goon wrote:
Corbyn is almost as bad as the Brexiteers in his insincerity in my opinion. Talking about remaining in the single market and customs union is fine but he knows as well as anyone that if he does that he wouldn't really have any new scope to change things economically or politically at home as you suggest. I've no idea what he's actually thinking or what he wants.
I don't think he's insincere, I think he comes from a political tradition that views European institutions with a lot of suspicion. I have no doubt the majority of politicians, Corbyn included, have been learning as they go about the implications of Brexit. Those who present themselves as experts on the detail (say Yanis Varoufakis) are actually rather dangerous, they're sufferers of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I think it's frustrating, but totally understandable on a political level that Corbyn has pursued a fairly enigmatic, small target strategy on Brexit. It's a mess of the Tory party's making. This sound bite sums it up quite well
Mirth wrote:
It's more within a 40-45 mark with the rest falling in the margin of error - it's honestly not a big swing considering the implications are widely known: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/09/12/how-public-feel-about-brexit-options
A second referendum would be a terrible idea - it'll genuinely lead to far more extremism and polarisation and around half the country will end up being angrier and more disenfranchised than ever. Besides, there will be a call for a third referendum as soon as the results are announced - what then?
Fair enough, I must have read about a different poll—seem to recall an article on the subject a couple of months back. I think this goes to the heart of what we understand democracy to be. Efforts to educate the public about the detailed implications of May's deal, hard Brexit, "Norway Plus", or remaining should be redoubled. If new information changes the polls, that is part of the supposed mechanism of democracy.
I think we should find it disturbing that the UK has embarked on a massive change, which is predicted to have significant economic negatives, that seems not to enjoy majority support even now. If you think that is democratic, good luck to you.
jones wrote:
Honestly as a Brit the one thing I would have hope for is Corbyn coming into power, which would most likely not happen unless the Tories fail spectacularly come March next year. I've worked in a Brexit transition task force for half a year in the finance sector and my very entry and high level assessment of the situation is there are innumerable landmines whatever direction you look (no deal, CETA 2.0, even re-entry into the EU) but I also think the UK could survive just fine either way. UK-EU relations, memberships in the single market etc pp are while important not the be all and end all; I'd worry a lot more about a "good" deal (which in reality is mostly good for big business and the City anyway) where May comes out strengthened and leads the country for another decade than a hard Brexit followed by Corbyn taking over.
Interesting perspective, you think Brexit is less relevant than the swings and roundabouts of government as usual … I would like to see what a Corbyn Labour government could do given the right conditions. I know a few people on the UK left and they are tooled up with policy and politics. And I believe an early general election is warranted. However, I also know to a certainty that all those people on the UK left massively overstate the capacity of such a government to determine its own destiny, in or out of the EU. What they can do is end Tory austerity and get some economically sound (rather than hostile to life) parameters around basic goods like housing.
I see a lot of history upcoming for the EU and the eurozone. Their overlapping institutions have fundamental deficits that, despite their apparent inertia, I think will end up evolving rapidly in the coming decades.
