Westministenders: I can't believe it's not butter

[RedToothBrush]

Nigel Farage @ Nigel_Farage
Cannot believe we're seeing Nazi salutes in 21st century America.

Yeah, that's what we said on 16th June 2016, when some dickhead stood in front of a poster.

The thing is, what Farage says with faux surprise isn't unusual or isolated to him. It's widespread. It's perhaps the norm rather than the exception in many circles.

It's represents a total lack of self awareness. It represents the disconnect that what comes out of your mouth tends to have an effect on the people around you, whether intentioned that way or not when you talk about 'others' or 'not belonging'.

It's a direct effect of nationalism.

Patriotism seems to be something that people have totally lost the plot with and don't understand. It's used as a defence for nationalism. It is the last defence of the scoundrel. Patriotism and being pro-EU or not being a racist dick are not mutually exclusive, though you'd be forgiven for thinking differently these days.

I think a lot of people will sit and go, "Look at America, that is awful. I'm glad we are not like that".

Except we are far more than we realise. Grenfell says much about that.

There's an phrase and Southern Wolves and Northern Wolves when it comes to racism in America. The UK is like the Northern Wolf. Sly and silver tongued to justify and hide racism because 'Look they are worse than us. We are the good guys'.

A bit like saying, you talked to an EU citizen and they were just as racist as me, so Brexit is ok.

It's the twisted desperation to justify the othering rather than take responsibility for enabling and emboldening racism. Then dressing it up as some legitimate political cause which actually you have zero understanding or comprehension of the consequences of.

Brexit has some deep roots in Nazi type fantasies. You can not separate the idea that Britain is superior and Brits are better than Europeans from too much Brexit logic. The Empire was not a pretty thing for much of the world. It's worrying.

Not to mention we've had a right wing attack on a group of people outside a mosque in this fashion before the US had that attack yesterday.

Let's not think that because we haven't had blokes with tiki torches providing a photographic opportunity and theatre for the TV producer that we are somehow 'better'. Or not as bad as America.

The only real difference between them and us is the brash openness about it and the fact they have a bunch of guns.

This was predictable. Indeed I expected and I expect more. There will be more and it will get far, far worse in the US. Yesterday was just the start. Trump wants it. He will fuel it. He will capitalise from it. Yes your mate Donald loves a bit of bigotry, Nig.

There no guarantees it won't happen here for various reasons. It just is characterised in a slightly different way because we are British and don't really do brash in anything as it's not our way.

It's too easy for Farage. Or Johnson. Or May. Or whoever to just walk away and innocently say they are shocked and bear no responsibility because they don't wave Nazi flags about.

You don't have to do that, to share the same values or believe the same thing. Salutes and flags are just branding. A repackaged version for the 21st century is even more dangerous.

We won't forget who Farage hangs out with or courts for publicity and attention. Farage only says and does what he thinks he can get away with. That's part of the ugly truth.

We still have not even started to confront the relationship between racism and Brexit. Indeed, much seems to be happening to suggest that after blaming EU, that there are a Brexit opportunities for scapegoating opening up.

For me yesterday was depressing not because it happened, but because we saw it coming and because our country is in denial about being the same.

Farage is the very personification of it.

Can't help agreeing with some of the North blog Swedish. The impetus that leave had on June 24th last year has been lost. GE was a leave loss. ROI and remain NI are standing firm. France, Netherlands and Austria didn't go the way they expected. Merkel's looking stronger than ever. Trump's position looks untenable. EU27 is very much still there. They may have lost already, which is why it's a little frantic in leave circles.

Father Time may have done for them.

Quarter of Brexit voters say they were misled, poll finds. Remain would win if another referendum was held tomorrow, research shows

It also showed that if there was another referendum about whether or not the UK should leave the EU, 47 per cent of respondents said they would vote Remain, against 44 per cent who said they would vote to leave.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-voters-poll-mislead-leave-campaign-nhs-claims-lies-remain-win-second-referendum-a7905786.html

The UK is heading for a cliff edge ....
and DD wants the country to take a great leap forward !

