Article 50/Brexit Negotiations

[blue cigar]

This is the dichotomy that the 'socialists' have consistently failed to address / explain.

If they were really 'true to their beliefs' then they should be the first in the queue to campaign to ensure that Brexit (now the decision has been taken to Leave) actually happens.

Patently a socialist model can never be realised within the EU - so the best chance they have to achieve their dream is to leave the EU and then get a socialist government elected. This opportunity to break free of the EU will not come again.

I think that some are simply faux socialists and others do not understand the theory of such a model but think that it is 'hip' to claim to be socialists.

Yet others it seems are simply contrary by nature. As someone has already said, this is a football forum not a think tank and therefore it should not be a surprise that the quality of their analysis is limited and tribal.

I want brexit to happen and i am as left wing as you will find. Sorry to piss on your arrogant tory chips but maybe a bit of realism instead of perception will do you good.
Carry on.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Anyway today's "news" seems to be either that the election weakened May's negotiating stance to the extent that the exit bill has gone from £30bn to £50bn (I couldn't quite follow why) or, more plausibly, we know what the bill will be but she's not saying it till after the Conservative conference.

Her negotiating position was weakened June 8th by the electorate returning the wrong result, according to William Hague.

I'm sure the remainers will be able to justify £50bn for whatever, come to think of it, assuming we do pay £50bn, what are we paying £50bn for?

Seems the only way to square the circle in Ireland is to give Northern Ireland special status. The DUP won't like that, it's the slippery slope to a united Ireland. We might be heading for another election quite soon and then the unthinkable.....

 

[The perfect fumble]

I want brexit to happen and i am as left wing as you will find. Sorry to piss on your arrogant tory chips but maybe a bit of realism instead of perception will do you good.
Carry on.

You're right, there's a strong tradition of EU opposition on the left, its one size fits all capitalist model. It runs against the grain to champion the rights of working people against the landed gentry, the industrialist class and now the rentier class neo-liberals only to hand it to corporatist Eurocrats.

 

[stonerblue]

We should rename this thread the Len and Fumble show ;-)

or the vonkey and some bloke in central America love-in..

 

[mcfc1632]

So, since fumble gave us this rather brilliant illustration of the EU view, mcfc1632 - surely now realising that, if he was right about his own amazing negotiating skills, then this government hasn't got them (or enough peole like him) - says fumble only posts "facile" stuff and metalbiker says "So far, nothing posted on this thread has any substance or gives anyone any understanding of what's going on", presumably including all the posts from metalbiker.

No-one has even hinted that the ship sailing away metaphor is seriously flawed - though I'd have thought that so much of Brexit is based on such an old-fashioned view of the world that the risk would be that the ship could sail over the edge of the world.


So the EU with all that enormous leverage can't do a deal, but we can get one without any leverage.

Fuck me - you are easily impressed!!

So let's just assess this profound contribution of fumble's that has so impressed you.

1. The substance is a cut a paste from his beloved Guardian - with all the bias and blinkered assessment that paper is renown for

2. Then there is fumble's own sage analysis and commentary:

"How could I not! All those BMW execs fretting about their mountain of unsold cars, that Prosecco lake undrunk.

Jesus Christ! Those Continental Johnnies are in deep shit."

You may see that as being statesman like - for me it is wholly facile bollocks that demonstrate the 'depth' of his capability to debate.

Anyway - my comments were mainly on MB's accurate assessment of the thread - so enough of quoting lightweights

 

[Metal Biker]

So, since fumble gave us this rather brilliant illustration of the EU view, mcfc1632 - surely now realising that, if he was right about his own amazing negotiating skills, then this government hasn't got them (or enough peole like him) - says fumble only posts "facile" stuff and metalbiker says "So far, nothing posted on this thread has any substance or gives anyone any understanding of what's going on", presumably including all the posts from metalbiker.

No-one has even hinted that the ship sailing away metaphor is seriously flawed - though I'd have thought that so much of Brexit is based on such an old-fashioned view of the world that the risk would be that the ship could sail over the edge of the world.


So the EU with all that enormous leverage can't do a deal, but we can get one without any leverage.

So what exactly are you trying to achieve yourself? Are you trying to "convince" those that voted to acknowledge the horrendous mistake you believe that they have made? To what extent and purpose? Is it so that you can go satisfy your own sense of virtue announcing to all and sundry that you were "on the right side of history".

Here is is a wake up call to your inflated egos in regards to the topic on conversation this thread is meant to encourage; nobody cares about how you voted but you. Look back on your own post; read it again and ask yourself "How has this post informed people who want to know about the Brexit negotiations with new information that could be deemed useful?" It's nothing more than your own opinion and we know that already, there's absolutely no need to post it again. This is the point I was making.

