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.

Misti, how is it probably clever politics if they're betting on nothing more concrete than 'the hope' that we come to our senses?

Genuine question, not meant belligerently or argumentatively!

I remain convinced, that the current Government's only interest in Brexit is to get all the Repeal legislation and sneaky bolt ons through Parliament.

Once they've done that, Brexit may well be allowed die a death.

I remain convinced, that the current Government's only interest in Brexit is to get all the Repeal legislation and sneaky bolt ons through Parliament.

This could of course, backfire on them. Suppose they lose office? I dare say that an incoming Government, however po-faced they had been about the Repeal legislation would happily utilise its provisions, and the Tories would be unable to do anything.
Maybe I am just too old and cynical.

The problem with a future government utilising the 'advantages' of the Great Repeal Bill is that with FPTP we will end up with successive governments endlessly undoing each other's work and not actually getting anything useful done. A bit like the Democrats and the Republicans over the Global Gag, but applying to all aspects of domestic policy. I find that a scary thought.

The problem with a future government utilising the 'advantages' of the Great Repeal Bill is that with FPTP we will end up with successive governments endlessly undoing each other's work and not actually getting anything useful done

Hmmm, so we become - in effect - ungoverned ?

Cui bono ?

^Cui bono?

It makes my head ache just thinking about that question...

Watch the NI/ROI border issue. Very volatile when talks resume October.

UK expats in EU might be in for a bit of a shock what with falling pound and health costs. Again this aspect for both EU and UK expats October

Will UK pay its liabilities? Another issue for October.

Without all three, there will be no progress. It seems to be impossible to me anyway to make such progress in such a short time.

Tariffs will kill trade. Trucks need parking places, square miles of them.

Erasmus gone. Availing of study in an EU University gone.

Free movement gone.

Very saddened, even though I have only touched on things.

Small article on add in NI. Recruitment for a MI5 finance officer. Applicants must be "born or naturalised British citizen". How does this work in NI wrt the GFA. People from NI are entitled to identify as Irish only. Don't have to hold dual citizenship. Can these NI people not apply for this job?

www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/mi5-are-recruiting-in-belfast-and-have-advertised-a-career-like-no-other-36029955.html

And there was no problem wrt NI and the Irish border said the gov't and Brexiteers. Before it was looked at. Or they are being compelled to deal with it before further talks with the EU.

All the stuff being issued by the Cons is to try to make it all political and attempt to bring it to the Council. Their hard place is the reality of having to deal with the technicalities of Brexit. As the Council has delegated to the Commission.

Ireland had better be expanding and building up it's ports toute suite to avoid the UK land bridge route.

Ireland has direct ferry connections to Roscoff and Cherbourg.

Dual citizenship is available in NI under GFA. So I suppose if one wanted to apply for the MI5 job, one presents a British passport.

Or identifies as Irish only, and doesn't apply. But the option is there.

Misti, how is it probably clever politics if they're betting on nothing more concrete than 'the hope' that we come to our senses?

I think the calculation is:

• there is no obvious political benefit from a "cancel brexit" policy (Lib Dem result at GE shows this pretty clearly - OK so tactical voting played a big part, but people still voted tactically for a pro-brexit party.)

• the Fox/Davis/Johnson "cake and eat it" brexit is a non-starter. Can't happen. And the longer they spend hunting unicorns, the less time to negotiate anything more sensible.

• which means that the only two brexits that are possible are a chaotic death-plunge brexit, or no brexit.

Hammond can't on his own prevent brexit, or impose a more sensible (EEA/EFTA-type) approach - he doesnt have the political capital. So he has to bet on Davis, Fox et al failing (which they will).

IMO the wager he is making is that enough of the Tory party is close enough to business interests for a cliff edge brexit to look very unpalatable. So when push comes to shove, something will happen to prevent the UK going over the cliff. Of course, by the time we get to this point, only delaying (unlikely: would need EU27 unanimity) or cancelling brexit will be possible; the time that could have been used to negotiate a sensible transition will have been squandered.

