With signs of buyer’s remorse already becoming widespread, Simon Wren-Lewis tries to think through how the result of the Brexit referendum might be reversed:
mainly macro: Just how bad will Brexit be, and can it be undone?
But a second referendum would not be necessary if, as a result of Cameron’s resignation, the UK fought a general election where the winning side explicitly campaigned not to invoke Article 50. This general election would become the second referendum.
For this to happen three rather difficult but not impossible things have to happen. The first is that the Labour leadership need to stop talking about `respecting the will of the people’ and focus on how the Leave side are already owning up to their lies and false promises. The second, and perhaps most difficult, is that Labour need to form a united front on the basis of a Remain ticket, involving the LibDems, Greens and SNP. This is the only way the Conservatives and most of the tabloid press will be defeated. Third, the new Conservative leader has to be forced to hold a general election before Article 50 is invoked.
I have responded with the following comment (awaiting moderation and not yet published):
“Some things, when broken, cannot be fixed, or at least it becomes so difficult to do so that it is best to move on and create something new to replace them. Why on earth should the SNP now join an alliance dedicated to reversing Brexit and preserving the Union? I think Scottish Independence within the EU now has to be taken as a given in any future scenario.
Secondly, why would an England beset by financial woes and led by Johnson and Farage continue to pour more money down the drain of N. Ireland than they ever paid to the EU? Ireland will re-unify, not because Unionists (or even some non-aligned and nationalist voters) want it, but because Northern Ireland will be dumped by England. Unionist emotional and family ties are more with Scotland in any case; their economic interests increasing aligned with the Republic of Ireland and the EU.
Lastly, why would the EU – already in an existential crisis – act generously towards their tormentors and welcome the UK back? Frankfurt has the prize of taking over the City’s role already in it’s sights. The German car industry will just have to find other markets elsewhere – politically discredited as it is.
So we are left with a rump England and Wales, angry and embittered, the outcasts of Europe, who have made life difficult for their friends in Gibraltar, Scotland, and Ireland. They will have to face their own demons without external bogeymen to blame:- the internal English class divisions, north and south, young and old. When those issues are resolved, perhaps England/Wales will once again be ready to join the nations of the earth and make a constructive contribution to the comity of nations and international relations in general. Before then, not so much…”
Am I being unfair and too hard on the Brits? Will the anger subside and a more reasonable accommodation be reached on all sides? Personally, I think Simon Wren-Lexis is clutching at straws. Something has been irrevocably broken, and all sides are better off “keeping calm and getting on with it.” That is how the Brits always liked to perceive themselves, and I can’t see them going cap in hand to the EU now, or ever again.
Thanks for these summaries and personal views, Frank. You’re a valuable member of our community.
Quite a fix your nation is in here. I hope Farage and Johnson are heavily politically damaged by the lies they told during the campaign and their willingness to cloddishly admit to those lies immediately after the vote. They don’t belong at the head of a great Nation.
It’s also impossible for me to believe that a negotiation with the EU overseen by Johnson or Farage would go well. They appear to have taken flamethrowers to their European neighbors, and people tend to avoid dealing kindly to those who deal with them in such bad faith.
I’m Irish! But yea, Brexit creates problems for N. Ireland – and hence the Republic, and also for our trade with the UK. As a European I’m quite glad that the UK’s perpetual whinging might finally come to an end and am hopeful that their bluff will be called if they attempt yet another renegotiation. They have dragged the EU quite a long way in the wrong (neo-liberal and neo-con) direction and it will take many years to undo the damage.
Ian Paisley
Billmon:
England acts to re-unite Ireland! That’s a header I never thought I’d live to see.
England Accidentally Re-Unites Ireland.
Ricky Gervais:
Not a chance in a trillion!! Brexit is here to stay and now it’s a matter of implementing.
Cameron has no political standing in Europe from today on and the British members
of the EP … why do they still occupy those seats?
“We must never forget, especially in these hours,
that the idea of European unity was an idea for peace.”
○ Britain has voted to leave the EU – what happens next?
No. Britain has not voted to leave. Britain has voted to recommend to Parliament that Britain leave.
Parliament is 3/4 pro-Remain. It’s more pro-Remain than Scotland voters. Britain will stay.
And how long will those MPs keep their seats?
To soon to tell. Can the PMs replace Cameron without holding a new general election? If yes, then those guys stay until the next scheduled general election in 2020. (It could fail before then if the Tories internal squabbles turn into a civil war.) If no, then it depends on if Labour has ousting Corbyn. If yes, the Tories hold onto their majority. If no, who knows?
