More on Brexit
- This topic has 493 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Actually, that has long been the choice facing the British capitalist class, as this letter in the Times on 14 August pointed out (anticipating Macron) :
“Sir, When I voted to join the Common Market in 1975 it seemed to me that the future of our country lay either with Europe or the US. Your leading article “Strategic Pivot” (Aug 13) makes it clear that nothing has changed. If we leave the EU we shall, inevitably, become a client state of the US, expected to follow the policy of the US government in which we have no voice. We may not always agree with the policy decisions taken by the EU, but we do at least have the opportunity to influence them. In a world controlled by competing power blocks, the idea of pursuing an independent path is a mirage.
Professor Richard Carter, Carnforth, Lancs.”Let’s not forget the Lexits
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/leave-fight-transform-founding-statement
With the fall of the pound as a consequence of Brexit, not only have the Brexiteers placed their future in the hands of the USA but have placed “for sale” signs on every UK asset for investors from every nation.
And, of course, the pound is still spiraling downwards so expect more foreign capital to buy up anything of value.
So much for Brexiteer nationalism and protectionism.
The political theatre over Brexit is getting more exciting or boring depending on your point of view. Besides exposing that political democracy is Britain isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be, the government’s planned suspension of parliament is probably aimed at strengthening the government’s hand in its negotiations with the EU. I don’t know whether or not Boris wants a no-deal Brexit. Because of its consequences for the British capitalist economy from it suddenly becoming more difficult to access one of its major export markets, I wouldn’t have thought so. I imagine his strategy is to get some face-saving changes to the backstop and then come back to propose May’s deal with these.
The backstop, by making a customs union and common regulatory area the fall-back position in case of non-agreement on a wider UK-EU trade deal, strengthens the EU’s hand in these negotiations. So you might expect a UK government to try to water it down. The idea is being floated that instead of a blanket arrangement covering everything, the same result could be reached on a sector-by-sector basis:
“Under a potential sector-by-sector approach EU product safety checks, especially on food and farm goods, would apply across the whole of the island of Ireland but different sections of the economy would have the freedom to follow new, British rules, under a ‘baskets’ approach. Diplomatic sources understand that such a plan would be designed to avoid the need for the current backstop by keeping a common regulatory framework in certain key areas…. Under such a scheme Britain or Northern Ireland would align with EU rules on safety of farm products and for ‘common prohibited goods’, such as dangerous chemicals, smuggling or counterfeiting.'(Times, 28 August).
This might work especially as both Ireland/UK trade and Northern Ireland/UK trade, neither of which involves the Irish land border, are more important than Ireland/Northern Ireland trade. That might save Boris’s face as well as meet the EU’s concern about Northern Ireland being a backdoor into the EU single market for goods that didn’t meet its regulatory standards. We’ll see.
As we’ve said all along, it’s all to do with the trading arrangements of the capitalist class and so not a concern of socialists or the working class generally, despite the efforts of politicians supporting various different capitalist interests to get us to take sides. Having said this, a no-deal Brexit at Halloween would unnecessarily, if only temporarily, make things worse for many workers and so not something to be welcomed.
There was a need for the SOYMB blog to issue some sort of observation so it did a relatively short post here
https://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2019/08/brexiteers-buccaneers.html
On re-reading it overly-emphasizes the personality of Johnson than focus on current constitution wrangling
perhaps someone can produce a more definitive response to use – hint, hint
Brexit has, to many, shed light on the fallacy of parliamentary/representative democracy – the risk is whether this sentiment turns into furthered support for EU “style” capitalism and management of class relations
Diane Abbots pennyworth.
Ignoring her hyperbole she doe touch upon what has been said on the forum and not much in the media – a pro American trade deal Brexit
Long time since I have been on forum, so apologies if this has been discussed recently.
We rightly defend ourselves against leninists and anarchists and say how we aren’t anti-reformism fetishists and would if needs be defend democracy – even bourgeouis democracy. Of course its easy to make that decision if the enemy are black-shirted fascists suddenly come out of nowhere and try and close down Parliament for ever. But what if its not that easy to spot? – Sinclair Lewis said that fascism would come “wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross” (which doesn’t narrow it down much at the moment).
