Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 28, 2019

Boris Johnson Seizes Power

The British Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson wants to lead Britain to an exit from the European Union without a specific agreement that would regulate the various details. A majority in Parliament is against leaving the EU without a deal.

Parliament will convene again in early September. The Brexit date is October 31. The opposition planned to seek legislation to stop Brexit and/or to hold a vote of no confidence in the Boris government. This would install a new government with the sole task of preventing Brexit without a deal.

The problem is that the process takes time and Parliament days are limited. The government has several means to prevent Parliament from having enough time to discuss the issue and to vote on it. Today it used a quite effective one.

The Johnson government, only inaugurated weeks ago, asked the Queen to announce its legislative program, a ceremonial event known as the Queen's Speech. Custom demands that Parliament is shut down for several weeks before the Queen's Speech is held. Parliament will thus have little chance to prevent a no-deal Brexit:

The government has asked the Queen to suspend Parliament just days after MPs return to work in September - and only a few weeks before the Brexit deadline.

Boris Johnson said a Queen's Speech would take place after the suspension, on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda".

But it means MPs are unlikely to have time to pass laws to stop a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

Tory backbencher Dominic Grieve called the move "an outrageous act".

The Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow is not amused about the unexpected move. Many members of Parliament will, like Dominic Grieve, be against this power grab.

Unfortunately there is little they can do:

A number of high profile figures, including former Prime Minister John Major, have threatened to go to the courts to stop it, and a legal challenge led by the SNP's justice spokeswoman, Joanna Cherry, is already working its way through the Scottish courts.

Britain has no written constitution. The courts rule along precedence and the government would thereby likely win the case:

BBC royal correspondent Jonny Dymond said the precedent was for Parliament to be suspended before a Queen's Speech, and it would be "impossible" for the Queen to reject the government's request to do so now.

He said that convention lifted the pressure off the Queen and to some degree, in some people's eyes, depoliticises it.

"The fundamental is the Queen acts on the advice of her ministers - in particular, on the advice of her prime minister," he added.

Laura Kuenssberg said only a small number of government ministers knew about the plan in advance, but the government would argue it was "a bog standard Queen's Speech process", despite all of the surrounding noise.

In a letter to the Members of Parliament Johnson only allows for one day, September 9, for a Parliament sitting.

The prime minister, not elected through a general election, is essentially making a power grab. Closing down Parliament at the moment when the most significant decision on the future of the country is at stake is a deeply undemocratic move.

Britain is on its way to falling apart.

Posted by b on August 28, 2019 at 11:36 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

Latest from Corbyn:

"A joint statement from @UKLabour, @theSNP, @LibDems, @Plaid_Cymru, @ForChange_Now and @TheGreenParty as we work together to stop Boris Johnson's smash and grab on democracy:"

Can't copy/paste the Joint Statement; so, if you want to read what it says, you'll need to click the link!

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 29 2019 21:34 utc | 201

JR @201--

"The Brexit referendum was not accompanied with any of the qualifications the remainers try to add now."

That's the point, the question asked by the referendum was the simplest possible: Leave or Remain. There were no qualifications, considerations, risks, or anything else attached so as I wrote earlier there's no way to know where voters stood on any of those things. It wasn't even binding; but as a Remainer, Cameron resigned as if he'd lost a no confidence vote which opened up the ensuing anarchy, which served to cover the continuing Neoliberal rape of the UK.

People's Momentum video showcasing a Tory MP discussion. Interesting thread comments. The thread comments @202 were also constructive for a change, I forgot to note.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 29 2019 21:49 utc | 202

This has been a very informative discussion, and I may have missed some points, especially as I've also been following a thread elsewhere that presents many excellent points about the British political system and where this may lead. There was one comment somewhere (and apologies to the one as I haven't been able to backtrack and find it) which explained that Brits in general (and the commenter was one) were agreeable to entering the EEC when that was the issue, but have been not so happy to be then put into the EU. (I take that as something similar to my feelings when my little local bank transferred my mortgage to a Big Bank without asking my permission.) In which case, as someone has said, people being asked whether they wanted to be in the EU or not would seem to be the core issue.

As I was attempting my backtrack I came across this comment over at Naked Capitalism, which I'll give in its entirety. It may or may not be helpful; I hope the latter:

"Mirdif
August 29, 2019 at 1:47 pm
This is all part of a ploy to put a very slightly modified deal to Parliament after the European Council in October and focus minds that it’s this deal or crash out – an extension to pass legislation will still be needed and I would imagine that he would ask for and receive it on the basis that the deal is passed. He’s highly likely to ask for it on that same basis thus focussing minds even more.