PaulFlynnMP
A couple of responses:
Mr. Luff appears to be unaware of the fact that Blairites have no steam and no leader to offer. (But Mr. Blair would be happy to oblige him if drafted, but wouldn’t give him odds better than less than 1% to beat Boris.)
I frankly don’t know if Corbyn is right, fit, or best to lead. But this is getting into “Never Trump” territory with a bunch of neoliberals pissed off that they’re not the ones who were selected, and then they have no one credible on offer. So you don’t like or want Corbyn. Fine. Make your case and offer up a candidate.
The “never Trump” folks are on the right. In the UK they’re the ones pushing for a referendum mulligan because the division on that side is merely a question of degree — austerity or austerity plus (Cameron or Johnson) — and there was no authentic disagreement the EU.
The “never Corbyn” folks are what would have materialized here if Sanders had won the nomination. Would expect a “never Sanders” operation to be meaner and uglier, but the dividing lines for the elites are most definitely the same here and there. (The ordinary HillFans don’t seem to want what she represents, but winning seems to be everything for them. Regardless if the win gives them more of what they don’t want.)
Sorry I was saying its a similar dynamic where they’re mad at the party’s choice but have no one to offer.
Not such a good idea to consider anger fungible. Easy enough to view all the Leave voters as angry, but much of that anger is legitimate and some merely the pre-existing anger of racists.
Corbyn isn’t responsible for Labour’s losses in the past two general elections; the Blairites are. And they compounded that by letting Cameron use the Brexit referendum to undermine them not once but twice. Essentially, they’re wankers.
The GOP elites have a different problem. They have trouble growing a candidate that can win nationally and therefore, are vulnerable to vanity candidates jumping into the fray. That has often worked well for them at the state level; so, didn’t occur to them that someone as unqualified, intemperate, and repulsive as Trump could win. But they had no answer to that as Cruz is even more repulsive and none of the others were ready for prime time. Trump is like Reagan without having bothered to run and sit in a gubernatorial seat for eight years and honed his pitch to the rubes. (Recall that Reagan and the GOP had to do its own flip-flops during those years. Their eugenicist roots had them on the wrong side when the backlash against Roe came down (same with the fundies).
Billmon (managed to get there before he did on this one):
Katie Grant
Nothing subtle about the Mail on Sunday headline or photoshop: “Labour MUST kill vampire Jezza: If MPs don’t vote for ‘Jexit’ now their party is doomed, says DAN HODGES” Mail and Hodges are despicable.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3660313/Jeremy-Corbyn-sacks-Hilary-Benn-Shadow-Cabinet-repor
ts-coup.html
These Labour MPs that see the initial outcome of Brexit as an opportunity to oust Corbyn have let their greed overrule a rational assessment. They think with Cameron out, Labour’s opportunity is in the middle. Even from way out west, I can see that Labour isn’t going to be running in any election against a Tory Leave candidate. Boris won’t take long to successfully pivot and reunite the Tories. That UKIP guy will have liar plastered on his face. And then some nameless, faceless Labour MP is going to run on the same agenda as Boris? Ha ha — the the Brits want a Tory, they vote for the real one over the faux one every time.
Happy to see Corbyn exhibiting some steel.
They’ve wanted Corbyn out since he got the job. They’re particularly nervous because the fallout from the soon-to-fail Brexit is going to hit the Tories hard. In addition to the power reason for replacing Corbyn, they’ve now got policy reasons, as Corbyn now has a reasonable chance to implement a significantly leftist agenda in the reasonably near future. Anathema for the Blairites.
Your comment reminds me of Harry Truman, who knew American voters are attracted to the real deal:
“I’ve seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the fair Deal, and says he really doesn’t believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don’t want a phony Democrat. If it’s a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don’t want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.
But when a Democratic candidate goes out and explains what the New Deal and fair Deal really are–when he stands up like a man and puts the issues before the people–then Democrats can win, even in places where they have never won before. It has been proven time and again.”
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/index.php?pid=1296
But, Karl…Truman did all sorts of things which pissed off liberals. He was less progressive than the current President. Given the ideologies you state here, you would have been opposed to him. Truman exited office with a 23% approval level, which tells us he had lost liberal support.
President Truman helped establish the military-industrial complex and allowed the national security state to establish itself. He was OK on Labor, but did some extremely controversial things there as well. He did some great things, but like all Presidents, he was a mixed bag.
The manufacturings of altered histories to use as weapons against our current leaders are pretty tired.
“A Democratic President facing a Republican Congress and a divided Democratic Party, Truman stands as a model for other presidents during periods of divided government.”