< scream emoticon required >

I've seen the phrase "leap of faith" used by Leavers before.

Trouble is, outside video games, such a thing tends to end with the leaper in smashed bits.

Leaps of faith require people to trust those making them. Trust is an acquired thing that is built on demonstrating ability to do something and building a solid reputation prior to making the leap of faith.

Can anyone spot the obvious problem for Davis in his quest to sell the lea of faith v Barnier in this respect?

Anand Menon‏***@anandMenon1*
Remarkable how Barnier is now routinely portrayed as this Zen-like font of negotiating wisdom.

Ian Dunt‏**@IanDunt**

Anyone can look more attractive by surrounding themselves with uglier people.

Anand Menon‏***@anandMenon1*

I keep trying and failing . But still, let's not overegg the pudding. The EU isn't necessarily right on everything.

Ian Dunt‏ @IanDunt
Quite right. They're not outperforming us because they're perfect. They're outperforming us because they are demonstrating basic competence.

Jo Maugham QC‏*@JolyonMaugham*

They're outperforming us because they don't have to pretend they can transmute lead into gold.

Anand Menon‏***@anandMenon1*
Again, fair enough. My only point is we shouldn't imply they can!

adam steinert ‏*@adam*_steinert
Remember though there is always the possibility that Barnier is not just basically competent.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-voters-poll-mislead-leave-campaign-nhs-claims-lies-remain-win-second-referendum-a7905786.html
Quarter of Brexit voters say they were misled, poll finds
Remain would win if anotherreferendum was held tomorrow, research shows

When respondents were asked whether they believed the £350m pledge, a quarter of all voters said they did:35 per cent of Leave voters and 16 per cent of voters who voted to Remain.

At least we are at a point where leavers are admitting they were mislead and crucially that they had believed the £350 million bus pledge.

This is good. Its potentially progress.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/22/homelessness-charities-target-migrants-deportation?CMP=twt_gu
It’s poisonous to use homelessness charities’ data to target migrants

The Home Office has exploited sensitive information about rough sleepers to deport non-UK nationals. And there’s worse to come

Link to the Opinium poll data tables is here (since Independent article links to wrong poll):

opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/VI-15-08-2017.xls

Quite a bit of editorialising in the Independent article. Their base sample voted 48% Remain the first time round but only 47% would vote Remain in an EUref2.

Not really much to report except from my pov of the 184 Scots asked their support for Remain has dropped from 62% to 56%. Also interesting that Wales still favours Leave, while Northern Ireland is 42% Remain / 40% Leave with 18% either undecided or not voting despite all the border issues under discussion (tiny sample of 61)

Also worth bearing in mind opinion polls prior to EUref tended to underestimate Leave with more undecideds opting Leave.

Coming to the conclusion it is not opinion pollsters who get things wrong but rather the over interpreters of them.

Coming to the conclusion it is not opinion pollsters who get things wrong but rather the over interpreters of them.

They are polls ... of opinions; with absolutely no comeback on the person giving their opinion.

Light-ish relief on what the bong crisis means.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-s-time-to-end-this-crazy-big-ben-ding-dong-fnfqbdwpw?shareToken=d76dd9cbee0bfe2528de6a1a97df2489
The Times seems to be the new Guardian .

I am concerned that 14 months after this vote there are still people who register 'don't know' in regards to how they would vote if the referendum happened again.

Is there some new law that you are obliged to tell some random pollster what you may or may not do in the event that something may happen in the future ?

The more "don't knows" the better, as far as I am concerned. Would slow down the current move to government by poll.

mother that is another problem with reading too much into the poll. 89% of those polled actually voted but in the EUref turnout was only 72%. Additionally of those polled the number too undecided / wouldn't vote has gone down from 11% to 8%. OTOH the 47% represents proportion of total polled rather than proportion of those polled who would vote and so under represents the Remain percentage of those who say they would vote. In the actual vote Remain areas tended to have lower turnout and the poll sample doesn't appear to reflect this, except in Northern Ireland.