Johnson is not aiming for crash out. If he was he’d have prorogued in to November. It may also help the polling numbers as he’d like to hold an election in November after having passed the deal and thus demonstrating that he’s upheld the will of the people.

It’s a very high stakes strategy and it may yet fail but I think no deal is not likely just yet – though it is more likely than it ever was under May. According to some of the Brussels correspondents on twitter Johnson has gone down quite well with Merkel and Macron and in the wider EU. He’s come to be seen as a more political operator and more dynamic than his predecessor in the previous few weeks. They feel he has more manoeuvers up his sleeve than she did."

I still think that pub conversation karlof1 alludes to would be more likely to go along the lines of the link to the George Galloway interview posted originally by Ort and then by me at 118. (If you haven't looked at that, please do, it is very entertaining and I think convincing.)

Posted by: juliania | Aug 29 2019 22:31 utc | 203

Dear reader,

We'll see, but just watch as BJ gets a no-deal Brexit through as people cry but, otherwise, do little to prevent it. Just like when Trump was elected- very powerful and active people oddly sit in an open-mouthed stupor and do nothing of impact. I dunno about a conspiracy, but that's certainly curious.

Anyways, these complex layers of questions and confusion serve as hallway of mirrors. I have followed the IR field for decades and it still confuses and confounds, so I understand why most don't pay attention and do other things. Spys are gonna spy and liars are gonna lie, its not a beautiful game.

The only real consistency is that most world-is-ending crises of the moment turn out to be nothingburgers. Remember when Yeltsin stated that NATO bombing Serbia in Kosovo could be the start of World War III?

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9904/10/kosovo.russia.diplomacy.

Sincerely, OOTA

Posted by: OutOfThinAir | Aug 29 2019 23:11 utc | 204

".. Brits in general (and the commenter was one) were agreeable to entering the EEC when that was the issue, but have been not so happy to be then put into the EU."

And the British were not alone in this. Both France and The Netherlands held referenda on the "EU Constitution" as it was called, setting out the changes in the EC and explaining the "need"for 'Greater Unification".
Ireland too put the matter before the people. And in all three countries, despite massive and officially financed campaigning for the "constitution' it was defeated.
The net result was that France and The Netherlands, essentially, got round the vote by changing the name of the treaty, adding a superficial amendment or two and voting it through their Parliaments. In Ireland, threatened with dire consequences and backed by all parties except Sinn Fein, another referendum was held and the verdict reversed 'democratically.'!
In the UK, politicians knew that the significant modifications of sovereignty would be rejected, as they had been wherever they were put before the people, and rushed the enabling legislation through Westminster.
The truth is that the EU cannot last in its present form: it will either be dismantled state by state or it will become, that Imperialist and Capitalist dream, a federal state with only vestigial democratic institutions.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 29 2019 23:35 utc | 205

Democracy has never existed in most countries, this is a prime example of the truth.

Posted by: steve | Aug 30 2019 0:16 utc | 206

@12 Jackrabbit

If this were the decisive game of the World Cup, the time would be second half, and the score would be 2-0 in favor of Brexit. And in response to the question "Do we hate chess players who win?" the answer seems to be "people who are morally inferior to us have no right to win under any circumstances". So boring.

Posted by: ETA | Aug 30 2019 1:15 utc | 207

bevin @13
Surely you mean "crypto-fascist". I am not finding "proto-fascist" in my dictionary.

Posted by: ETA | Aug 30 2019 1:20 utc | 208

BM @21
When you refer to BoJo as 'Yeltsin' do you mean that he is dominated by a certain foreign leader as Yeltsin was by President Clinton? And if so what is the name of that leader? Does it by any chance have 5 letters?

Posted by: ETA | Aug 30 2019 1:48 utc | 209

@ juliania... i happened to see craig murray went right into what BM and i were addressing about the queen in his post today...

you might find the short article worth the read... titled - The Queen’s Active Role in the Right Wing Coup

Posted by: james | Aug 30 2019 2:01 utc | 210

I tend socialist and have to say Corbyn is a great disappointment and a disgrace. Everytime he had the chance to say something important or pick a side, he failed. Sure establishment is all against him and he would never become a PM but he still had the chance to be a great voice and a great leader in this time for Brittain. But his flip flopping makes him look like a weak flacid old man.