○ Truman delivers his Fair Deal speech
Oui, it wasn’t just the McArthur firing that dragged Truman down. That alone wouldn’t have delivered him approval ratings which were worse than any of W. Bush’s.
The Marshall Plan and integration of the military and other civil service agencies, an important part of the Fair Deal, were great and important projects which were absolutely the right thing to do, but lost him supporters. But then there are other things, most of which you would have tarred and feathered him for if you had been a contemporary:
You accuse Truman of “Installing the MIC and security state as permanent post-War fixtures”. That’s a stretch, but it’s true some seeds were sown during Truman’s administration for what has become known as the “Deep State” or Arthur Gilroy’s Perma-gov. After WWII, who was left standing, but the U.S. and Russia? But no way should Truman be blamed for “Deep State.” I’ll venture a guess that it was Nixon’s administration (Henry Kissinger) who is more responsible for setting this mess in motion. With Reagan pushing Ayn Rand’s voodoo economic policies and Bush/Cheney installing surveillance programs, we now have all the parts of “Deep State” working in unison. Clinton’s neoliberalism brought the Dems on board to the mess, as well. FDR & Harry Truman would not like how things have turned out. I know Jimmy Carter’s not happy because he told Oprah the U.S. is no longer a democracy, but an oligarchy. (I’m thankful Michael Lofgren’s new book “Deep State” is in bookstores. Hope it’s a best seller. Interestingly, Lofgren worked as a congressional staffer for John Kasich at one time.)
Recall that the National Security Act of 1947 as gifted to us by the same GOP Congress that gave us Taft Hartley. As Truman disbanded the OSS, he wasn’t interested in replicating it.
Side not — the person you’re having this argument with isn’t arguing in good faith. He/she took your compliment of Truman to launch a discussion that Truman wasn’t perfect and in real time progressives weren’t at all happy with him. (They do the same if one compliments FDR, Lincoln, Jefferson, Washington, etc.) The intent is to secure agreement that in real time Truman didn’t look so good to lefties and therefore, in real time, Clinton (or X) is like Truman (or X) and progressives are too stupid/blind to see it. Of course, the argument is lame because they never factor in real time prevailing knowledge and cultural and sociological standards of the day.
To unilaterally order armed forces integration in 1948 was bold and forward thinking. And it wasn’t without risk to him and other Democrats in that November’s election. To get anywhere close to that act of Truman’s, Hillary would have had to stand with Gavin Newsome when he ordered that same sex marriage licenses would be issued in SF. Instead she offered her bullpucky of “marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a women.”
Precisely said.
Plus Gish Gallop.
That too. Is there a term for disarming a known or assumed or guessed to be opponent by first seeking agreement on some issue and from that extrapolating to the primary intent of the speaker? I’ve encountered this for decades from those selling religion (Jehovah’s Witnesses and Scientologists) or products (like Amway) but it’s more recent in politics.
My gut/skin is faster to pick up on this being used on me than my head is. So, I waste time in formulating rational arguments when fair debate doesn’t exist.
Karl read The Brothers by Stepghen Kinzer, for who is ultimately responsible for the deep state.
The Dulles brothers finger prints are all over it.
Eisenhower was a willing President to what they set up and ran, until John Foster Dulles died in 1959, and JFK fired Alan Dulles in 1961. The US has never really given up on what they set out to do.
Or The Devil’s Chessboard that focuses on Allan Dulles who didn’t skip a beat in moving from OSS to the CIA.
Harry Truman can’t defend himself, but I will defend Harry with his own words. (BTW, this is my favorite Truman quote.)
“You can’t get rich in politics unless you’re a crook.”
Harry Truman was not a crook. Also, Harry Truman told the truth and some people don’t want the truth told. TPTB demonized Truman while in office. Truman worked to get more of FDR’s ideas passed. Truman was a champion of the “little guy” and tried to get national health insurance. He was called a socialist for doing so. Reminds me of Bernie Sanders being called names which are not true.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/november-19-1945-harry-truman-calls-national-health-insurance-pr
ogram/
Yes, he was a New Dealer. Good on economic issues (and vetoed Taft-Hartley which the GOP congress in their two year window overrode — and none of the many subsequent Democratic congresses bothered to repeal). He did fall down in the economic arena by paying down the WWII debt far to quickly. Screwed up on Hiroshima/Nagasaki and Nat-Sec (he was more blindsided by the “best and brightest” on that), and not adept at pushing back against the nutso commie hunters. However, his post WWII handling of Germany and Japan was very good.
The American Medical Association was against Truman’s national health insurance plan. Now I wonder how they feel since Big Medical has corporatized their profession? Some docs and residents are petitioning for unionization. Wow! This is something from a profession that was anti-union.
