Politics Discussion Thread (Heated Arguing Warning)

[Bacchus]

I see the argument, but based on general dysfunction I think UK would be lucky to get off that easily. I'm afraid what will actually happen is a no deal crash out, somehow, and in worst possible fashion -- like Parliament will revoke, and everyone will think its fine, but then at the last moment there will be some Tory rebellion and party leadership, whoever it is at that point, will pull from talks and then some Tories would split to make a coalition Govt, but it won't be in time. Some fucking circus of this sort.

[Krill]

I don't see how that can happen, because Article 50 revocation has to be enshrined in a bill and passed as law, recieving Royal Assent: I don't see how it fails if it passes the first hurdle, I don't see how the circus comes to town to scupper it after the fact.

[Bacchus]

The circus can purposefully aggravate the EU to the extent that the EU doesn't grant the revocation. But I guess you are right, doing so would grant the aggravators the very thing they want, so maybe not.

[Krill]

They can't not accept the revocation. It's unilateral. The ECJ said so.

The circus would have to pass a whole new act of parliament reactivating Article 50 and to then get thrown out without a deal.. just being a bunch of dickwads isn't enough.

[Bacchus]

Yeah, all that is true. I'm mostly afraid to jinx your proposed scenario, it seems too good of an outcome (in the short term, long term I agree that UK is better off outside the EU, but that is really predicated on having at least a minimally competent government, as opposed to a Thick Of It reenactment group).

[Gustaran]

No deal can still happen. EU needs to be careful to not explicitly back Britain into a corner, as overt bullying would quite likely cause a principled reaction. Merkel understands that, but the Spanish guy clearly doesn't, and has an election coming up.

During recent weeks media editorials in the German media rejecting any postponing of Brexit have started to appear and I totally agree with that point of view.
I personally hope the UK will just leave at the end of march, and frankly I don't care anymore if it is with the negotiated May-EU deal or with a "no deal". At least we would be done with that nonsense and I would not have to read about the latest crazy twist in British Brexit politics on a regular basis.

What is going to change during a few more months of non-negotiation? Nothing. God forbid this drags on until the European elections later this year...

I also think a no-deal Brexit could be good to show that leaving the EU is a trade-off that entails negative consequences as well.
What boggles my mind is that there still seems to exist some sort of legend that leaving the EU will automatically lead to terrific new trade deals, a lot of money for the NHS, favourable access to the EU single market and no more bothersome immigrants. In short, the UK will supposedly become the land of milk and honey as soon as it is freed from the tyranny of the EU.

Now, don't get me wrong: Though I don't share that view, I can respect British people who have carefully weighed the pros and cons of leaving the EU and still feel that the economic disadvantages will hopefully be short term and are outweighed by not being part of the EU in the future. Unfortunately, from following German and British media coverage I got the impression that this seems to be the minority of "leave" voters.

But I must admit what is really difficult to comprehend for me from the outside, is the fact that during the whole process I somehow expected the UK to come to an agreement on what Brexit should look like. Correct me if I am wrong, but we are now one month away from Brexit and there seem to be people:

- welcoming a hard Brexit
- in favor of the EU-May deal
- supporting the EU-May deal, but only if the backstop could be renegotiated
- suggesting a second referendum
- who want to remain in the EU and hope Brexit fails

[MJW (ya that one)]

The logical solution is a second referendum with Hard Brexit vs Unilateral Revoke. The EU is so hostile that both of those options are better than a deal; which was implict in the first referendum--which would justify the second one. The reason why this isn't happening is the EU's bad habit of "voting until you get it right" which is why things are spazzing out. It now depends if the Brexiteers fold or not now. If they don't we get a second referendum. If they do I think May's deal gets over the finish line with her rebels+DUP being cancelled out by Labour's rebels.

[Krill]

No. Just no. A referendum cannot happen, there isn't enough time. Anyone who doesn't understand it is the EU who allows the extension just doesn't understand reality.

[MJW (ya that one)]

No. Just no. A referendum cannot happen, there isn't enough time. Anyone who doesn't understand it is the EU who allows the extension just doesn't understand reality.

They can just revoke with the intention of triggering Article 50 again if leave wins. This is why ECJ ruling makes no sense...

[Krill]

No they can't! That is the sodding ECJ ruling: it has to be a sincere intent to remain, not a legalistic method of allowing a referendum to occur that would have one option to restart article 50! If this was tried it would be thrown back to the ECJ for an emergency ruling and they have already said that revoking Article 50 only applies in this instance.