I have no problem with Porton Johnson taking over and delivering brexit. That's what he promised. Time to deliver.

Posted by: Comandante | Aug 28 2019 13:42 utc | 16

What it is called? Balderdash? Rubbish? My command of insular English is too weak.

Number one, "I am socialist by inclination but I have to problem with Johnson" is a typical Trollish shtick.

Number two, "strength" is not a virtue if it boldly leads folks into a morass (or is it a quag?). Corbyn is not an angel, but demanding clear choice between "EU is a paradise" and "leaving EU is like liberating from Egyptian slavery" is bunkum, balderdash, rubbish, neither is true, however "manly" iit s to make a pick, and "unmanly" to reject this false choice.

Currently, Johnson has a trouble convincing a super-majority of his own party to his position, hence he resorts to "bold moves" that insulate him from the diehard minority, as well as from the voice of the rest of the Parliament. In a way, his play is similar to that of Teresa May, ram in her/his solution under the threat of an electoral catastrophe for the Tories. However feebleminded members of Parliament may be, it seems that every which way Brexit is delivered, UK (and Tories) will be in a pickle, something that contradicts "liberation" narrative. Welcome to 40 years wandering through a desert!

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 30 2019 2:01 utc | 211

Piotr Berman @212: ... reject this false choice.

But REMAIN or Trump devours your health service! is also a false choice as well as fearmongering to get people to accept the lesser-evil (which is, naturally, the establishment's desired outcome).

Instead of calling for a re-vote (as he has already said he would) Corbyn should call BoJo's bluff. The establishment knows that if they go ahead with the disaster of a no-deal Brexit, they face generation of Labor rule.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 30 2019 2:54 utc | 212

If Brexit succeeds, Italy could come next. And then all hell breaks lose.

The 'globalist' Big Brother establishment has already decided for all of us:

> Europe will be a united set of poodles;
(via unabashedly pro-US establishment in UK, France, and eastern European countries)

> US-controlled NATO (occupation) will continue despite the end of the Cold War;
(Despite lip-service about a European army)

> US is the only country that can project force far from its borders;

> Israel is the only country that can control its borders.


Despite all the "Democracy Works!" propaganda, the people are simply not allowed to make a choice that conflicts with the above.

UK will REMAIN after the farce has played out.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

Welcome to the rabbit hole.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 30 2019 3:14 utc | 213

Posted by: bevin | Aug 29 2019 23:35 utc | 206

I see bevin is a really old-fashioned Bennite. I would have said they'd all died out thirty years ago, but for the survival of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party. Though Corbyn's failure to make a go of it not a good sign. Such people have been predicting the death of the EU for forty years, but somehow it has not died, but flourishes even stronger than ever. It's a matter of lifestyle, not of politics, as old-fashioned isolationists such as bevin don't understand. Nobody wants to go back to the old ways of waiting for an hour to go through passport control, as is the new British plan for Eurostar in the Gare du Nord in Paris. They don't want to go back to filling out 20 pages of customs forms for each package in a container. But isolationist Brits like bevin, they do want that. Puzzling as to why.

Posted by: Laguerre | Aug 30 2019 3:18 utc | 214

I find it bizzare that Parliament claims that it is Sovereign over itself - implying it is not bound by past decisions. True Sovereignty over oneself is exactly the binding of one's future actions according to a decision made in the present.

If I said 'I will stop drinking alcohol from henceforth', but a week later changed my mind and sunk back into the bottle - would I be Sovereign over my own self? No, I'd be an irrevocable weakling.

And even if Parliament were such a weakling, it does not impact the fact of it being bound by the True Sovereign - the citizenry, as represented by the electorate. If it refuses this, it is simply undemocratic - directly.

As some other left leaners here, I agree Boris is doing the right thing initially. The Queen did what she is legally bound to do - not interfere.

That the Queen and the Tory elites may be taking Brexit for their ulterior motives is besides the point - the elites do that to all laws anyways. It is the job of the decent breed of politicians on both sides of the spectrum to move Brexit to what would be beneficial for the population as a whole.

Any touching of the vote would be engaging in ex post facto law. It was a bad vote, with no consideration of problems, contingencies, allowance for re-runs. But those are lessons for the next directly democratic vote.

Jeremy here reveals himself as an opportunist and a coward. He wants Brexit because no level of his mid 20th century state socialistic dream could be pulled off inside the EU, but he does not shout it from the rooftops.