If stupid, selfish people only ultimately took down themselves and their own, we could laugh at the plight of current US docs. Unfortunately, for decades we all have been paying for their obstructionism.
Part of the vote for Brexit was a hope for restoration of NHS funding. Imagine everyone covered at a little more than half what the US spends on health care that excludes some meaningful percentage of folks totally.
RT
Six years from now he or someone else can say the same thing.
The Blairites in Labour should shut the f*** up.
Soon there will be openings in the conservative party of Cameron.
Good thing the EU referendum has shaken up British politics … the start of a revolution for economics with a social face. If the elites across all party lines don’t see the signs of the times they will be ousted.
It’s not up to Corbyn to unite the Tories … it’s their own Boris Johnson who took the lead to vote for Brexit and undermine PM David Cameron. Cameron only pushed the EU referendum to keep Ukip’s Farage from gaining more seats in Parliament. It was fear, not strength that caused today’s turmoil.
Labour lost all its seats in Scotland to the Nationalists due to former leader Milliband’s faulty policy. The Scots wanted to stay in the European Union. The Scots have been short-changed by Tories and Labour in the past. The promises of David Cameron made before the Scots’ referendum on independence have NOT been kept.
Looking at last Thursday’s results, one must subtract the Scottish votes! The Scots wiil seek a new referendum for independence. Northern-Ireland won’t join Ireland, perhaps an union with Scotland would offer an opportunity.
The Tories have a habit of not listening to their constituents or a large majority of all Brits. Just look at France’s Hollande and the mess he made of the Socialist party by confronting the Labor unions. Hollande stepped outside of parliament and democracy and ruled by edict. Waiting for the next French Revolution.
Europe must grasp this opportunity to drastically change its position versus the alliance with the UK and US on capitalism and neo-colonialism through means of perpetual war. Down with TTIP and stop NATO expansion into unchartered territory. Stop globalisation to avoid paying a living wage in the home nation. It’s small businesses in London and across Europe to hire cheap labor from Eastern Europe instead of keeping Brits/nationals on the pay-roll.
Nothing has changed in Europe for the last 50 years … companies in The Netherlands, for example, bringing migrants from Spain, Italy, Greece, Morocco, Turkey, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania …. get the idea?
As the saying goes in London City: the cleaning lady pays her share of taxes, the president-director manages to avoid most taxation. The inequality in the western world will force an abrupt change in politics and cause a revolution. It’s a matter of time.
Another example of classic colonialism is seen with the British citizens from its former Commonwealth of nations: Pakistan and India. The Dutch with its vast empire across Indonesia, keeping its citizens captive. The Dutch of the Reformed church participated in slave trade from Africa to the Americas and bear responsibility for apartheid in South Africa.
Before World War II, the Dutch-East Indies empire consisted of a vast majority of Muslims… how so Judeo-Christian culture and values. Believe the bs of Geert Wilders and his pro-Israel policy position. The Dutch couldn’t stand five years of German occupation and atrocities from 1940-45. How about the nations colonised by western powers throughout recent history?
The North Atlantic Alliance, NATO, colonizing nations should be warned their position is untenable. Brexit offers a great opportunity for change… president Obama and U.S. Congress have been a great disappointment.
○ Brexit ‘a Warning’ for Hillary Clinton, Says Council on Foreign Relations President
Watch the MSM and the ‘Westminster Game’ unfold to undo the result of the EU referendum. Blocking the political proces for a Artikel 51 Declaration. This will immensely irritate the 27 member states of the EU. Once the Brexit is initiated, the UK will fall prey to EU control and demands in the negotiations. How far has the Empire fallen! The Queen should abdicate while she can and hold onto her properties (castles) in Scotland. Soon she may require a visa to travel. 😉
○ The return of the Blairites is the last thing Labour needs | The Guardian – May 2015 |
○ Blairites should ‘keep their mouths shut’ and get behind Jeremy Corbyn | The Independent – Jan. 2016 |
○ The American connection: Clintonites and Blairites are the same people | The Economist – Nov. 1997 |
Interesting additional take from b at MOA.
Tend to doubt that the Chilcote Report will be much of anything. However, if it is, it’s those Blarite MPs and not Blair that’s going to need cover from Corbyn because the Tories are going to pounce on them and Blair. Might draft Cameron as the new PM in the process. These wankers need to learn how to play something other than checkers.
Sorry — it looks as if Craig Murray proposed this interpretation and offers more substance:
See my earlier post about Dame Margaret Hodge – circulated letter for a no-confidence vote blaming Brexit vote on leader Corbyn.