This "Article 50/Brexit" thread is anything but a place to discuss the negotiations from a neutral perspective. It's a refuge for people to moan, denigrate and lambast the decision, which is fine, anyone should be allowed to do that, but at the very least start another thread on it rather than polluting the current discussion with insults about others whose opinions you disagree with. Somebody posts a link about the negotiations that you feel is overly positive and not accurately reflective of the tone of the piece then by all means, if you feel it is necessary argue against it, but argue against the point not the person, which is all that's happened these past 400 pages.

Quick example: someone posts about Brexit from a news source about how the UK and EU are at a disagreement about a certain aspect of the negotiations. Their conclusion isn't that this is important for both sides to reach an understanding or that maybe one side or the other needs to be more flexible insert examples here, no it's that BREXIT IS THE WORST DISASTER TO EVER BEFALL THIS NATION IN IT'S HISTORY, AND THIS IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF HOW IT'S DOOMED TO FAILURE! I'D RATHER FACE THE NAZIS AGAIN!!!!!

Not entirely helpful or realistic. Look at your own rhetoric; "We're a ship sailing towards the edge of the world" in your critique of a metaphor used by those in favour of leaving the EU. That's a bit radical isn't it. We've elected to kill ourselves, is that basically what you're saying here? If this topic is causing you so much anger and stress because of your displeasure at how the talks are progressing ("Don't you mean REGRESSING!" Haha, got in before you!) then why put yourself through so much misery...or is this thread somewhere for you to vent? If that is the case, fine be honest that your contributions add nothing to the discussion and nobody should take what you say seriously, i'm just letting you know that as someone who does come on this thread and who respects the input of Len Rum, SWP's Back, Damo et al who clearly have a better understanding of the terminology being used when these announcements are made than I, that contributions like yours and others that focuses solely on insults of opinions are not entirely useful.

 

[stonerblue]

Her negotiating position was weakened June 8th by the electorate returning the wrong result, according to William Hague.

I'm sure the remainers will be able to justify £50bn for whatever, come to think of it, assuming we do pay £50bn, what are we paying £50bn for?

Seems the only way to square the circle in Ireland is to give Northern Ireland special status. The DUP won't like that, it's the slippery slope to a united Ireland. We might be heading for another election quite soon and then the unthinkable.....

As i predicted 12 months ago.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Fuck me - you are easily impressed!!

So let's just assess this profound contribution of fumble's that has so impressed you.

1. The substance is a cut a paste from his beloved Guardian - with all the bias and blinkered assessment that paper is renown for

2. Then there is fumble's own sage analysis and commentary:

"How could I not! All those BMW execs fretting about their mountain of unsold cars, that Prosecco lake undrunk.

Jesus Christ! Those Continental Johnnies are in deep shit."

You may see that as being statesman like - for me it is wholly facile bollocks that demonstrate the 'depth' of his capability to debate.

Anyway - my comments were mainly on MB's accurate assessment of the thread - so enough of quoting lightweights

You can only beat what's in front of you.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

Her negotiating position was weakened June 8th by the electorate returning the wrong result, according to William Hague.

I'm sure the remainers will be able to justify £50bn for whatever, come to think of it, assuming we do pay £50bn, what are we paying £50bn for?

Seems the only way to square the circle in Ireland is to give Northern Ireland special status. The DUP won't like that, it's the slippery slope to a united Ireland. We might be heading for another election quite soon and then the unthinkable.....

We are paying the £50 billion as it is funds that we have committed to for ongoing projects in the EU. Those funds cannot be dispersed against the other members because had they known the total cost they would have to bear might have influenced their decision to sign up.

You don't honestly think that this is just a figure pulled out of a hat do you? Everything to do with exiting the EU will be contained within the agreement. (if it wasn't we wouldn't be arguing over it we would just be telling them to stuff it) All someone had to do was to read the thing. Surprisingly the politicians didn't make this clear in the run up to the referendum, had they done so (along with lots of other facts) the public who have had some substantial information on which to make up their minds. This makes me believe that Call me Dave and the Tories wanted the vote to go the way of the leavers.

 

[The perfect fumble]

We are paying the £50 billion as it is funds that we have committed to for ongoing projects in the EU. Those funds cannot be dispersed against the other members because had they known the total cost they would have to bear might have influenced their decision to sign up.

You're right of course, but if you share a house with others and someone leaves, your share of the bills goes up, pleading you didn't factor in the possibility that someone might leave wouldn't get you very far with your flatmates.

With that said, mature nation states don't just up stumps and leave others in the lurch, even if there might be some legal fig leaf.

As for....

This makes me believe that Call me Dave and the Tories wanted the vote to go the way of the leavers.

Hum? Not so sure, I think they were just weak and inept.