A Brexit run by the right people could move Britain away from the expected Tory wet dream, but it would take a leader on the left, for the left to be elected into power. And Jeremy, although a principled politician when voicing the minority opinion, is a failure when in charge of the majority opinion.

And Ireland should reunite. It is only natural. Sure it will take time for the people to re-merge, but staying divided won't do them any good in the long run.

Posted by: Ilya G Poimandres | Aug 30 2019 5:41 utc | 215

"A joint statement from @UKLabour, @theSNP, @LibDems, @Plaid_Cymru, @ForChange_Now and @TheGreenParty as we work together to stop Boris Johnson's smash and grab on democracy:"
Can't copy/paste the Joint Statement; so, if you want to read what it says, you'll need to click the link!
Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 29 2019 21:34 utc | 202

The statement is here.

Corbyn statement

What proportion of parliament to Labour, SNP, LibDems, Plaid Cymru, For Change Now and the Greens have between them? [Maybe one should subtract New Labour parliamentarians from the Labour count, though].

Posted by: BM | Aug 30 2019 7:35 utc | 216

Posted by: bevin | Aug 29 2019 23:35 utc | 206

Bevin, the EU is ALREADY an undemocratic institution, ruled not by the EU parliament but by the European Commission, an unelected posse of bureacrats, beholden to NATO, the IMF, the European Bank and other UNELECTED institutions.

Posted by: Barovsky | Aug 30 2019 9:51 utc | 217

Posted by: Ilya G Poimandres | Aug 30 2019 5:41 utc | 216

Corbyn is not a socialist, nor does he advocate for a socialist UK. At best he's a social democrat living in a world of unbridled Victorian capitalism and very much an aberration (unfortunately).

Posted by: Barovsky | Aug 30 2019 9:56 utc | 218

It seems the EU blinked first:

Brexit May Be Delayed Again to Help Reach Deal - Luxembourg's Foreign Minister

"There is a date, October 31, which was set by us as well and one should not discuss possible prolongation now. If we postpone it to achieve a result, I support the idea, but if we delay just to delay, then I don't," Asselborn told reporters when he arrived at an informal meeting between the EU ministers of foreign affairs in Helsinki and was asked if the Brexit deadline could be postponed.

Translation from diplomatese: please stop Brexit, British oposition, we need your country.

Posted by: vk | Aug 30 2019 11:20 utc | 219

Posted by: vk | Aug 30 2019 11:20 utc | 220

"Translation from diplomatese: please stop Brexit, British oposition, we need your country."

--Didn't you mean: Translation from diplomatese: please stop Brexit, British oposition, we need your MONEY.

Alternatively, it's like seeing your star player about to walk on a free transfer...

Posted by: Anacharsis | Aug 30 2019 11:31 utc | 220

OOTA @205

"Remember when Yeltsin stated that NATO bombing Serbia in Kosovo could be the start of World War III?"

I do not remember that particular statement but one could certainly build a case that would support that prediction.

Posted by: arby | Aug 30 2019 12:23 utc | 221

karlof1: voter turnout is what carried Leave.

Yes a good ex. of the supporters of the ‘radical’ proposal: consequent change, overturning part of the accepted order, the mad cap idea, etc. turn up to vote, with those against less motivated, interested, involved, or alarmed.

Not to mention the in-betweens, don’t knows, don’t cares, etc. not voting.

Was the Referendum binding? Before the vote? If so, how what when? Unclear...

Adding, UK voters were, are, completely unused to the status of referenda on major issues.
They vote for their local MPs, for MEPs, mayors, and the like, in a rather, until now, ‘stable’ pol. landscape.

The referendum is a wild-card intruder.

CH radical proposals are almost always refused, as *the status-quo lot turns out en masse*. Recently binned, ex.:

Full Money Initiative (Monetary creation by National Bank only, putting paid to Private Banking) —imho will return in some other form. hopefully.

https://www.vollgeld-initiative.ch/english/

Universal Basic Income —imho this one was badly formulated and poorly worked out, swiss are OK with the present social aid system - paying the UBI implied changes that were not gone into - work ethic is incredibly strong

Putting Swiss Law first over International Law. 6 months of intensive debates - media, press, all pol. parties, many other groups, taking stances, citizen groups, discussions at the bus stop and on and on - complicated. Defeated by 66%. (I quote this one because of the ‘sovereign’ arguments, similar to UK.)