○ Labour Friends of Israel: Corbyn a poor choice, support Liz Kendall for Labour leadership | RT – Aug. 2015 |
Saw that. At some point the UK (or Britain if that all that remains) and the US are going to have to confront the USG fealty to Israel. The country and their foreign backers are simply not sustainable. On the part of outside supporters it was a noble effort (for the Zionists it was based on blood and theft), but not every experiment works in the long-run.
skilpat
Thanks to the Fixed Term Parliament Act and the thin Tory majority, it basically takes both the Tory leadership and at least one of the opposition to call an election (i.e., they need an Act of Parliament where a substantial fraction of Tories will defect). That’s a hard lift, especially since the pro-EU Tories are the ones who will have to lose their seats for a Brexit, but they are the majority who will be picking the new PM.
The party most endangered by a new election is the Tories because they have the biggest gap between their pro-EU MPs and their anti-EU voters. Plus, their anti-EU voters will get pissed in a hurry once it becomes clear the vote was basically a scam. Given those incentives, I don’t see the Tory leadership making the big push they need to have an election. A pro-EU leader certainly won’t and even Boris probably won’t; based on his waffling and weaseling since the vote he didn’t really want out, he just wanted to posture for out to get the Leavers to support him.
So, basically, the people who would be at most risk of losing their seats in a snap election will be picking the new PM. Do you think they’ll pick a PM who will call an election?
The Tory Parliamentary party get to pick a shortlist of candidates for PM. It is the Tory party membership who make the final selection, and they are overwhelmingly Euro-sceptic. So unless the Tory Parliamentary party can avoid putting BoJo on the shortlist, he is favourite to become the next leader.
Fair point, and the pre-EU Tories don’t anything close to enough of a majority to keep him off the shortlist. That said, from what I’ve seen of Boris’ floundering around since the referendum, if I were a Tory MP I wouldn’t want him leading me, regardless of my opinions on Brexit. He seems to have neither a clue nor a plan.
Britain may stay. When in uncharted territory, the odds are too unknown to make any declarative statement as to what will happen next that’s any better than flipping a coin. Foolish to argue “heads” or “tails.”
What a bunch of authoritarian bullshit. The people voted for this. The people wanted this to happen. Their leaders should follow through. There is no going back. I agree with you, Frank.
Elites should take lessons from this vote, not try and have a “taksies backsies” second referendum. Lol. “Oh yeah you can have an election, just choose what we want.”
“Reminder that “people regretting their vote” is a bullshit media narrative – 1% of Leave voters unhappy with result”
~Tom Gara
Citing:
Vote split // On the #EUref result
(Remain / Leave):
Happy: 4% / 92%
Unhappy: 88% / 1%
Indifferent: 7% / 5%
(via ComRes)
The British people are rooted in “democracy” so I can’t see them buying into some bs media narrative, as some Americans do. Great Britain has been about bringing power closer to the citizen for a long time. Since their political DNA is our political DNA, it will be interesting to watch what happens here as a result of Brexit. My dad used to say, “As the Brits go, so goes America.” We’ll see.
Ah but they did buy bs. Cameron, Johnson, and Forage all blaming the EU for austerity and cuts to the NHS. (Old people vote, and if given a choice, they will punish those that cut their good enough and virtually free health care.)
I wonder if older Americans will go along with TPTB that want to cut their Social Security & Medicare?
Perhaps TPTB will try to convince the younger people that SS & Medicare need cut, so it can be saved. That happened in the 1980’s with the Reagan/Tip O’Neill legislation. I don’t think the youth will buy that line this time. They keep in contact with their parents and grandparents through social media. People now are having to delay their SS benefits, since the age for full benefits increased. Also, Granny hasn’t gotten much of a COLA the last 8 years, which has averaged 1%/year.
Friday Alan Greenspan discussed entitlements when he was discussing the fallout from Brexit on CNBC:
“There’s a certain amount that monetary policy can do, but our problem is fundamentally fiscal,” he said, adding that this is true in the United States as well as “every major country in Europe.”
“Part of the problem is that the “developed countries are all aging very rapidly,” which is leading to a higher ratio of government spending in the form of entitlements, Greenspan said.”
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/worst-alan-greenspan-says-british-150954491.html
I believe trying to plant the seeds of a generational war will be ineffective here. Overall, Grandma & Pops have been pretty good to the little ones over the years.
The ’83 SS reform was sold to boomers as the means to save it for them. It was also sold to seniors as a way to continue the COLA adjustments that by then they were accustomed to getting and liked very much.
