Re-join the EU?

[french frank]

One point on public opinion:

Back in December, 51% thought we were WRONG to leave the EU and 40% thought were were RIGHT.

By June this year, the figures were WRONG 44%, RIGHT 43%, so there's been a 10% drop in the gap. That has to be watched.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/987347/brexit-opinion-poll/

Democracy is fluid. People change their minds. And many people I know have done.
4 years is roughly the average time between general elections, and we all know how things can change there.

Been said before: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.” The mobile vulgus rules.

[Sir Velo]

Could not agree more.
Talk to farmers up round here - voted Leave, but now................?? REAL anxiety and despair.

Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas

[Dave2002]

Democracy is fluid. People change their minds. And many people I know have done.
4 years is roughly the average time between general elections, and we all know how things can change there.

If the populace at large is not allowed to change its collective mind, then why have elections at all? Just have one election and the party or person(s) which win then "rules" forever.

[Petrushka]

If the populace at large is not allowed to change its collective mind, then why have elections at all? Just have one election and the party or person(s) which win then "rules" forever.

Hitler and Stalin tried that one. It didn't work out too well.

[Dave2002]

Hitler and Stalin tried that one. It didn't work out too well.

That approach, sadly, still seems to be used in other places. Of course yet another approach is to give up all pretence of democracy. Rule by force - by crazy people - for no apparently good reasons.

[Serial_Apologist]

My own view is that those who are appalled by Brexit and the massive affront to civilised values that it represents, should devote their energies to ensuring the break-up of the so-called ‘united’ kingdom, and allowing Scotland to escape the yoke of southern tyranny. It would have a long journey to gaining EU membership, but it’s been clear for a long time that Scottish voters don’t want what english voters seem to want.

The obsolescence of the union flag would be highly demoralising for quitters.

Well, that would probably put paid to any prospect of a future Labour government - and arguably the one big reason Labour opposes Scots (and Welsh) independence.

[french frank]

Well, that would probably put paid to any prospect of a future Labour government - and arguably the one big reason Labour opposes Scots (and Welsh) independence.

True. Incidentally, James Hawes has just written a follow-up to The Shortest History of Germany with The Shortest History of England, explaining 'England' as the nation that never was, with a people always resentful of being ruled by 'outsiders'. The original Angles, or 'English' - who invaded and conquered the British - were then conquered by the Normans and subsequently called in the Scots (James VI & I), the Dutch (William III of Orange) and Germans (George I of Hanover) to rule over them. What direction would an independent 'England' take vis-à-vis all its neighbours?

[Serial_Apologist]

And thanks to the general ignorance of far too many MPs about the EU (in common with their constituents) not enough of them would have recognised the lies and misleading narrative either. That ignorance persists and is now compounded by ignorance of how the UK functions in terms of trade and business,a general level of gross incompetence and, I believe a refusal to recognise that governing independently is very different from doing so as part of a bigger organisation with which the heavy lifting was shared. For instance it was known a long time ago that there were only a handful of people in the UK who had experience or skills in the trade deal field for instance - because it wasn't necessary as part of the collective bargaining of the EU, where the UK input was welcome and valued as I understand it.
Regardless of any other considerations about whether rejoining is possible/desirable there is the first hurdle, which I think has already been indicated by the EU side, which is that this country has to get its act together before any discussion on the matter can even begin. Having a halfway competently run country would go a long way to calming both sides of the issue; the current floundering and disintegration on top of the pre-existing problems of basic services being run-down to the point of not functioning for far too many people does not make for tolerance and satisfaction with life. Covid has held much of it at bay for now but the more some sort of normality is restored the more the chasms become apparent.

Not forgetting that we're talking, on both sides of The Channel, of economies that are ruined by capitalism all being capitalist economies. That said, a socialist alternative to the divisive nationalism of the Brexit advocates would build on the interests in common between British and EU workers by prioritising solidarity in the face of jobs downsizing, capitalism's answer to its own inbuilt deficiencies and wastefulness wherever it shapes people's prospects. These were played down by the Union Jack-waving Brexiteers in the ignorant Thatcherite belief you could destroy jobs dependent on free trade and start all over again - which has since led to the very neglect of working class communities then told new jobs competitive on the world scale would somehow restore them to the thriving communities that eventually emerged from the Industrial Revolution.

