More protests in Westminster: Saturday & Tuesday

[Sephiroth]

If you think mays deal, where the uk accepts eu rules but has no say in them, will placate leavers and heal wounds you are even more deluded than I already think you are

[Loutwo]

So what do you think we should do? I?m assuming you are STILL fixated on a second referendum despite all the warnings and further polarisation?

This is why we are getting nowhere. People are entrenched and not willing to compromise. That?s why our democracy is failing us. The country reached a decision, we need to come together with a middle road option.

Louisa.

[JohnL]

As I said previously - 5 years in EFTA/EEA with an agreement to review and fast track back into the EU or to leave with a free trade agreement after that.

EU have already offered this to Theresa May but it was disregarded by her.

Edit: That's my compromise position - My original position is strong remain.

[Loutwo]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As I said previously - 5 years in EFTA/EEA with an

> agreement to review and fast track back into the

> EU or to leave with a free trade agreement after

> that.

>

> EU have already offered this to Theresa May but it

> was disregarded by her.

Now this is a decent compromise. No chance under a ERG run Tory government though.

Louisa.

[Sephiroth]

Using language like ?fixated on? is pretty weird - it?s the path of solution in other countries. Other countries which have survived such crazy ideas

But using words like compromise makes you feel warm and cosy like you are the sensible one when all it means is you haven?t understood the problem. The problem is still the lie that the people can just leave the eu with no major problem. And that can?t happen no matter how much pretending you do

There are no easy solutions but I?ve already outlined mine. Remaining is the best option as it immediately stops the clock ticking. There is then no external pressure. All we have to deal with are angry leaver voters. But and here?s the thing. They will remain angry if we leave with a deal, with no deal or remain. So we have to deal with them no matter what

I would revoke now and skip referendum given the time constraints. I would tell Leavers the idea isn?t abandoned but before we can address leaving again they have to organise, define what kind of shape leave they want and agree on it. Then that could feasibly be out to a referendum at a future date

But that?s just too logical. So proceed as you see fit. No deal, deal a la may - whatever. But listening to Brits butch about it for years to come with severely diminished rights and powers , you can be the one reminding everyone ?but it was a compromise!!!!?

[diable rouge]

May's deal didn't respect the referendum, it provided a very hard Brexit and didn't reflect the closeness of the result. My take at the time, and it's written on here somewhere in one of the myriad of threads, was that Brexit at the time of the referendum was nothing more than a concept, the Brexiters needed to go away, take as long as they needed, and come up with a coherent plan for what exactly Brexit meant, no catchy slogans/soundbites, actual policies and solutions such as the Irish border, and once done put that to a second ratification vote, this was before the People's Vote idea came about. I didn't think that was a compromise, more a pragmatic, logical and fair thing to do, something that the Brits were once famed for.

As for now, I'm with Seph, we need to stop Brexit asap, it's dragging the country down and down, we need to get back to some normality. The Brexiters have had long enough to facilitate Brexit and failed miserably. This doesn't stop Brexit from happening in the future, the Brexiters can go away and do what I suggested, come up with a clear coherent plan but rather than another referendum, it has to be done via an election, part of a party's manifesto. The biggest mistake was distilling Brexit from everything else in a binary referendum, when the reality is it affects everything, and therefore needs to be judged as part of an overall political manifesto...

[JohnL]

Fair enough - all good ideas above.

[exdulwicher]

May's deal didn't respect the referendum, it provided a very hard Brexit and didn't reflect the closeness of the result.

Agreed but added to that is the problem were now in where literally nothing "respects the result of the referendum" because it was never spelled out HOW we leave.

With a deal (and if so what kind of deal) without a deal...

Michael Gove said there's no chance of us leaving without a deal because we'll get a great deal. We were told that a deal would be "the easiest thing in human history". We were promised that we could stay in the single market.

All sorts of random promises, statements, all of them total bollocks and none of them fully understood by the politicians and assorted hangers on making them or by the public hearing/reading them.

May's deal didn't get rejected by traitorous Remoaners, it got rejected by ultra-hard Brexiteers for whom it wasn't hard enough (mostly because it still meant the UK would be bound by the new EU Anti Tax Avoidance laws). So until the Brexiteers can actually agree what "leave" means and until they can sell that idea to the public we can't leave!

This is all it is to the tiny cabal of ultra-right-wing elites. A tax dodging measure so they can be even richer. There is no version of Brexit that benefits the general public in any way.

[pk]

exdulwicher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> May's deal didn't respect the referendum, it

> provided a very hard Brexit and didn't reflect the

> closeness of the result.

>

> Agreed but added to that is the problem were now

> in where literally nothing "respects the result of

> the referendum" because it was never spelled out

> HOW we leave.