It was also seen as a way to stop increasing the payroll tax rate whenever SS began to run out of funds. Business didn’t like that payroll tax increase on themselves but the prospect of predictability and stability must have won out. Workers didn’t like that increase either, but it was almost worth it to shut up the “OMG — social security is going broke,” GOP naysayers.
That funding part of the legislation was really solid. It was the cash handling part of the trust fund that they totally screwed up.
Guess I should comment on the Greenspan riff. When has Alan not sounded the alarm about entitlements both her and abroad. He loathes democratic-socialism and is always looking for an opportunity to find fault with it.
The aging population in most Western European countries it at or near its peak and leveling off stage. Those countries have managed that change just fine. The UK is quite there yet, but its problem is a poorly functioning economy that the is sum of what Thatcher through Cameron have done to it. So, now they scapegoat old people. Alan keeps freaking out and blaming old people for the same reason. The US population is younger (only 13%>64 compared to near or over 20% in many countries — UK 15-16%) but will begin to rapidly age in the next two decades. And that will be the reveal on the fact that Alan and his cronies stole the trust fund.
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/washington-post-gets-hysterical-on-brexit...
“Britain’s exit from European Union sends global economies into tailspin.” That was the headline of a Washington Post article * on the vote in the UK. If you missed the tailspinning economies that’s because this is just Washington Post hysteria. Obviously the Washington Post is referring to financial markets. They apparently don’t realize the difference between financial markets and the real economy.
[…]
“In terms of hits to the world economy, the 2011 budget agreement that turned the U.S. sharply toward austerity was almost certainly far worse than Brexit. Of course the Washington Post basically liked that deal so it is unlikely that it would ever make this sort of comparison.”
LOL WP doesn’t bother to read content, either. Jes trolling along…
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/serious-confusion-at-wapo-on-brexit-consequences-and-austerity
“”A strain of fear is already running through the German government as it contemplates the loss of Britain — whose conservative prime minister, David Cameron, largely backed Chancellor Angela Merkel’s austerity crusade. Berlin now fears a ‘ganging up’ by nations including France, Spain and Italy, which may seek to overthrow Merkel’s austerity-first policy.”
See the problem here? The article tells us that France, Italy, and Spain can’t lead because they are all suffering from serious internal problems. But almost all the problems cited, except for terrorism in France, are a direct result of their economic situation. And, that’s right folks, the bad economic situation is the result of the austerity imposed on them by Germany with the backing of David Cameron.
So, if Germany is no longer in a position to impose its absurd austerity policies on the rest of the EU, then France, Italy, and Spain can again have normal growth and lower unemployment. Stronger economies would then make these countries much better situated to play a leading role in the European Union: problem solved.”
So close to realizing the EU, UK, and US agenda of: austerity today, austerity tomorrow, and austerity forever. Then those people upset the apple cart. With Leave, Johnson wrested power from Cameron, but without the EU skirts to hide behind, how exactly will he manage to impose austerity on steroids? If Germany loses the clout to impose more austerity, how will Presidents Clinton deliver the goods for their backers? Quel bordel! And quel dommage.
Ta-dah — and here comes the:
Easy enough to overlook that Cameron’s offer of the referendum was to best the Lib-Dems as well as UKIP. And it worked exceedingly well. Of course the Lib-Dems are rather useless.
That’s putting it mildly, with English-like understatement. They were the enablers of Cameron the first time round and their legacy lives on.
They’ve got a lot of nerve saying they’re the one “really” opposing Brexit when they voted to put the referendum up in the first place!
They’re all just jockeying for power at this point and throwing anything at the walls to see what will stick.
This is pretty powerful commentary:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/06/i-want-my-country-back
“There’s not enough tea in the entire nation to help us Keep Calm and Carry On today. Not on a day when prejudice, propaganda, naked xenophobia and callous fear-mongering have won out over the common sense we British like to pride ourselves on. Not on a day when we’re being congratulated by Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, and nobody else. Well done, turkeys. Santa’s on his way.
Nigel Farage, the rich, racist cartoon demagogue, boasts that this victory was won “without a single shot being fired”. Tell that to the grieving family of Jo Cox, the campaigning Labour MP gunned down last week. Farage promised that unless something was done to halt immigration, “violence will be the next step”. It looks like we’ve got a two-for-one deal on that one.
So, here’s the thing. This was never a referendum on the EU. It was a referendum on the modern world, and yesterday the frightened, parochial lizard-brain of Britain voted out, out, out, and today we’ve all woken up still strapped onto this ghost-train as it hurtles off the tracks. Leave voters are finding they care less about immigration now that their pension pots are under threat. Maybe one of the gurning pundits promising them pride and sovereignty should have mentioned that, but they were too busy lying about the NHS. The curtain has been torn away and now we all have to look at the men behind it. They are not good men.
