Brexit is dead. Parliament killed it
when they voted against a no-deal option. All the remainers have to do
now is to keep finding excuses to vote down whatever deal is put in
front of them, which they will. As for the leave crowd, I kind of feel sorry for them. They have been
cheated and don't realize it yet. It's a good thing that the right doesn't share the left's enthusiasm for a good riot. If they did, I think they might burn London to the ground.
The Gospel Preached to the Patriarch Abraham
21 hours ago
3 comments:
The problem is that while there is a slim majority for an undefined Leave, there is no majority for what that should actually look like. There are basically three minority opinions: definitely hard Brexit, Leave but definitely no hard Brexit, and Remain. New elections required. Riots are possible given the nationalist mood on the Right (enflamed beyond reason by social media and foreign provacateurs), but they would come at despite not having majority support not because the will of the majority was undermined. The Right is getting more comfortable spouting non-democratic rhetoric.
The better option would be to use a long delay to address the clear weaknesses of the European project as currently structured, e.g., the euro, completely unconstrained internal labor mobility.
The original post looks very stale in view of the developments of 20 Mar 2019. Now it is too late in the game to achieve an orderly exit without an extension of time on the 29 Mar 2019 deadline. The EU has said that an extension will only be given if May's deal is passed, but the speaker of the House has said that it is not possible to hold another vote on May's deal. In other words, the only legally and practically possible outcome in view of the asserted positions of the relevant actors right now is a no-deal Brexit on 29 Mary 2019.
It is always possible that one of those two positions will collapse in advance of 29 Mar. Right now, however, the U.K. is on a glide-path to no-deal Brexit on 29 Mar 2019. The parliament's vote of disapproval of that option is totally irrelevant to the probability of that no-deal outcome (as soon vote that you disapprove of spring arriving in March). If one were giving odds on likelihood of different outcomes, no-deal Brexit would surely be the odds-on favorite right now.
I do not say this because I favor such an outcome. I am merely looking at the facts as I see them and assigning probabilities in response. I would be interested to hear it if someone has reason to case doubt on my assessment.
The other option being a longer extension, which would require some sort of process whereby the UK could assure the EU it was going to do x, which would lead to a clear decision one way or the other. For example, new elections to be called with time after that to negotiate the exit (whether hard, soft, Remain with changes, or just Remain). There is clearly a majority against a no-deal Brexit, it's just a matter of whether they feel confident enough to vote on what that means. The referendum itself as well as "Brexit means Brexit" has always pandered to nativist sentiment without getting dirtied by the realities it would entail (i.e., financial collapse, billions to Brussels for commitments already made, no more money for NHS, no EU monies to non-London UK, etc.) You are correct that it is just as easy for the hard and no-specifics Brexit majority to allow the final date to pass by inaction. I'm not so sure the soft Brexit middle is as soft in the head to allow the financial ramifications of a no-deal Brexit to happen, though, even if it emboldens the nativist no-dealers campaigning (like Republicans here have for years) that they simply need to be more extreme to get the results they want. Like with Trump in 2016, sometimes you just need to let the dummies get what they want to teach them how dumb they're being; there ain't no cure for stupid, except direct consequences to their actions.
Post a Comment