Remainers - What do you want? When do you want it?

[optionalrationale]

We had the referendum, we had the legal challenge, we had the Supreme Court ruling, Article 50 has been triggered. The United Kingdom will no longer be part of the European Union.

So my questions to Remainers are
What do you want? When do you want it?

Here's what I want..

I want the negotiations to go well. I want future relations with our neighbours to be cordial. I want a good deal for UK and the EU. I want us to walk away if their demands are unacceptable (and stem from vindictiveness and to deter other members from following our lead). I want the UK to be free to make good trade deals with any country it wants. I want the UK to lead in creating a new model of trade without excessive interference in each partner's social and political arena.

Its why what is being touted now is not democracy but the tyranny of the majority.

Good post Bluepepper.

Bluepepper
The "Isn't democracy just a total bastard" jibe was started by one of your camp. You lot like to dish it but you can't take it can you?

Um, no that would be the leave camp.

Democracy matters when you want it to, then when you don't want it to its all "you lost shut up" and "enemies of the people".

You sure ur ok hun?

Dannythechampion

"Its why what is being touted now is not democracy but the tyranny of the majority."

Is you sure you isn't one a dem racists Danny? Cos that is wot you is soundin like bud.

I'm not interacting with you anymore.

You clearly can't handle the debate, otherwise you wouldn't be so facetious.

There there hun, let the adults talk now.

The "Isn't democracy just a total bastard" jibe was started by one of your camp.

Whose camp am I supposed to be in?

I know you don't seem to like people pointing out logical inconsistencies in your position, or when you've hugely oversimplified an issue to the point of misrepresentation - because that's when you resort to personal jibes rather than addressing the issues. But it's even weaker to use my statement - pointing out that the 'undemocratic' institutions of the EU in Ceta were bound by local democratic processes - to attack others because you've decided we are all 'in the same camp'.

In the binary choice between
a) Hoping the Brexit negotiations go as well as possible for the UK and
b) Hoping the negotiations don't go well and the EU play hardball
Where do you stand?

It's really not a binary choice though, is it? My opinion of what's best for the UK is almost certainly different from others. For me a negotiation that goes as well as possible for the UK includes all the points I made:
Communication
Accessible further education
Peace, especially peace in Northern Ireland. I'm afraid I really don't know anything about Gibraltar so I cannot comment on that
Linked to the above - no reintroduction of hard borders and absolutely no redeployment of soldiers in NI.
Free movement between Ireland and the UK, but I don't know how possible that is which is what gives me greatest concern over my personal situation
The economy not tanking
Communication

Or if 'the EU play hardball' means that the unlikely scenario that British migrants are kicked out of EU countries and EU migrants, including Irish, are kicked out of the UK then I guess I stand in Ireland, or another EU country (I have been brushing up on my French) or another country. I'm not sure if I'll apply for British citizenship as it leaves a very bitter taste right now.

Its so interesting isn't it Danny that you wany adult debate yet your weapon of choice is to accuse of anyone who disagrees with you of being a racist. Very grown up, I'm sure

I want the government and the media to drop the Billy Big Bollocks act and accept that Britain is not the super power it thinks it is. Nobody outside of the right-wing mass jerk off is impressed by it.

I want leavers to stop blaming the EU for everything and accept that the consequences of brexit are as a result of their choice, not the EU/Spain/Scotland/remainers/(inset bogieman of choice) being a big meanie to us waaaaaa.

And most of all, stop using faux concern for Brits in Europe as an excuse for being utter bastards to EU migrants in the UK.

"Its so interesting isn't it Danny that you wany adult debate yet your weapon of choice is to accuse of anyone who disagrees with you of being a racist."

No, what I've said is that there are lots of leavers who deny that their vote was regarding immigration and their feelings towards that. But rather "democracy and sovereignty", but then had totally different reactions when the UK courts upheld UK law to do with the sovereignty of the UK parliament and Brexit.

Those that then make a fuss about anyone who might have been a remain supporter speaking about anything in public, they should "shut up" etc. It becomes a bit murky when you discuss democracy as the reasons you voted to leave.

It gets even murkier when the UK government puts in the White paper that: "Parliament never lost sovereignty , it just sometimes felt like" , because that kind of nulifies those claims even further.

It further gets more opaque when people who claimed they wanted democracy and claimed the EU was undemocratic, criticise the EU for having to follow the democratic processes of its nation states and not being able to enforce changes on them

See it all just doesn't add up when you put it like that, the dichotomy between all of the different things that are claimed as reasons for leaving, and the behaviour of people on here, in real life, in other places on the net just don't add up.

So yes, then when the logic all doesn't connect, and you aren't an ardent defender of democracy, then citing democracy as your very ver strong reason for voting to leave becomes a bit circumspect.