Anyone feel like they’ve got their country back yet? No? That, after all, was the rallying cry of the Leave campaign – the transatlantic echo of “Make America Great Again”. There’s a precedent for what happens when svengalis with aggressively terrible haircuts are allowed to appeal to parochialism and fear in the teeth of a global recession, and it isn’t pretty.
It says something about this campaign that I’m no longer at all worried about risking hyperbole or unoriginality when referencing all that Nazi history they made us study in school. I’m just frightened. I’m frightened that those who wanted “their” country back will get their wish, and it will turn out to be a hostile, inhospitable place for immigrants, ethnic minorities, queer people – everyone and anyone who wasn’t included when Farage proclaimed victory for “ordinary, decent people” this morning in front of a posse formed entirely of angry-looking, whey-faced blokes in suits.
…
The Welsh have a word for this feeling. The word is “hiraeth”. It means a longing for a home you can never return to, a home which may never have existed at all. The Welsh, incidentally, voted to leave the EU after decades of being ungently screwed by government after conniving Tory government; cackling and tearing the heart out of towns which were once famous for something other than teen suicide. Finally, someone gave them the opportunity to vote for change, for any change at all. When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like David Cameron’s face.
…
In desperation, the Remain camp begged us to think of the markets. Unfortunately, everyone here hates the markets. Fear-mongering over “the economy” was never going to work when the most deprived areas of the country have already suffered years of savage right-wing austerity in the name of safeguarding “the economy”. Those parts of the country clearly felt that things were bad enough already, that they had little enough to lose that they could gamble the rest on the possibility of being lied to. British people are used to being lied to by incompetent spivs in the name of “protecting the economy”. Unfortunately, this time the spivs were dead right.
As the tattered remains of the government try to work out what Brexit will actually mean in practice, more damage has already been done to our economy, to our prospects and to the job market than years of open borders ever could have.
In the meantime, the cackling clown-car drivers rolling this catastrophe over the wreckage of civil society are already cheerfully admitting that they lied about their key campaign statements. No, there won’t be £350m more to spend on the NHS, whatever Vote Leave wrote on its battle bus. It turns out that the reason you can’t get a GP appointment isn’t because of immigration, but because the Conservatives have spent six years systematically defunding the health service and cutting public spending to the bone. Brexit will mean more of that, not less.
This was a working-class revolt, but it is not a working-class victory. That’s the tragedy here. The collective howl of rage from depressed, deindustrialised parts of the country bled white and reckless by Thatcher, Blair and Cameron has turned into a triumph for another set of elites. Another banking crisis, another old Etonian in power – that’s what we’ve got to look forward to as Scotland decides when to let go of the rope and the union splinters into jagged shards and we all realise we’re stuck on a rainy rock with Michael Gove, forever.
I wish I could tell you that we’re about to turn this around. I wish I could tell you that we’re about to collectively realise, even at this late hour, the magnitude of our mistake – that we will discover a new capacity for tolerance, a new resilience, a way to recover ourselves and remember our common humanity. I wish I could tell you that the cannibalistic, scattered Left will rally. Today, I don’t want to make any promises…”.
A lot of contradiction in her writing. Rash in her rush to judgement. Columnist and blogger Laurie Penny
And what was copied and pasted here far exceeds “fair use.” No reason to disrespect and violate generally accepted reasonable standards.
Another very prescient comment;
Worth highlighting for readers here — but we should also always be mindful of fair use laws. You’ve more than doubled a generous interpretation of fair.
Billmon:
Fair dealing under UK law
Booman Tribune is domiciled in the US. Fair Use here.
If anyone has the legal expertise to evaluate what they’re lifting from other publications and from the four factors determine that they are well within Fair Use standards, find. For non-eagle-beagles, bloggers have long been following a simple convention: identify the author and/or publication, provide a clear link to the original, and copy/paste the bare minimum which should never be more than a fraction of the whole.
Of course you are right about the two posts you criticised.
Excellent article at EFF – Bloggers’ FAQ on Intellectual Property .
I understand my mistake here, and accept that I made a mistake.
That comment has been quoted in many places;
all over the internet
Without a link to the original or your text describing the source, it wasn’t possible to determine if lifting the whole thing was acceptable. You’re okay on this if it was a comment — just as anyone can take and use any comment posted here.