The 2019 Referendum choice was therefore between two equally unsustainable brands of capitalism - globalism, as practiced since WW2 under the armed protection of NATO - and we now see where that has repeatedly led - and shrink-wrapped begin-all-over-again nationalism, with nations divided and fighting over the cake. With Brexit the province of the Right and Far Right, based on false premises, the only choice (ducked by Labour under Corbyn) was to go for the lesser bad of Remain.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

True. Incidentally, James Hawes has just written a follow-up to The Shortest History of Germany with The Shortest History of England, explaining 'England' as the nation that never was, with a people always resentful of being ruled by 'outsiders'. The original Angles, or 'English' - who invaded and conquered the British - were then conquered by the Normans and subsequently called in the Scots (James VI & I), the Dutch (William III of Orange) and Germans (George I of Hanover) to rule over them. What direction would an independent 'England' take vis-à-vis all its neighbours?

Don't forget the Welsh (Tudors).

[french frank]

Don't forget the Welsh (Tudors).

And me with my Welsh ancestry!!!

[ardcarp]

And of course it was the Lib Dems who were the first party to push for a vote on Brexit, careful what you wish for.....

Yes, I suppose so. For me it's a question of whether referendums (-da?) are part of our democratic system. I suspect future leaders will be very wary about suggesting one. Do you go on (as Scotland may do) having them until a favourable-to-somebody result is achieved?

[Katzelmacher]

That's quite a distortion of the Lib Dem position! The last annual conference voted on rejoining the EU as a 'longer term objective', when circumstances permitted it. That did, however, reject the previous policy of actively attempting to rejoin without first getting the approval of the public - 'unilaterally', as Andrew called it earlier, or to immediately campaign to rejoin. I think it would be inaccurate to call it a 'brexity' party. A new party dedicated to such campaigning is a one-issue party. It has the luxury to need no other policies on anything; but it won't get anywhere.

Whereas I would have a secret satisfaction if Scotland were to leave the UK and Northern Ireland under a SinnFein majority were to unite with the Republic (satisfaction in that Brexit was the catalyst, so I could say, "Now look what you've done!"), it would go against my general 'unionist' principles. But I also think the UK is a far less democratic and fair union than the EU itself. If 2 million Slovenians can be a separate nation in the EU, why shouldn't 3 million Welsh - to say nothing of the 5.5 million Scots?

Btw: "As of June, 2021, 44 percent of people in Great Britain thought that it was wrong to leave the European Union, compared with 43 percent who thought it was the right decision." That's a narrower majority pro EU than before the referendum. Any failed attempt to rejoin would simply put the situation further back - but that's just my own judgment.

Clarification appreciated - but when a party downgrades a flagship policy to a ‘longer term objective’, one does get a sense of something being kicked into the long grass.

It’s also interesting to reflect that the Liberal Democrats were the second party (after the Referendum Party) to call for an in-out referendum of british membership of the EU (in 2007).

[Katzelmacher]

Well, that would probably put paid to any prospect of a future Labour government - and arguably the one big reason Labour opposes Scots (and Welsh) independence.

If - and it’s a very big if - Labour ever returns to power, it will inherit a country where its room for manoeuvre has been severely curtailed and it will be even more hamstrung than the last Labour government was by two decades of Thatcherism.

[french frank]

Clarification appreciated - but when a party downgrades a flagship policy to a ‘longer term objective’, one does get a sense of something being kicked into the long grass.

It’s also interesting to reflect that the Liberal Democrats were the second party (after the Referendum Party) to call for an in-out referendum of british membership of the EU (in 2007).

Speaking as a semi-detached member, I'd be first to admit that the party has made some disastrous decisions just at the point where their decisions (for once) actually mattered. But policy and strategy often take politicians in different directions and in many cases the decisions are a case of 'damned if they do, damned if they don't'. To support an in-out referendum seemed a democratic course, but it backfired on the Lib Dems (and Cameron) for supporting it. To have come out against consulting the public on what was being presented as a matter of public concern could have been branded as 'undemocratic' - just as coming out in favour of a post-referendum People's Vote has been presented as wanting to 'overturn a democratic vote'.

With hindsight, the country wasn't properly prepared for a referendum vote and it was not the right moment to have supported it. But hindsight, by definition, usually comes too late to be useful. Serial's point about Labour's attitude to Scottish independence boils down to strategy: if we support A, B is likely to happen. Ergo …?

[LHC]

My own view is that those who are appalled by Brexit and the massive affront to civilised values that it represents, should devote their energies to ensuring the break-up of the so-called ‘united’ kingdom, and allowing Scotland to escape the yoke of southern tyranny. It would have a long journey to gaining EU membership, but it’s been clear for a long time that Scottish voters don’t want what english voters seem to want.

The obsolescence of the union flag would be highly demoralising for quitters.

While I can appreciate the sentiment, in a kind of ‘damn them all to hell’ way, disentangling the UK from the EU will look like a walk in the park compared to trying to disentangle Scotland from the rest of the UK.