Britain: The End of a Fantasy

[Denzil_DC]

To understand the sensational outcome of the British election, one must ask a basic question. What happens when phony populism collides with the real thing?

Last year’s triumph for Brexit has often been paired with the rise of Donald Trump as evidence of a populist surge. But most of those joining in with the ecstasies of English nationalist self-assertion were imposters. Brexit is an elite project dressed up in rough attire. When its Oxbridge-educated champions coined the appealing slogan “Take back control,” they cleverly neglected to add that they really meant control by and for the elite. The problem is that, as the elections showed, too many voters thought the control should belong to themselves.

Theresa May is a classic phony Brexiter. She didn’t support it in last year’s referendum and there is no reason to think that, in private, she has ever changed her mind. But she saw that the path to power led toward the cliff edge, from which Britain will take its leap into an unknown future entirely outside the European Union. Her strategy was one of appeasement—of the nationalist zealots in her own party, of the voters who had backed the hard-right UK Independence Party (UKIP), and of the hysterically jingoistic Tory press, especially The Daily Mail.

The actual result of the referendum last year was narrow and ambiguous. Fifty-two percent of voters backed Brexit but we know that many of them did so because they were reassured by Boris Johnson’s promise that, when it came to Europe, Britain could “have its cake and eat it.” It could both leave the EU and continue to enjoy all the benefits of membership. Britons could still trade freely with the EU and would be free to live, work, and study in any EU country just as before. This is, of course, a childish fantasy, and it is unlikely that Johnson himself really believed a word of it. It was just part of the game, a smart line that might win a debate at the Oxford Union.

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/06/10/britain-the-end-of-a-fantasy/

[Kolesar]

1. save this for tomorrow! eom

[Doodley]

2. The fantasy was a United States of Europe that nobody voted for. The Brits voted for a

Common Market (a trade agreement) in 1975. Since then, British politicians passed more and more decision making to an ever-expanding lawmaking factory on mainland Europe, despite promising the Brits that wasn't happening or they would be able to vote on it. Brexit is happening because of the lies and deceit of British politicians.

[Denzil_DC]

3. Did you bother reading the article? n/t

[Doodley]

7. Yes, and the author is obviously anti-Brexit with an axe to grind.

[Denzil_DC]

8. Whereas you are completely impartial, totally right, and have no axe to grind. n/t

[Doodley]

10. I am not making false statements. The author of that article is. I was against Brexit, but recognize

the lies and the betrayal by politicians who have been "arrogant" by taking the people of Britain (and other nations) for granted.

[Denzil_DC]

12. So you'll be able to document the author's "false statements". n/t

[Doodley]

13. Seeing as the article is littered in lies, yes. Are you sure you read it?

There is nothing "phony" about Theresa May's position. She was against Brexit and now she is Prime Minister she is committed to implementing the will of the people (by the way I was against Brexit and am not a fan of May or the Conservatives). The author does not mention that Jeremy Corbyn (who was against the Common Market) was also against Brexit, but it now also supportive of the referendum result. The author doesn't call Corbyn phony. That doesn't suit the "oxford" elitist label the author puts on Brexit. It is all BS from the author. It is also disgusting that anyone should say there is anything "ambiguous" about the referendum result. Some say we should ignore the result and the will of the people. Tony Blair, for example. The author is full of BS. So, no, I am not going to defend BS.

[Denzil_DC]

15. I'm more likely to read it if it's a bit more coherent and less frothing than you've just been.

Stating that the author doesn't mention Corbyn's position is not proof of a "lie", but an omission.

If a decades-long Member of Parliament and the Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition doesn't class as one of "the elite", I think our definitions of terms are so far apart that you'll need to explain what language you're writing in if there's to be any point in continuing, because it's not any English I understand.

Other than that, all you've got "It is it's all BS from the author," "The author is full of BS," and the plain ridiculous "It is also disgusting that anyone should say there is anything "ambiguous" about the referendum result." Don't waste my time if that's the be-all and end-all of your insights.

Of course the result was ambiguous. Every Leave campaigner of any note said that (all caps here because you seem hard of vision) THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF LEAVING THE SINGLE MARKET.

IF THAT ALONE (THERE'S PLENTY MORE) DOESN'T MAKE THE RESULT AMBIGUOUS, WHAT THE HELL WOULD?

[weydowner]

4. Make England Great Again

The thing about May is her absolute arrogance in thinking that she is totally right, even though her views today are 100% opposed to her views yesterday. Whatever she thinks is totally right and the fact that people do not agree mean that they are The Enemies Of The People' (Copyright The Daily Mail, of course).
The Referendum was almost 50/50, and brought on by various Tabloid newspapers (which are owned by such rich idiots as Murdoch etc, who don't have a shred of allegiance to the UK) and various personalities like Farage or Boris Johnson who lied and lied, and took back their words the morning after the referendum.