And will lead others to draw conclusions.

That is an adult point, now lets see if you can counter it.

NotaMammy
It is indeed a binary choice, I'm afraid.

Remainers now have to decide (as they did in the binary Leave / Remain debate) what they hope for.

It is clear from this thread that a very vocal proportion of Remainers are actually hoping for option b. They want the negotiations to go badly for the UK.

Unfortunately this will fuel the hard Brexiteers as they will believe that Junkers et al will adopt the position "If I am really tough with them, they might cave in and decide to Remain after all"

No one wants negotiations to go badly for the UK

However we do reserve the right to critique the decision and the reasons behind it, and how the leave process is currently being managed.

Its also naive to think that the EU are going to play tough so that we remain, they have stated repeatedly that they would seek a beneficial deal, just anything that isn't the "cake and eat it" result is classified by many as the EU punishing the UK.

Sorry optionalrationale it's not. The term 'Best for the UK' is very subjective, which is what I tried to point out in my reply.
I, of course, want the best for the UK. But Best for the UK in my opinions include all the things I mentioned in my answer. Is that what you believe is best for the UK?

Since when was 'best for the UK' synonymous with 'best for the Tory party'? It's the hard right of the Tory party which drove this - it's up to them to fix it, and if they are to discharge their duty properly, to consider the good of the whole country. Unfortunately, a word like duty doesn't seem to appear in their dictionaries.

It's not a binary choice though really is it?

In an ideal world I would hope for a) for negotiations to go well

But there is a cut off point where I would think that negotiations are going so badly that I would hope we would rethink. Either in terms of changing our negotiation stance or rethinking leaving altogether.

Surely almost everyone must have a point at which negotiations could go so badly that they would agree with this. The difference that makes it non binary is that this point will be different depending on your point of view.

'Surely almost everyone must have a point at which negotiations could go so badly that they would agree with this.'

And this is why its so damaging to persist with deriding half the nation as ignorant, racist and quite simply too stupid to understand. It was a campaign tactic of identity politics, but something that now sadly carries through.

Theres not many in the UK at the moment, that will easily forget being called a racist or too stupid to understand, and that in itself, entrenches half the population in their positions. How do you build bridges and undo that damage?
Why should a leave voter suddenly join forces with a remainer whose spent almost 2 years telling them what an abhorrent person they are?

The division continues. For every protest, every legal challenge, every objection, another 1000 leave voters entrench deeper into some perceived 'no surrender' position.
Remainers are perceived as still trying to win, not be heard.

If remainers wish to be heard, they need to stand on the same pavement as the leave vote. Not opposite throwing bricks. This is totally new territory not some by-election in Dorset

"If remainers wish to be heard, they need to stand on the same pavement as the leave vote."

No, they don't have to, the eurosceptics spent 41 years arguing and getting their voice heard, and having influence over policy, they were a smaller minority than the remain vote, but now you say that we HAVE to come round to your way of thinking.

For every insult thrown at leavers, the same has been thrown back at remainers, sheeple, traitors, remoaners and many more so I think its a bit rich to say that this entrenches your position. Furthermore, having been told by all and sundry before the vote that it was about democracy and sovereignty, much of the leave support vociferously objected to a court case ensuring the democratic and contitutional process of the country was followed.

I think most remainers would be happy if any compromise was mooted, indicating the closeness of the vote, but still following through, but every time something is suggested it is shot down with cries of about the : "will of the people" and accusations of treachery.

Like most remain voters I accept the outcome, and the fact that we will be leaving the UK, but there is no compromise at all from the leaders of the leave camp and their demands, whilst at the same time being told to "shut up".

Danny
"I think most remainers would be happy if any compromise was mooted, indicating the closeness of the vote, but still following through"

What would a compromise but still following through look like?

Why should a leave voter suddenly join forces with a remainer whose spent almost 2 years telling them what an abhorrent person they are?

I'm an immigrant. I'm used to being talked to and about like I'm the shit on the shoes of quite a few people in this country, most of whom I suspect voted Leave but obviously I cannot be sure.

Why is bridge building seen as a one way exercise? Why are Leave voters - the winners - absolved of blame and responsibility for their contribution to a divisive, nasty referendum campaign and its aftermath?

I'm not sure there is any way to bridge the divide now. May pursuing the hardest of hard Brexits - despite a very close run vote - has entrenched divisions, and the language used by prominent leave supporters in the press ("enemies of the people") has reinforced this.

To be brutally honest, after the referendum I thought leave voters were simply misguided. But 9 months later, I actively despise them. Sorry, but there it is. Enough has come out in the last 9 months, about the likely issues to be caused (and already caused, in terms of bigotry and violence against EU citizens) that no leaver without a nuanced position - and this is true of very few of the ones who post on social media - has any respect from me whatsoever. I actually wish that, if brexit happens, you are harmed by it.