Not saying Swiss system is better, diff countries, diff trads, diff laws - only that referenda in the UK are not part of the instituted system so actioning one may be sneakily manipulatory.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 30 2019 14:21 utc | 222

ETA@209
I am not a grammarian but by proto-fascist I mean someone preparing the way for fascism. By crypto fascist I would mean someone who amounts to being a fascist.

Laguerre@215 Your contribution is really not worth answering. Suffice it to say that you appear to be extremely interested in the minutiae of travel arrangements. There is no reason on earth why the UK cannot strike mutually beneficial deals regarding tourism or trading commodities with the EU.

Barovsky @218 I agree with everything you say. I did not suggest that the EU would become democratic-it already is- but that it would shed all pretence to being so, and being committed to evolving towards democracy.
Why disagree with those who, clearly, are on the same side as you?
As to whether or not Corbyn is a Socialist, I can assure you that The Establishment in the UK, from the military, to the nobility to the plutocracy fear that he is. But then they are, politically, paranoid that their scams are close to becoming extinct.

Finally it would appear that, unsurprisingly, people take the MSM's reports of Corbyn's position on the current situation as being accurate. This is a big mistake. The media hate Corbyn for the same reasons that Wall St hates Sanders. In fact Corbyn is not calling for a 're-vote' but for Brexit to be negotiated in good faith and without the consequences of No Deal. And this is not his personal whim but the mandated compromise policy which he has been instructed by the party Conference to promote.
While I sympathise with the policy it is not one with which I agree. But then I am not employed by the largest political party in Europe to carry out the policies its-flawed but authoritative- policy making bodies mandate.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 30 2019 14:45 utc | 223

What seems to have motivated the those of the elite in favour of Leave, it seems, was radically different, as far as I understand. The EU has been pushing for more transparency of offshore tax havens such as the British Virgin Islands, and for tighter measures against money laundering - of which the world-wide capital is the City of London, linked very closely with the offshore tax havens through the very opaque links that risked being opened up by the EU transparency measures. The UK oligarchs were then determined to get out of the EU at all costs before the transparency measures could be implemented. BM @ 170.

In a previous post, i mentioned ‘finance was the tipping point’ ..

The EU has been making moves for many years against tax havens, offshore finance, cheats, and very important, against Mega Cos, like GAFA who pay no (or symbolic) tax. Why?

Because citizens in F, D, It, Poland, etc. object strongly. Small biz pays 30% tax + VAT, an off the cuff rough average, even a low estimate..ok whatever… and Google and Apple.. pays..zilch..

The EU PTB know the EU will break apart if this injustice is not corrected, so the Council is forced to act, move forward.

A problem is that they gave over or tolerated privileges to ‘favored places’ like to the Republic of Ireland (to give advantages and promote adherence..)

GAFA or GAFAM = Google Apple Face Book Amazon, plus Microsoft.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 30 2019 15:42 utc | 224

What proportion of parliament to Labour, SNP, LibDems, Plaid Cymru, For Change Now and the Greens have between them? [Maybe one should subtract New Labour parliamentarians from the Labour count, though]. Posted by: BM |@ 217 <=instead of a statement, or even instead of objecting, what would be the result if the people of England were to write their own constitution without regard to the queen or the government, and independently circulate the proposed peoples democratic constitution for ratification? Should a majority of the persons in England ratify such a new constitution, may be the old government would just disappear.. ?? that is what happened in 1789 in the USA.. a newly ratified constitution forced the old government out.. and the new government was staffed by a vastly different bunch that had little interest in the folks from the old government. Its just my opinion that neither the old government nor the queen is going to change.. Bickering to no useful end will not reduce the suffering of the masses. I don't know? is developing and circulating a constitution against the law in UK occupied Briton?

everybody just sits back and talks while the people who stymied the people's resolve now try to avoid it.. what folly? Just MO.

Posted by: snake | Aug 30 2019 16:11 utc | 225

- Boris Johnson wrote a book called "The Churchill Factor". It's clear that BloJo admired Churchill.
- But BloJo and Churchill do have something in common. Churchill was leading the UK when the country/Empire was past its peak. And BloJo (some hate BoJo so much that they refer to BoJo as BloJob) becomes prime minister at a time when the UK is NOT "in the best of financial shapes".
- "Will the last one that leaves the UK also turn off the economy and the lights ?"