Anyway, Parliament is being shut down – but only for a few days, and apparently not with any long-term fascistic intent (though nascent fascists are hardly likely to declare that intent). I doubt its sufficient to stop the UK working class rising up and voting for SPGB at the next election in their droves if they were to suddenly gain class-consciousness. I’ve been in the Party for 38 years and would finally love to attend one of those fun-looking reformist’s demo’s. I probably wont actually go along to today’s in Glasgow (but more to do with Partick Thistle v Ayr than any proud principle) but interested to hear if any other comrades are starting to think at what point it becomes a fetish to stand aside. “First they came for the EU….etc etc”
I think when it comes to the case for democracy both Remainers and Brexiteers have an argument
There was a referendum where the majority voted to leave the EU, no matter what reason. May then Johnson both say they have been trying to honour that result. I do note that referenda have been a favourite tool of despots in the past as has suspending parliamentary procedures.
Hard Remainers believe that another referendum should be held, believing the will of the people has now changed.
The Soft Remainers still hope for some sort of membership of the EU at least for the time being in the form of an agreed deal.
The Scottish Nationalists have spotted an opportunity on technical grounds to disregard the 2014 referendum and hold another one and they too are hopeful that there has been a shift in opinion due to Brexit. With the drop in the pound they are now committed to break the link with sterling which previously they were reluctant to do.
So all I can say is that a referendum is simply a snapshot of how people feel at a particular moment in history…and it can be different the next moment in time.
Missed this at the time (last week, 26 August) but here’s Corbyn denouncing no deal as a “bankers’ Brexit”:
The anti-Corbyn media, i.e. most of them, criticised this as absurd, pointing to the list of bankers and other financiers who had bankrolled the Remain campaign. I didn’t notice any mention of the fact that a different group of financiers bankrolled the Leave campaign. Clearly, there was a split amongst financiers, with the mainstream City establishment supporting Remain (for fear of being cut off from selling their “financial services” in the EU) with a smaller number of mavericks engaged in less respectable dealings supporting Leave (as they didn’t want EU regulation of their activities).
The second lot will indeed benefit from a No Deal Brexit, in fact from any Brexit. Which is why of course they bankrolled the Leave campaign.
It always amazes me how sections of the media accused the Russian state of meddling in the US elections but when Trump meddles in the affairs of other countries as with Brexit…
Either we disregard completely the borders of nation states (the preferred option) or stop resorting to double standards
Somebody gave me their copy of the 15 August issue of the London Review of Books. There’s an article by Alexander Zevin ( of New Left Review) which makes a relevant point:
“The image of the EU held by those who still hope to reverse the Brexit vote is rarely darkened by its actions, from the devastation of Greece under Troika-imposed austerity, to the stagnation of Italy, whose modest fiscal stimulus runs foul of Europe’s draconian deficit and debt rules, to the way it treats those who cross its southern and eastern borders. Membership of such a club may look preferable to exclusion from it, but it’s unclear why there should be much enthusiasm about the choice.”
Or, of course, why people should get worked up in favour of the choice to leave it.
Amid all the events going on in Westminster at the moment this news item is perhaps not getting the significance it might deserve: the DUP agreeing to a border down the Irish Sea for agriculture and food products.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/dup-open-to-talks-on-allireland-food-zone-to-ward-off-backstop-38464852.html
“DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds says his party is open to discussions with Prime Minister Boris Johnson on a possible all-Ireland food standards zone as part of a solution to the Brexit backstop.
Mr Johnson told MPs yesterday that he wants talks on an all-Ireland approach to agriculture and food products.
He has suggested that agri-food could continue to be regulated on an all-island basis after Brexit, creating a regulatory barrier down the Irish Sea.”
Don’t know if the EU will agree to this, but it maybe part of the face-saving formula the Johnson regime is working on.
Evidence supporting Robbo. I saw little mention in the UK media of Mike Pence visit to Ireland where he pressured the Irish to make a deal with Johnson
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.