If you want to narrow this divide you too have to make some attempt at meeting halfway. At this point many remainers would be happy with a soft brexit - what about you? What's your compromise?

May pursuing the hardest of hard Brexits - despite a very close run vote - has entrenched divisions, and the language used by prominent leave supporters in the press ("enemies of the people") has reinforced this.

Quite, May refused to condemn the Press, she babbled about a free press, but refused to say that they had overstepped the mark. I wrote to my MP to complain - she said she never received the letter, so I emailed a copy and this was ignored. Another person refusing to speak out.

May was in Turkey wooing Erdogan when Trump announced his Muslim ban. She had to have a statement dragged out of her, her first response being that we didn't interfere in other countries internal matters (what a joke in itself!). Then Johnson managed a statement that it wouldn't affect British Muslims with dual citizenship with the countries blacklisted. Which was another joke, when a British Muslim, who was born in the UK was denied entry to the US.

It's not the response that optional wants me to say, I suspect, but why should I accept the results of a cat fight in the Conservative party? All it's made me do is join another party and start to work actively against the Tories. I still hold what I regard as decent values - I see absolutely no reason to take a leaf out of the nastiest of the Tories book and copy their behaviour.

I will continue to try to do my best to be a good parent, friend, neighbour, but as for getting behind Brexit because the Leavers want us to because somehow their 'win' doesn't taste quite as sweet as they hoped - You wanted Leave, you make it work.

May pursuing the hardest of hard Brexits - despite a very close run vote - has entrenched divisions, and the language used by prominent leave supporters in the press ("enemies of the people") has reinforced this

Yes. The Government has done everything possible to increase division (let's not forget their conference rhetoric) and the press has reinforced it with their talk of enemies and traitors.

And they wonder why remain voters don't want to get on board.
The OP is a fine example of a leaver trying to foment division, IMO; if s/he didn't set out to be goady (dubious), s/he certainly descended to that point pretty quickly.

At this point many remainers would be happy with a soft brexit - what about you? What's your compromise?

Assuming that was addressed to a general 'you', not a specific poster, I'm happy to answer that.

I've posted before what I think the compromise should be, and I obviously don't speak for Leavers, just myself:

A soft Brexit is the best compromise for where we are now, at this point in time, although it's not where I ultimately want to be (although I may change my mind in the future if that does come to pass and if it works out well).

It's the sensible option for the immediate future as it is the only option that would be palatable for the majority (the broad spectrum of people across both sides of the vote), and hard Brexit won't work if there are a significant number actively fighting it.

I believe it's also sensible as it gives a long transition period whereby NI & Scotland can be properly addressed, as well as the breathing room to really work on building up Britain again (infrastructure, training, transport links etc etc - all which have been decimated over the last 20+ years due to the over-reliance on cheap, imported labour).

The most important thing for me, at this time, is to 'leave' - even if it's barely noticeable. Once we're out, we are free to make our own choices for the future direction of the UK long term - this could be continuing with soft Brexit or moving toward harder Brexit - whilst still part of the EU that choice was/is not there at all.

The future direction is what should be voted on in GEs: Theresa May, David Davis et al's job is to remove us as a member.
Future govts should be mandated by a GE to decide direction from there - standing on manifestos that make their position/long term goal clear.

I am aware that my view is not shared by the more extremes on either side, but I do think that it can be politically 'sold' to a lot of Remainers, and to a lot of Leavers (although for Leavers, for short term only).

What won't help that course being followed is the more shouty types deriding Leavers as being 'too stupid to realise that they aren't getting cake & unicorns' etc (all which I see repeatedly on here); that serves only to deeply entrench people even more, and the push for quick, hard Brexit inevitable.

The remainers who are claiming that leavers did not know what type of Brexit they were voting for are being disingenuous. Do any of you really believe that a single leaver wanted to leave but continue to pay into EC institutions and remain subject to European law? That choice is just totally illogical because, as many of you have repeatedly pointed out, that has zero advantages over membership and many disadvantages.

The 'hardest of hard' Brexits line is also a sound bite and not at all what May is currently pursuing. Both sides know that a compromise is needed. We will continue paying something and in certain areas we will be subject to EU law/courts. On the other hand we do need to gain something positive out of this and the EC know this too.

As I said above but (like most positive points about the UK's position) was ignored by the Mistis and Peregrinas of this world was that, although no deal would be disastrous for the Uk, it is also potentially disastrous for the EU. Even a mild recession in Europe has the ability to destroy the Italian banking system and take the Euro with it.