My life was destroyed when my husband sent me packing, after 13 years we have been together. I was lost and helpless after trying so many ways to my husband back to me. One day at work, I was distracted, not knowing that my boss called me, so he sat and asked me what it was all about, I told him and he smiled and said it was no problem. I never understood what he meant by it was no problem getting back my husband, he said he used a spell to get back his wife when she left him for another man, and now they are together till date and initially I was shocked hearing something from my boss. He gave me an email address of the Prophet abuvia which helped him get his wife back, I never believed that this would work, but I had no choice coming into contact with the sayings that I get done, and he asked for my information and that my husband was able to propose to throw him the spell and I sent him the details, but after two days, my mother called me that my husband was pleading that he wants me back, I never believed, because it was just a dream and I had to rush off to my mother’s place and to my greatest surprise, was kneeling my husband beg me for forgiveness that he wants me and the child back home, when I gave prophet abuvia a conversation regarding sudden change of my husband and he made clear to me that my husband will love me until the end of the world, that he will never leave for another woman. Now me and my husband is back together and started doing funny things he has not done before, he makes me happy and do what it is suppose to do as a man without nagging. Please if you need help of any kind need, please contact Abuvia Prophet for help. His email is prophet.abuvia@gmail.com his website is prophetabuviasolutiontemple.webs.com
Twitter discussion:
Scott Peterson (SP): If only there were a functioning Labour Party to take advantage of it
Billmon: Labour RW & “moderate” Tories now represent same technocratic elite. Political fragmentation is forcing even closer together
SC: Agree. Does Brexit cause both Labour and Tories to re-align?
Billmon: I don’t know. This is like trying to guess where the tornado will set Dorothy down — DURING the tornado scene.
NRichardson-Little: Right wing Tories go UKIP to defend Brexit while Labour splits into Corbyn rump vs PLP? (with chart — MPs for Leave: Con – 138; Labour – 10; DUP – 8)
And Cameron and Blair are blaming the Brexit lost on Corbyn. Talk about chutzpah — a tradition among public school twits, wankers, and pig fuckers.
Paul Mason: Heidi Alexander – “Corbyn not strong enough opposing Tories” – but you wanted him to share a platform with them?
Note: Alexander joined the Blairite putsch.
Billmmon: He didn’t work closely enough with the Tories; he isn’t strong enough to oppose the Tories — a true post-modern Orwellian campaign
…
Lee Fang: Trump continues to hire campaign staff from the DCI Group, lobby firm that reps the gov of Japan to promote the TPP
Billmon: Not sure I’ve ever seen any pol run such a multi-sided con game before.
And how is any ordinary working stiff supposed to stay on top of these milti-side con games that are coming faster and more furiously than ever before. Flippety-flop, flippety-flop, flippety-flop. Who do they think they are? Hillary Clinton?
Ali Abunimah: 45 of 50 local Labour chairs asked by BBC still back @JeremyCorbyn. Who is really out of touch? http:
Matt Kennard: Everyone saying @jeremycorbyn is under pressure, but he’d have to be utterly insane to resign now. The coup is an absolute shambles
Billmon: Starting to remind me of Moscow 1991, when coup leader’s hands were visibly shaking on camera.
The Scotsman – Ewan McGregor brands Boris Johnson a `spineless c**t’
Labour MPs might want to remember June 9 –EU Referendum: Angela Eagle Crashes and Burnsin ITV Debate
I, personally, will be very sad if Corbyn goes. He may very well be the last leader of Labour as a major political force. Yes he is a throwback to a previous age: The sort of leftwinger who organised rallies and protests and joined all sorts of progressive advocacy groups that I used to get involved with in my youth. But he also represents a decency and integrity which is almost entirely absent from todays post factual politics.
The candidates he stood a against in the last leadership election were simply absolutely awful. They couldn’t give a straight answer to straight question. All seemed to be careerist crawthumping ingratiaters who would do or say anything if they felt it would further their promotional prospects and who wouldn’t know a principled stand if it slapped them in the face. None of them actually seemed to believe in socialism or trade unionism or anything Labour used to stand for.
So Corbyn was a giant amongst pygmies, and remains one of the greatest assets the labour party still has. I wouldn’t be surprised if he successfully withstood the Westminster coup being plotted against him. In fact it could further his standing as an outsider not of the Westminster elite who have been primarily responsible for the current mess. Perhaps the British press are about to find out that they no longer call the shots.
I could even see Corbyn becoming Prime Minister if the Tory party splits over the EU, and UKIP runs away with a lot of their votes. He is the only person with the standing to actually reverse course and negotiate a left leaning reform of the EU as the price of staying in – following an election in which he explicitly campaigned for a remain. But maybe that is wishful thinking on my part…
That’s what drove Bernie’s high favorable ratings as well. Unfortunately a solid majority of Democrats can’t stop thinking about 1992. (Explains the age divide among Democratic primary voters.)