Posted by: Willy2 | Aug 30 2019 17:03 utc | 226

@ BM | Aug 28 2019 14:02 utc | 19

”When an official of the palace Anthony Blunt was exposed as a Soviet spy he was arrested and should by law have been tried for treason. But as a senior palace official intimate with the monarch he knew too many secrets about the British monarch's actions during the wars with Germany. These secrets may have come out in a trial, so Blunt was allowed to go to the Soviet Union where he remained for the rest of his life.”

Blunt was never an official of the palace – he was the curator of the Queen's art collection, that's all. He was head of the Courtould (sp?) Institute of Art, and he worked for MI5 during WWII and occasionally after. Blunt did not go to the Soviet Union, although fellow spies Burgess and Maclean did. He made deals with government and MI5 officials when he was found out, and lived out his life in England.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Aug 30 2019 20:05 utc | 227

Instead of calling for a re-vote (as he has already said he would) Corbyn should call BoJo's bluff. The establishment knows that if they go ahead with the disaster of a no-deal Brexit, they face generation of Labor rule.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 30 2019 2:54 utc | 213

I am not sure what does it mean "call BoJo's bluff". I bet that no-deal Brexit will be delivered, and the latest invention is a coalition of opponents just ineffectual enough that it will narrowly fail. Corbyn graciously offered himself as a leader of "caretaker government", and he faces vehement opposition to this idea among the several folks who recently left Labour and Conservatives, and leaders of LibDems. That would improve Labour chances for taking votes from their so-far supporters in the next general elections.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 31 2019 1:20 utc | 228

Piotr Berman @229: I am not sure what does it mean "call BoJo's bluff".

Corbyn told Parliament that Labor would call for a re-vote and campaign for REMAIN if BoJo's Brexit plans didn't pass muster.

"Call BoJo's Bluff" means to complain about his Brexit plans but not take the bait and becoming the BoJo/establishment instrument for reversing Brexit.

Remainers are now pushing a full-on fear-mongering campaign that includes the claim that UK is being driven in to the arms of Trump and NHS will be privatized. Because the establishment still wants REMAIN to prevail.

<> <> <> <> <>

Despite my warnings, I doubt anyone will listen. When the smoke clears, REMAIN will have won out. And Labor will be blamed for reversing Brexit.

IMO there is STILL not enough cynicism about the Empire/establishment. So few see through the machinations.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 31 2019 2:17 utc | 229

The first comment Bjorn Holmgaard I tip my hat to you. ( I agree) I too say the will of the people should be honoured, if not what do we have? For nearly three years Parliament has abrogate and delayed the decision of the referendum.

Posted by: col from Oz | Aug 31 2019 3:16 utc | 230

Brexit referendum was already quite clear. That referendum didn't include all the hurdles the fifth column remainers in close cooperation with the EU put on the road to Brexit. The May "deal" would have demoted the UK to a dependent non-member state as would fit the European Neighborhood Policy. That ENP through an association agreement signed by the US installed puppet regime reduced the Ukraine to an indentured, indebted thoroughly corrupted state forced to sell its assets in a fire sale.

Recently the Brexit referendum was confirmed by UK's EU parliament elections result through the landslide win of Farage's party destroying all incumbents (Labour, Tories and LibDem) in a landslide win.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48403131

Posted by: JR | Aug 31 2019 7:26 utc | 231

What it is highly likely behind the Brexit Hoax...On why they ( Trump and its accolites around the West and the world...)seek chaos and the end of representative democracy...

Brexit & the Madness of the ‘Sovereign Individual’

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 31 2019 9:26 utc | 232

An accurate analysis on state of affairs in UK and what Brexit really is and will be...

Cruel Brittania – The Road to Ruin

Britain is nothing like what it was even forty years ago. The very serious question that Britain could become a failed state has only emerged because it is failing in its primary duty – to protect and safeguard the lives of its citizens. And on the current trajectory – it is only going to get worse.

Perhaps, as some economists and experts say, Brexit is actually the result of identity politics that thrust a wedge through civil society – itself nothing more than a bogus response to crisis-hit Britain. In reality, the public has been fooled to walk down one path – alienation on the one hand or animosity on the other – far from the tolerant, polite, friendly, law-abiding country Britain once was. Political figures set a bad example. They are becoming lawless, they are publicly intolerant, many are just plain rude and do not deserve a privileged place in public life care of the taxpayer.