Definitely given the ifs / buts n mibbes too much head space now

That Leave Alliance Twitter thread was certainly interesting reading, thanks Swedish. Although it's all stuff that has been covered on Westministenders, so looks like we're way ahead of him . Wonder what the Brexit faithful think of it - is he now a traitorous unbeliever talking Britain down?

"Unusually, the latest UK policy paper, dealing with cross-border civil judicial cooperation, contains a lengthy section outlining what might happen if Britain walked away from Brexit negotiations without striking an exit deal.

The section, which was included at the request of Brussels negotiators, makes clear that the UK would be forced to rely on existing EU rules for wrapping up outstanding court cases but would then have to fall back on less effective arrangements under international treaties such as the Hague convention."

“It would be much more difficult [to get a child back],” said one official. “There are a range of time measures. The fact is none of these systems are as effective or speedy as the current arrangements we have or the future ones we want to agree.”

Oh, but Izzy Oinkshott will probably tell us this is what people voted for in a Leave or Remain in the EU. To sever links with this EU legislation and make it harder to get abducted children back. Leave voters did all their research, knew exactly what they were voting for. Thereby knew all about and particularly eschewed this legislation. Along with all the other things. I can just hear it now. The Leave vote was a clear mandate for making it harder to get abducted children back.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/22/abducted-uk-children-at-greater-risk-if-legal-ties-cut-brexit-officials-say

Soz, couldn't resist the Izzy Oinkshott.

I think the don't knows are always the problem....if they all of a sudden do know they can change everything, which is what happened in the referendum in the first place. I guess they do know, just do not want to declare to a pollster.

I was surprised at a recent Uni reunion to hear 2 friends both say that they had no idea which way to vote until they actually had a ballot paper in their hands. They both felt they genuinely couldn't judge what was best. In the end they both plumped for remain as the "no change" option.

So that's 2 50-something Uni-educated people who felt unqualified to vote ....

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-frankfurt-dublin-banks-relocate-jobs-front-runners-uk-divorce-european-union-eu-a7906516.html

Great headline isn't it? There was the UK, minding it's own business and suddenly other countries just unfairly started poaching jobs and business from it. They were sabotaged.

Oh wait. Is that not what happened? You wouldn't know it from that headline. Again, we can be satisfied there was a clear mandate for this from people who had researched thoroughly the repercussions of leaving the EU. Aided by a well run and effectively policed referendum campaign. Only truthful and factual information. If it fell short of this standard, it didn't matter because voters themselves had researched so throughly. To think otherwise would be calling people thick.

This comment from a reader of the FT has gone viral because it nails the remainer/leaver Brexit row

France Coppola is worth following (and engages with her followers as well if ask questions). Anyway, this is a snippet of conversation from the other day (references Richard North). Hope it's readable, difficult to c&p them easily from Twitter.

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏
@Frances_Coppola

Also, the IEA's paper explained something that has been puzzling me - why hardline Brexiteers are so blase about no deal Brexit.....

....paper shows they think treaty continuity applies, so trade with EU would continue to be zero-tariff in both directions after Brexit.....

The IEA think this is the case?

here's the relevant section, though it echoes throughout the paper.

Mentions MFN limits but then lurches between favourable FTA vs punitive tariffs as scenarios.

Doesn't understand WTO rules. But the key thing here is the treaty continuity. Assumes Brexit is secession, not treaty abrogation.

Bob Harper‏ @BobData Aug 20

Yes, and the CZ/SK example is a total red herring

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 20

I've found out where the IEA got that from. Previously cited by Richard North to support "treaty continuity" arg. www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85808 …

Steve Analyst‏ @EmporersNewC Aug 20

Ben Kelly writes for the IEA, my money would have been on him.