May, as well as being a mock-populist, is the sort of near-evangelic English Middle-Class woman, made to set ones teeth clenching as soon as she opens her mouth. Plus she is a true Robot Politician, churning out cliche after cliche without effort.

The UK - 50 years after we lost our Empire - still considers that We are Special and Better. It will learn, maybe in 50 years, but probably much sooner. A Referendum where, say 80% of the people voted for leaving, and facts had been used, and politicians thought about their country rather than the Mob view might have been much better. The country is sick of 10 years of unnecessary austerity and who better to blame than those damned foreigners?

Still, we don't have Trump.

Both the US and the UK will learn the stupidity of The Voice Of The Forgotten People.
I'm sorry for both.

[Denzil_DC]

6. "her absolute arrogance in thinking that she is totally right,

even though her views today are 100% opposed to her views yesterday".

There's a lot of that about: See Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson, for example, who made her UK mark by being an outspoken supporter of Remain during the referendum campaign, changed her tune to "the people have spoken, democratic will, yadayada", and did everything she could to bitterly oppose the SNP's efforts to get May to take Scotland's views on brexit into account, but now Scotland has 13 Tory MPs, is all "soft brexit" and "we must listen to all parts of the UK" (until the wind changes and she decides which way to blow again).

[Doodley]

9. So she respects that the people have spoken. There is a bias in this argument that there

is anything unusual in a leader who has to implement policy they do not necessarily agree with. For example, Jeremy Corbyn was for unilateral nuclear disarmament, now he isn't. There is no arrogance.

[Denzil_DC]

11. "There is no arrogance." LOL

Let me guess, you don't live in the UK, do you?

"The people have spoken" is bullshit.

I can spend all afternoon copying and pasting links to prominent Leave campaigners insisting that there was no way brexit would involve leaving the single market, just for starters, but I can probably find better ways to spend my time.

Now a narrow vote - on the scale where Farage said on referendum night said that it would not have been at all decisive if it had gone 52/48 Remain and another referendum would be necessary - on a vague question after a nonsensical "national debate" fueled by an anti-establishment protest vote and a bunch of proven blatant lies from the Leave campaign is grasped by people like you to justify anything at all that suits your agendas.

The king is naked, the tide has turned and will keep turning, and I look forward to hearing from you about "the people have spoken" when you wake up and finally realize it.

[Doodley]

14. I have lived in UK for most of my life. Is that the level of argument you want?

I am not particularly happy with Brexit, but I am not going to single out Theresa May, as that is a pointless exercise. Boris Johnson was pro-Brexit. Do you think he would be a better prime minister as far as Britain and Europe is concerned? Or do you think that if you don't like the result, you should ask the people to vote again to get the result you want?

[Denzil_DC]

16. Given the disaster that brexit has proven

and the polls showing a change in public opinion, I think there's every reason to abandon the whole project.

Johnson was instrumental in propagating the anti-EU propaganda and blatant lies that blighted the whole debate for many years, so no, I don't think he'd make a very good anything, not even a doorstop.

If it takes another vote to satisfy the likes of you - while you continue to dodge the issue that nobody, not May, not Corbyn, nobody, can square the circle of continued single market access, let alone membership, without adhering to EU legislation and the Four Freedoms - then OK, let's do it, but let's set a threshold for adherence that's considerably higher than 50/50, or accept that it's constitutionally just advisory, as the last one was, despite any nonsense David Cameron might have come out with when he thought a win for him was a safe bet.

[Doodley]

17. Like Tony Blair, you obviously don't accept or respect the democratic will of the people.

[Denzil_DC]

18. I already explained why cod-populist slogans like "the democratic will of the people" are bullshit

(and again, read the article). You really don't have anything more meaningful than "brexit means brexit," do you?

You'll have to excuse me now, I have to work - all the harder nowadays because of the inflation this damn fool adventure has imposed on us all already - and you're not really adding anything new here.

[LanternWaste]

19. You certainly make many unsupported allegations.

You certainly make many unsupported allegations. In science, it's called the Irrational Premise, but I'm rather confident you'll rationalize it as something else...

[Doodley]

20. Ironic that my complaint is to do with the unsupported allegations in the article in the OP.

[Denzil_DC]

22. None of which you've been able to cite. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

21. May should have gotten the clue when Farage and Johnson

for all their campaigning and media whoring, wanted jack shit to do with the PM's chair or the details of how Brexit was even going to happen... Then May doubles down on the stupid by forcing through a plan for a 'hard' Brexit even though they are *clearly* not prepared in the least...