This dishonest and risky strategy (also being used by Starmer) is of course only clever if it works. My view is that if you are between a rock and a hard place, as Hammond is, it must look like a risk worth taking.

I'd expect the Tories to decide that it is more risky politically to cancel Brexit - because it would massively split their party and infuriate the hard right authoritarian chunk of their voters.

If they run the economy over a cliff, they would have a decent chance of putting the blame on EU punishment and the treacherous Remainer "elite"
< rejoice, we're part of a powerful elite that can kill unicorns ! >

Well, you have been on the money before misti
Trade unions piping up against brexit too more now.

I think that's a significant risk bigchoc. But it seems to me that the more the downsides of brexit become apparent, the more the "business wing" of the Tory party will find its voice. Almost all of my management colleagues vote Con, all voted remain, all have a very large vested interest in brexit not happening. There will come a time when a third party might realistically hoover up those people, and others like them.

Just to depress you all ....

(paywall) Jacob Rees-Mogg, an English Trump but better at Latin

As Moggmentum surges.... < not envy >

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/rees-mogg-an-english-trump-but-better-at-latin-mdm82q87j

Jacob Rees-Mogg came round for lunch with us last week in Bath,
a suitable location for this politician dubbed “MP for the 18th century”.

As it was the summer recess I thought he might have loosened his top button a little but no:
he arrived impeccably dressed in a double-breasted suit with a shirt and tie.

Rees-Mogg says he has “never worn a pair of jeans”.
< and represents those fed up with elites >
....
Rees-Mogg is exactly as you would imagine him to be.
And these days authenticity is the major currency of any politician with eyes on high office.

Only recently taking to Twitter with a Latin maxim,
he gets more “likes” and “shares” for his tweets than any cabinet member, including the prime minister.
.....
To his fans Rees-Mogg is straight talking, has disarming humour,
is good on television,
unflinchingly patriotic
and a successful businessman from a privileged background who nevertheless understands the concerns of ordinary men and women.
< Latin and jeans phobia, yeah >

Like an English version of Donald Trump but with a better grasp of Latin
Does he see any similarity?

Rees-Mogg answers carefully and says that he fully understands the message of the populist revolution in 2016 that rocked the ruling classes on both sides of the Atlantic.

“The governing elite in both the US and the UK,” he said, “had come to the conclusion that the only reason that people wouldn’t do what they said is because they didn’t understand.

< yes, he's anti-elite ! >
....
“The problem with the European Union is we can be ­outvoted by a qualified majority vote and therefore laws can be passed that the ­British people have not only not consented to but have opposed.”

< the UK has been outvoted on only 2% of occasions >
....
Certainly, some part of the Conservative grassroots is all agog with the thought of him standing as leader when the time is right.

“Cometh the hour, cometh the Mogg”

is a recurring line.
But others — including the former Conservative MP Matthew Parris — are not so keen.

In his Times column yesterday Parris described Rees-Mogg’s views on moral, social, sexual and reproductive issues as
“brute moral conservative”

and warned that electing him as leader would kill off the “broad-church Conservative Party”.
....
Rees-Mogg is against:

● Gay marriage
● Raising welfare benefits
● Smoking ban in private vehicles where a child is present
● Euthanasia
● A 2016 investigation into the Iraq

…BUT FOR
● Trident, bedroom tax and academies
● Stricter asylum systems and a stronger enforcement of immigration rules
● Mass retention of data from communications and surveillance

Pete North's views. He's quite difficult to like but he is, at least, coherent on Brexit.‏ And I've noticed more Remainers I follow have started to engage with him.

1. So Norway's PM has cast doubt on temporary British EEA membership...

1. She is right. It will take some re-engineering to take into account the UKs former EU status.

1. If there is any point in it, then it's to expedite Brexit and reduce the workload of the repeal bill

1. That process, though, will take some years. The notion of a rapid transition is bunkum. Total nonsense.

1. Given the work involved, and the disruption, only for it to come to an end is hardly worth the headache - especially for Efta

1. More to the point, once you have transitioned into it (the simplest option) why would you even bother transitioning out of it?