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 20

that article is drivel. Same ridiculous argument as Richard North. And now underpins the IEA's latest dismal paper.

Steve Analyst‏ @EmporersNewC Aug 20

I know, and what's deeply distressing is how many times people have cited them to me, or heralded them as Brexit messiahs.

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 20

I think people are learning not to do that to me.

Liam Blizard‏ @LiamBlizard 14h14 hours ago

Opinions evolve, and I highly doubt @TheScepticIsle would write that article these days

Steve Analyst‏ @EmporersNewC 14h14 hours ago

You mean, accuse people of being disingenuous or ignorant, while being disingenuous or ignorant?

End of conversation
New conversation
(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 19

.....so a no deal Brexit would not mean a sudden trade shock and immediate customs barriers, because "continuity" = zero tariffs....

Allan Thornley‏ @AllanThornley1 Aug 20

John Redwood argued this point on #Bbcnewsnight

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 20

They are appealing to the Vienna Convention amendment for succession of states. But I can't see how it applies.

Jake Staines‏ @Sanakism Aug 21

One presumes this is consistent with the extreme-Brexiter delusion that we don't have "sovereignty" as an EU member state?

New conversation
(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 19

Replying to @Frances_Coppola
....terrible misunderstanding of WTO MFN rules, but they clearly believe it. Imho explains why they think no deal or "clean" Brexit is fine.

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 19

obvious, really. If you think leaving the union won't affect the terms under which you trade with the union, you can cheerfully walk away.

Jan van de Rieth‏ @JvdRieth Aug 19

That's an amazing level of self delusion.

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 19

It was clearly stated in the IEA's paper. They said the EU would have to continue to trade with UK on zero tariff basis.

Ben Cooper 🇪🇺‏ @bencooper Aug 19

3rd para even says "both ... continued to honour the treaty obligations" - are they insane?

(((FrancesCoppola)))‏ @Frances_Coppola Aug 19

I think they fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the EU. They think UK is seceding from a superstate, not abrogating a trade treaty.

Smoo‏ @didgery77332nd Aug 20

Does Lisbon Treaty not make eu superstate?

Ben Cooper 🇪🇺‏ @bencooper Aug 20

No. And you know how you can tell? The UK can decide to leave, the UK is completely sovereign.

It all makes complete sense now.

What morons.

Thanks Swedish that explains a lot.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/22/theresa-may-u-turn-brexit-european-court-justice

(May) is visiting the Alexander Dennis site to announce £44m of government financial guarantees to enable the sale of 90 low-emission vehicles to Mexico City.

However, the prime minister will not address staff at the factory for a speech or question and answer session, and journalists will not be allowed to attend apart from a shared broadcast camera

Green on anomalies of ECJ u turn and 'embargo' on paper:

‏ @davidallengreen 9h
So: commissioned to write on tomorrow's Brexit position paper. Will not, on principle, look at any embargoed copy. This will be fun...

@davidallengreen 9h
Will not, on principle, report or comment on any official Brexit publication on the basis of privileged prior access.

@davidallengreen
Official Brexit documents should just be published to the public as and when available. No privileged prior 'embargoed' access to media.

@davidallengreen
There is either jurisdiction or no jurisdiction.

No clear idea what ECJ non-"direct" jurisdiction could mean, if anything...

That post of yours also makes clear why TM and the staunchly patriotic idiots persist in anathematising the ECJ.

www.politico.eu/article/uk-government-hints-at-ecj-climbdown/
Govt to propose a hodge podge of muddled arrangements for dispute resolution across all areas of potential conflict because to the rabid Brexiteers the ECJ represents an assault on UK sovereignty.

Aforementioned paper on cross-border judicial arrangements is here
www.gov.uk/government/publications/providing-a-cross-border-civil-judicial-cooperation-framework-a-future-partnership-paper