenchxit in that universe instead of a Brexit.
 
Michel Barnier has claimed a Brexit deal could be within reach by next Wednesday but warned the prime minister that only by abandoning a key red line and agreeing to a customs union can impediments on trade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK be avoided.

The UK would have to give up on its plans for free-trade deals with China and the US under such an agreement, the EU's chief negotiator insisted, but otherwise a customs and regulatory border within the territory of Britain will have to be erected.

The EU's contentious proposal for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland after Brexit is for Northern Ireland to, in effect, stay in the customs union and remain under single market regulations, while the rest of the UK withdraws.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-may-must-agree-on-customs-union-says-barnier
Sadly, while it would be the most sensible things for the UK to do (if only as a transition), it would request May to think about her country and not about her party.
 
Theresa May cannot say she has not been warned. Brexit poses a mounting threat to the unity of the UK. Nor can she dispute the eminence of those who have been doing the warning. During the referendum campaign in 2016, John Major counselled that a British exit could "tear apart" the UK. This past summer, Gordon Brown arguedBritain was at serious risk of "being permanently paralysed by seemingly irreparable divisions". These are serious voices.

To the unwary, their warnings might seem to have been directed at receptive ears. Few serving prime ministers express their commitment to the union more often or more clearly than May. She calls it her "beloved union". Last week, at her party conference, she called it her "precious union". It would be wrong to doubt the sincerity of such words. But the impact of Brexit on the union is now more threatening than ever, and May seems to possess a wholly inadequate armoury of words, ideas and actions to mitigate or prevent it.

When May talked about the union in Birmingham, it was clear from the context that she was thinking primarily about the union with Northern Ireland. Given that the Irish border is, by her own admission, the crunch issue at stake in the Brexit negotiations, this is hardly a surprise. What is more surprising is that, as a supporter of the union, she has been so obtuse about accepting the political consequences of what needs to be done.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...heresa-may-uk-scotland-northern-ireland-union
One could of course argue, and I am among them, that the unity of the UK was threatened as soon as May pretended that Brexit was the will of the people, ignoring not only the 48% of voters that voted against, but also, and most importantly, the 62.5% of the voting population that didn't vote in favour of it.
 
According to Le Monde, quoting the Financial Times itself behind a paywall, May is surrendering to EU on the Irish question: Northern Ireland would remain in the European Single Market and the rest of UK would remain in the customs union. The cost for UK is simple, and it is the possibility to sign independent trade deals with the rest of the planet.

In a very surprising turnabout, sanity seems to prevail after all of this, concluding with UK simply renouncing most of its decision privileges within the Union instead of committing national suicide. Of course, it remains to be seen whether the Parliament will vote for this.
 
Last edited:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-may-must-agree-on-customs-union-says-barnier
Sadly, while it would be the most sensible things for the UK to do (if only as a transition), it would request May to think about her country and not about her party.

Assuming May thinks at all.

No one likes May right now. Not her own party, not people that voted leave, not people that voted stay.

According to Le Monde, quoting the Financial Times itself behind a paywall, May is surrendering to EU on the Irish question: Northern Ireland would remain in the European Single Market and the rest of UK would remain in the customs union. The cost for UK is simple, and it is the possibility to sign independent trade deals with the rest of the planet.

In a very surprising turnabout, sanity seems to prevail after all of this, concluding with UK simply renouncing most of its decision privileges within the Union instead of committing national suicide. Of course, it remains to be seen whether the Parliament will vote for this.

SO, in essence:
"Fuck you, fuck your people, you get nothing, fuck you, fuck you, and britain can go burn"

In essence.

Very good negotiation ability from May and an amazingly diplomatic EU /s

Ya, no. You're proving UKIP right.
 
SO, in essence:
"Fuck you, fuck your people, you get nothing, fuck you, fuck you, and britain can go burn"

In essence.

Very good negotiation ability from May and an amazingly diplomatic EU /s

Ya, no. You're proving UKIP right.
That's cute.

Now that you have very stupidly opened your mouth, please show your wisdom in dealing with the Irish question, which is one among many in Brexit.

FACT: The British Isles are divided into two countries, UK and the Republic of Ireland.
FACT: the island of Ireland is divided into two parts, Northern Ireland, part of UK, and the Republic of Ireland.
FACT: the Troubles, long period of religious and political violence between Irish communities, was stopped thanks to the Good Friday agreement, involving among other things free circulation of people and goods between each part of the island of Ireland.

Now, after considering these facts and the Brexit vote, choose among the following options:

A) Establish a border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, voiding the Good Friday agreement, restarting the Troubles.
B) Establish a border between Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom, splitting UK as a country.
C) Establish a border between the Republic of Ireland and EU, against the will of the Republic of Ireland.
D) Obi-Wan Kenobi.
E) Do not create any new border, therefore still being de facto in the economic territory of the European Union and thus subject to its laws and regulations.

Any other option you want to suggest will have to be backed with international legislation, precedents and documents showing both sides would agree upon it. Bad faith debating will get you reported right away.
 
That's cute.

Now that you have very stupidly opened your mouth, please show your wisdom in dealing with the Irish question, which is one among many in Brexit.