>

I totally agree - the referendum was flawed from the start - effectively it asked 'shall we stay as we are or shall we do something different' (but offering no clarity on what something different meant and as we can see now people interpreted (and still interpret) what leave means differently

leave doesn't mean leave in any certain way and brexit doesn't mean anything specific either

[Sephiroth]

For what it?s worth, I remain extremely pessimistic

Firstly - no deal is still the default. Johnson still has to request and eu still have to agree to any extension. If I was then I would wonder ?why bother? We said don?t waste the time 6 months ago but the state of ye!?

Secondly, everyone rah rahing about last night but that was all about democratic process, and included many many non-remainers. Leaving with some imaginary beneficial deal is still the most many people are hoping for.

[Sephiroth]

Basically it needs every living citizen who thinks leaving in any capacity will leave us worse off to be more vocal in saying so. The more people who do that the more the window shifts to it being possible

Pretending there is some compromise with insanity is no good to anyone

[diable rouge]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Firstly - no deal is still the default. Johnson

> still has to request and eu still have to agree to

> any extension. If I was then I would wonder ?why

> bother? We said don?t waste the time 6 months

> ago but the state of ye!?

True, the Bill if it passes only moves No Deal to another date, in this case 31st Jan. Only revoke or accepting a deal takes ND completely off the table. The Bill makes it clear that the PM has to ask for an extension, that would be enshrined in law. I think if it gets to that stage he's more likely to resign than have the optics of going to Brussels cap in hand. He must realise that now, hence all the goading of Corbyn to seek an early GE, his only Get Out of Jail card.

The EU may think that but they are the ones who have been sensible and pragmatic during the process and I'm sure they would grant one, especially if as likely there will be an election, for them that's better than ND...

[Loutwo]

A minority of hard line Brexiteers know it will make us worse off, they don?t care. Sovereignty is their main concern.

A more substantial number of people, myself included, know it will do damage, but remain committed to democratic processes, and feel uneasy about revocation or further referenda to overturn that decision made in 2016.

I know this sounds harsh, but I genuinely feel uncomfortable with this ?by any means necessary preventing Brexit? strategy of some, is just not going to achieve anything other than anger the majority who voted for it, and now feel can be told to do one and come up with a strategy to achieve their aim via some sort of make believe version of Brexit, conjured up over a unlimited number of years, and then we get to vote again on that version. It?s all deeply undemocratic to expect the general populace to have any sort of understanding over and above ?Do you wish to remain in the EU?? YES or NO.

Louisa.

[Sephiroth]

Could you be more limp Lou?

If you feel uneasy go and visit countries who have second referendums and resort back on how unhealthy and undemocratic they are

Mogg said in the radio a couple of days ago that problem with a second referendum was that it WOULD overturn the first. Is the Democratic will of the people NOW can not be listened to

You cling to this corrupted notion of ?democracy? like the old couple in Raymond Brigg?s ?when the wind blows? holding on to the government pamphlet telling them their nuclear shelter will protect them

Democracy isn?t a single point in time and then never again. That?s what dictators do

[Pugwash]

May's deal was better than nothing - the backstop seemed to be a sensible compromise allowing more time to sort out the border questions etc.

The DUP MPs have not been representing their constituents in NI Parliament but are still drawing their salary, if I lived in NI I would be asking my constituency party to deselect them.

[Sephiroth]

Better than nothing is still a paltry thing

The backstop was welcome - but what is the point of leaving the eu if we are still subject to all the same rules without any influence over them? I could live with it up to a point, but leavers? The same ones who would take to the streets if we remain? Nah

[pk]

Loutwo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It?s all deeply undemocratic to

> expect the general populace to have any sort of

> understanding over and above ?Do you wish to

> remain in the EU?? YES or NO.

>

> Louisa.

Of course it isn?t deeply undemocratic to provide people with adequate and accurate information to allow them to understand what NO means

Because as we can see NO doesn?t mean the same to everyone so in fact an oversimplified question like that is very undemocratic

It?s equivalent of saying in a GE do you vote for the government or against it

[Sephiroth]

Honestly I sometimes think it?s because this country has pushed the idea of being subjects rather than citizens for so long, that they have such a weird deferential forelock-tugging attitude to posh voices

?Thus us cluuurlay an affront to democracy?

?Ooh ?ee?s right yknow!!?

[JohnL]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Honestly I sometimes think it?s because this

> country has pushed the idea of being subjects

> rather than citizens for so long, that they have

> such a weird deferential forelock-tugging attitude

> to posh voices

>

> ?Thus us cluuurlay an affront to democracy?

>

> ?Ooh ?ee?s right yknow!!?

How many times I've been told I should lose my Welsh accent - yet it's still there.

Posh speakers do get promoted faster - but so do tall handsome men (IMHO)