1. Once it is done, there is no actual obligation for the EU to negotiate an alternate FTA and no incentive for them to do so.

1. If we are going down the Norway route then EEA serves as both the transition and the destination. Which is fine.

1. Once we're in we can reconfigure through annexes & country specific protocols until it resembles what we'd have negotiated otherwise

10. The only alternative to this is to stay in the EU for longer with no voting rights til an FTA is concluded.

11. Only then can you set about transitioning when you know what the new regime will be. This adds years to it.

12. This would be largely pointless in that we do actually want most of what the EEA offers. 90% of it at least.

13. When you add in all the additional considerations beyond trade then a comprehensive FTA necessarily will look like EEA

14. So if we go for bespoke deal we are in longer - and losing more business thanks to uncertainty - for no discernible reason.

15. Since the arbitration system will have to mirror Efta to a large extent, it might as well be Efta. Nothing wrong with it.

16. Any benefits to going the bespoke route are nullified by the risks and delays - and as far as I can see, the advantages are minimal

17. EEA may be suboptimal but it is the best of the options available. We are going to have to compromise one way or another.

18. Main benefit of EEA is it simplifies the process and gets us out faster - minimising the threats to trade - and reduces cost of leaving.

19. Ironically, so-called "clean Brexit" would be longer, messier and riskier and more expensive. EEA is the cleanest Brexit there is.

20. If I honestly thought there were compelling advantages to bespoke option I'd be pushing for it, but on balance, there's nothing in it.

21. As it stands not one reputable analyst thinks we will get a better deal than EEA. The Tory Brexiteers are cranks. You KNOW this by now.

22. If Efta option ruled out then we are looking at a "shadow EEA" where we do a "find and replace" changing Efta to some other instrument.

23. That may be likely as politically it allows govt to call it an FTA even though it is SM membership by another name. Will take longer tho

Considering how the talentless Cameron was elected PM and now the Mogg fawning,
imo, England has never really escaped a feudalist mentality,
deferring instinctively to the aristocracy.

woman could brexit result in a German-style coalition of mutual interest between labour and management? Probably wishful thinking, but wouldnt that be a result.

Both Norths talk sense and Richard North in particular has the depth of knowledge to back up his opinion.

The moggle will be the end of the Tories for a generation. I hope they elect him. Its not impossible: this is the party that elected that talentless vote-loser IDS.

German-style coalition of mutual interest between labour and management Imagine a sensible world. Barbara Castle tried here in her 'In Place of Strife' doc, which didn't get through. Even
German football is organised sensibly.

There is almost certainly no time for an official "third party" to be formed and get elected before 31 March 2019.

There may be unofficial coalitions of convenience, especially in the HoC
That's where I pin my hopes of a long transition where the Uk essentially stays as it is, just without most voting rights, while it carefully unpicks 45 years of integration.

iirc, Richard North says it will take a 10 years transition, to avoid economic pain and social chaos,

Both Norths talk sense and Richard North in particular has the depth of knowledge to back up his opinion.

RN is incredibly knowledgable, and a good and readable explainer of complex technical subjects too - but after months of lurking on his site I still don't really understand what he hopes to get out of brexit, beyond "sovereignty".

However, his personal manner is very abrupt, he's unpleasant to anyone who disagrees with him, and he has a huge ego - all of which may help to explain his failure to sell his big idea.

England has never really escaped a feudalist mentality,
deferring instinctively to the aristocracy.

I've seen that on here. Stuff like, "We need to leave the big complicated decisions to those who've been to Eton. Hard stuff is not for the likes of us".

Mogg and / or hard Brexit would only be the Tories' doom if their own voters - not just Labour or LibDems - decide Brexit was a mistake and / or that they elected the wrong party to carry it out.

That would mean a chunk of Leave voters admitting they made a mistake.
Remember these are the authoritarian-leaning voters, not the most flexible thinkers.

imo, even under real economic meltdown, many would refuse to accept that they and their party booked massively.
They'd try to blame anything else but Brexit and their own decisions.