Surely what we really want is a system where people, on the basis of talent, effort, and achievement, rather than wealth or social class, get to rise to positions of power in areas from education to policing, from corporations to politics. What Brexit massively fails on is that it is an ideology the opposite of what might be called a meritocracy. It will deliver the opposite to anything remotely looking like a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. It will be more divisive, create more inequality and make society more ruthless.

No matter what your political persuasion, do you think that our country is best served by reducing the life chances of the young, kicking those that trip over on the way and then neglecting the elderly that contributed a life that helped to maintain the nation?

Soon we will be in a country where half will be in a class being kicked by the other half.

This spiral around the plughole is the route we have chosen where our sense of fair play is submerging just as democracy drowns. Perhaps Brexit is what we deserve.

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 31 2019 12:53 utc | 233

Sasha - thanks. It is remarkable the amount pro brexit sentiment on this board. And almost all the leavers who totally don't get how badly they have been duped into believing there are beneficial aspects like "national sovereignty". Fake memes pushed by Mercer/Bannon/Farage/Trump.

When clearly the most immediately beneficial course of political action in all countries is to mobilise on the left for economic equality and humanitarian values to not only allow refugees and immigrants from environmentally destroyed nations to our south.

The exact opposite of which will occur by backing conservative neoliberals pushing retrogressive policies tinged with authoritarian fascism.

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 31 2019 13:38 utc | 234

Not only allow refugees but actively support their integration into our societies to help enlarge our organised opposition to the ruling classes.

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 31 2019 13:41 utc | 235

@Posted by: Sasha | Aug 31 2019 12:53 utc | 234

On harsh contrast with this black prospect, on a future working till up to 75 to then die willfully in misery as the Greencapitalist consider any health service spending on you a waste, an article by a Briton who traveled to the GDR in the late 80s to find that what people mainly and most were missing there was only the "freedom" to travel abroad, but for the rest they seemd to enjoy their state guaranteed security net from cradle to grave on full employment, affordable housing, free education and health care, and regulated working and leissure hours, and guaranteed pensions.....But it could be that that "freedom" still available to us, could not be there anymore in the near future, since Ursula Van der Leyen ( iguess that under the alibi of climate change...) wants to increase flight tarifs to such stratospheric levels that only the likes as she, Greta, Bojo, Rees-Mogg and Trump will be able to travel...Thus we will be lacking the only "freedom" not available to those in the communist/socialist countries while enjoying all the hell of late savage capitalism....

Do not you think we must start organizing ourselves before ours is reduced to ashes to do something more than throw opinions in the net?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1CyPjQQTAM

I will be using my "freedom" in the next days....See you in the last days of September...

Stay healthy and keep up the good fight...To the trolls and under payement minions of the turbocapitalists elites... you die of nausea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hmtsBk9L_s

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 31 2019 13:50 utc | 236

"believing there are beneficial aspects like "national sovereignty". Fake memes pushed by Mercer/Bannon/Farage/Trump.>>"
The idea that the Labour left, which has consistently opposed the EU for more than 50 years-and whose prophecies of the consequences to the UK of becoming a part of the European "Project" have all been borne out in time. The idea that it got its ideas on the importance of national sovereignty from Bannon etc is one that could only have occurred to an American dilettante.
Far from being "fake memes" the assertion that it is impossible to develop independent policies without refusing to accept diktats from organisations like the EU and NATO is so obvious that it is incontrovertible.
The facts are very simple within the EU, ruled by its neo-liberal constitution, it is impossible for the UK to reverse the systematic dismantling of state enterprises and social services carried out by Thatcherites and Blairites.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 31 2019 14:07 utc | 237

@Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 31 2019 13:38 utc | 235

LOL! It seems that almost simultaneously to when you were writting your response, I was just typing what could be the the perfect response to yours...

May be a case of torsion radiation?

Love this phenomena...especially when happening amongst working class peers...That is something, friends...

Hearts up!

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 31 2019 14:29 utc | 238

bevin, name calling me and hiding behind the storied history of the nationally sovereign "Labour Left" doesn't mask the fact you and the "Labour Left" were duped by the fake memes promulgated by Mercer/Bannon/Farage/Trump.

Or maybe Mercer/Bannon/Farage/Trump are counted by you among the "Labour Left?"

Jackrabbit manfully admitted he erred in voting for Trump. Doubling down on the Brexit fallacy won't improve your expert standing anywhere...except maybe on this board.

Even renowned experts such as yourself are wrong on occasion while dubious dilettantes such as myself can be correct.

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 31 2019 16:16 utc | 239

Sasha, hahaha. Yes, that is funny and not atypical mental telepathy exhibited across the world wide web when "grate minds" think alike.