FACT: The British Isles are divided into two countries, UK and the Republic of Ireland.
FACT: the island of Ireland is divided into two parts, Northern Ireland, part of UK, and the Republic of Ireland.
FACT: the Troubles, long period of religious and political violence between Irish communities, was stopped thanks to the Good Friday agreement, involving among other things free circulation of people and goods between each part of the island of Ireland.

Now, after considering these facts and the Brexit vote, choose among the following options:

A) Establish a border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, voiding the Good Friday agreement, restarting the Troubles.
B) Establish a border between Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom, splitting UK as a country.
C) Establish a border between the Republic of Ireland and EU, against the will of the Republic of Ireland.
D) Obi-Wan Kenobi.
E) Do not create any new border, therefore still being de facto in the economic territory of the European Union and thus subject to its laws and regulations.

Any other option you want to suggest will have to be backed with international legislation, precedents and documents showing both sides would agree upon it. Bad faith debating will get you reported right away.

The fact is, a large chunk of the Corbynites and Tories are both supportive of Hard Brexit for their own ideological purposes, and they will sink any bill that promises less when it comes to Parliament.
 
Poverty AND a return to the Troubles. Impressive policymaking indeed. Talk about taking back control.
It'll probably cause the Queen to step in with the ungodly horror show that this sort of mentality would create. Probably would simply sack the entire thing and rule via the bureaucracy for at least a few months, probably -given the factions involved- a year or more.
 
That's cute.

Now that you have very stupidly opened your mouth, please show your wisdom in dealing with the Irish question, which is one among many in Brexit.

FACT: The British Isles are divided into two countries, UK and the Republic of Ireland.
FACT: the island of Ireland is divided into two parts, Northern Ireland, part of UK, and the Republic of Ireland.
FACT: the Troubles, long period of religious and political violence between Irish communities, was stopped thanks to the Good Friday agreement, involving among other things free circulation of people and goods between each part of the island of Ireland.

Now, after considering these facts and the Brexit vote, choose among the following options:

A) Establish a border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, voiding the Good Friday agreement, restarting the Troubles.
B) Establish a border between Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom, splitting UK as a country.
C) Establish a border between the Republic of Ireland and EU, against the will of the Republic of Ireland.
D) Obi-Wan Kenobi.
E) Do not create any new border, therefore still being de facto in the economic territory of the European Union and thus subject to its laws and regulations.

Any other option you want to suggest will have to be backed with international legislation, precedents and documents showing both sides would agree upon it. Bad faith debating will get you reported right away.

It's like you didn't even...
The cost for UK is simple, and it is the possibility to sign independent trade deals with the rest of the planet.

That is the "fuck you" from the EU.
 
It's like you didn't even...


That is the "fuck you" from the EU.
No, it's common sense. If you have no border for goods with EU, you cannot force the EU to have products enter on terms other than EU's... Unless you believe California can establish its own trade deals with China.
 
No, it's common sense. If you have no border for goods with EU, you cannot force the EU to have products enter on terms other than EU's... Unless you believe California can establish its own trade deals with China.

California isn't a nation. And I recall a rather large amount of open ocean around the UK.
 
California isn't a nation. And I recall a rather large amount of open ocean around the UK.
If UK doesn't want borders for goods, people and services with the rest of EU, then it is in the same position as California with the US where trade is concerned.

Why would the EU accept that someone else decides what can enter its customs territory without its permission or say-so, huh? UK could have kept its say-so... if it remained in the Union.
 
California isn't a nation. And I recall a rather large amount of open ocean around the UK.
You realize that it shares a land border in Ireland, right? Not to mention that a hard border for the Chunnel will fuck up transportation of goods badly.
 
You realize that it shares a land border in Ireland, right? Not to mention that a hard border for the Chunnel will fuck up transportation of goods badly.
This, plus the Good Friday agreement that stopped things like mortar attacks on Downing Street. And the detail that UK wants access to the EU customs union, a request that has no reason whatsoever to come with a loss of control of the Union on its own markets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EiC
Essentially, Brexit is dumb. The only real reasons boil down to idiotic populist xenophobia/racism. It got media support explicitly because Rupert Murdoch sees the EU politicians as LESS corrupt than the British ones. He actually said that the British ones do whatever he tells them, but the EU ones won't even talk to him.
 
Essentially, Brexit is dumb. The only real reasons boil down to idiotic populist xenophobia/racism. It got media support explicitly because Rupert Murdoch sees the EU politicians as LESS corrupt than the British ones. He actually said that the British ones do whatever he tells them, but the EU ones won't even talk to him.
Populists and corporate drones tend to really dislike how much more transparent and democratic the EU is compared to most national government, thus their constant propaganda campaigns.
 
I could at least understand the sovereignty concern if it weren't surrounded and propped up by so much histrionic nonsense. I get why it's pushed, though; with the UK already the super-special snowflake of the EU, selling Brexit without distortion and lies would have been tough.

I don't think it boils down to xenophobia, though. Sure, there's plenty of it around and it did matter, and some of propaganda goes back decades. However, both xenophobia and more general anti-establishment votes tend to explode when people feel an economic crunch and the government is perceived as making it worse. When people feel they're being screwed, it's natural if unfortunate for all kinds of scapegoats to be blamed.

One of the ironies is that the UK being a currency-sovereign snowflake, its turning hard toward austerity had much less to do with anything in the rest of the EU. That too was an unforced, self-inflicted wound.
 
Back
Top Bottom