Good luck to you my friend...

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 31 2019 16:30 utc | 240

I would never have guessed that racist, nationalist xenophobia is also a historical feature of the "Labour Left" but thanks to Bevin for enlightening me.

Fear of the other mixed with nationalism is the deadliest historical feature of the European identity. I thought we got beyond that post-WWII but everything that's old eventually becomes new again....because of the detrimental impact on the working class by the recurrent business cycles of globalisation.

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 31 2019 16:57 utc | 241

Tony 32

I am in basic agreement with your position.
I share your view of the EU.

However, I don't feel that this is all there is to be said about the actual referendum process and outcome and the "execution" of the result.

I generally trust the viewpoints of Finian Cunningham, and he reminds readers of the following points that have maybe gone down the memory hole:

"Who called for Brexit in the first place? It was Johnson's Conservative Party under David Cameron's leadership that pledged holding an “in-out” referendum as part of its election manifesto. That move was motivated by internal Tory party squabbles with hardline Euroskeptics and a bid to calm the ranks with a referendum. It was also motivated by Cameron trying to stymie the newly formed UK Independence Party (UKIP) led by Nigel Farage which was stealing Conservative voters with its hardline anti-EU platform.

Cameron probably didn't bet on the Brexit referendum result. The whole exercise was a political maneuver to buy off Tory party assaults from within and from UKIP. The referendum was carried, largely down to claims of huge economic savings if Britain were to leave the EU and its budget obligations. Those claims, such as post-Brexit Britain having billions of pounds to invest in the National Health Service, have since turned out to be empty, told to the electorate by the likes of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and other hardline Brexiteers who are now in control of government."

The rest is here:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52187.htm

Still, there are downsides and scurrilouis agendas in most elections, and it is up to voters to figure these out and choose accordingly. It is not acceptable to say "voters didn't understand what they were voting for." The same percentage probably wouldn't understand what they are voting for the second time round, either.

I am not British. All I can say is that the prospect of driving the UK, or whatever is left of it, into the arms of Trump and the USA does not look like a good idea. The more the UK is dependent on trade with the USA for survival, the fewer options it will have for domestic policy. So, from the frying pan into the fire? But perhaps the post-Brexit voters would/will have more say to mold domestic policy, including policies that the US attempts to foist on them.

Surely the ideal scenario would be a Brexit that forges a new relationship with the EU that provides the UK with some ballast against the depredations of the Trump USA and its enablers within the UK.

.

Posted by: Really?? | Aug 31 2019 19:45 utc | 242

This crowd marching on to Buckingam Palace reminds me of that final scene of "V of Vendetta"

https://twitter.com/descifraguerra/status/1167857295134351360

May be it is true that this move could cost Elizabeth her crown....

Posted by: Sasha | Sep 1 2019 0:48 utc | 243

Every option with regards to Brexit has been rejected by the UK Parliament. The most benign option, the Norway option, would have got a majority in the UK Parliamentary indicative votes (as would every other flavour of Brexit) if remainers had gone for it. Why didn't they? Because it suited MPs to polarise the options between Remain and a "hard" Brexit.

The Norway option (the softest of Brexits) would have been acceptable (as a compromise) to the vast majority of British people; one reason why it was unacceptable to the UK Parliament. A second reason is that the UK parliament feared that a small step away would, in time, have been followed by further step aways. Remainers fundamentally did not believe that the British people, having dipped their toes in the water, would ever have stepped back; a curious lack of faith in their beloved project!

Posted by: ADKC | Sep 2 2019 7:03 utc | 244

donkeytale @:Jackrabbit manfully admitted he erred in voting for Trump.

Erred in that I voted AGAINST HILLARY and got much the same anyway. Trump's 'America First' has been a scam: he's still in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria; has increased military budget as part of Cold War II; is attempting regime change in Venezuela; etc.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 2 2019 11:19 utc | 245

Johnson adopted a new puppy to assure himself that he will at least have one loyal friend

Posted by: john mellar | Sep 3 2019 17:15 utc | 246

The Brits voted for an EU Exit. That has so far been denied to them. Boris must do what it takes. Yeah, bad to leave with no plan, but that's why the opponents have been stalling, hoping to derail the Exit.
Boris has only 'seized power' from the opponents who denied the Voters' power.

Posted by: Toolman | Sep 7 2019 10:16 utc | 247

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.