An interesting problem that might occur is both major parties (Conservative & Labour) both imploding at the same time.
Conservatives have the Brexit fiasco, where a large chunk of the MP's promised (some in writing) to leave with no deal if needed. They quickly turned around and became Remainers. That, plus May's disastrous 'leadership'. make any election a nightmare in waiting.
Labour has its own issues with a large number of their voters, generally outside of London, voting for Brexit too. Corbryn would like to leave but can't say that because the core of the party wants to stay in the EU. Its not played up by the press much but if you read the core's writings you find out that they are neo-communists. They can't talk about that either. Then there is the Jewish problem they have...
A general election right now could be a nightmare for the parties with people staying home, or worse, voting for new parties.
6
One word: dysfunctional!
4
It is what happens when money and right wing politicians every time.
So why not have a second referendum and vote against Brexit?
3
Let's mark this as the century of humiliation for the British.
3
The Brexit requires a second referendum .Further, a decision of this nature needs to be explained and debated publicly so as voters take a judicious decision.
Sandipt mishra
Visakhapatnam
3
Putin's joy at both this and the divisions in th US must be overwhelming. We are doig to ourselves what he and his minions couldn't accomplish. Brexit was a bad idea from the beginning. What will the English think when they lose Scotland to the EU. And inevitalby Northern Ireland (Thank God for that)
11
Actions do have reactions, the bigger fault here lays first with the egotistical and witless politicians and the ignorance of the voters themselves. This is when politics becomes a circus, everyone is caught up in the soaring colorful balloons and the banging drums but don't realize beneath it is nothing by air and grit.
5
Too bad that neither the authors nor, apparently, their editors understand what the Suez Crisis was. Ridiculous.
1
Pierre Nanterme, CEO of Accenture “Digital is the main reason just over half of the companies on the Fortune 500 have disappeared since the year 2000.”
Klaus Schwab “We must develop a comprehensive and globally shared view of how technology is affecting our lives and reshaping our economic, social, cultural, and human environments. There has never been a time of greater promise, or greater peril.”
While most people talk of great promise of ongoing 4th digitally driven Industrial revolution, they have uncharacteristically unable to understand the grave peril if the process is not understood and suitably prepared for the great shift.
In the case of Britain it has signally failed to understand that British Empire is part of history and it’s a great delusion even now to think that Sun never sets in the British Empire.
Today world is the flattest and entered into an era of digital globalisation where unprecedented global flows of data and information transfer are occurring. It’s an incontrovertible truth that the world is more connected than ever before.
In "Age of Discovery", Ian Goldin & Chris Kutarna have “ given us an engrossing and illuminating account of the connections between the past eras of discovery, the world in which we find ourselves today, and the future towards which, we are hurtling at break-neck speed, a thought-provoking book which will leave us both uneasy, but also hopeful, much food for thought and discussion” not just for British but for everyone.
3
UK: I’ve had it with EU, I’m going to leave.
EU: Please don’t go. It’s not a perfect relationship, but we’ve grown closer and stronger.
UK: I’m leaving anyway.
EU: That’s too bad. I’m not sure I understand. Take your time to consider this.
UK: I’ll be gone in 2 years.
EU: I’m sorry to hear that.
UK: After we split up, I don’t want anything to change between us.
EU: Hmmm. I’m not sure that will work.
UK: How very dare EU!
Scotland: I’m thinking of leaving U, K?
UK: How very dare you! Traitors! We’re better together!
11
Where is Noam Chomsky to talk down to us, yet say something intelligent and uplifting? Here's my imitation: What is happening in the UK is quite simple. A rash decision has been made by the last vestige of xenophobic, of primarily age 50 plus something libidos, (I'm in my 60s btw)and the greater good, collective consciousness--of even "them"--senses it was a big mistake. Thus they are 'un' or semi-consciously resorting to dysfunctionality to halt a bad decision, but yet not admit that they made it. If someone would just recognize how easy it would be to go down in history, show true leadership, stay in the EU--be better if the leaders did this and did not re-vote, but either way. Move past this and bolster, not break, with leaders of the EU. 15 years from now, a bunch of these MPs will be saying, I wish I would've seen how easy it was to be great.
3
Referenda are open to manipulation unless there are checks on the campaigns for or against. In countries like Ireland where Referenda are part of the Constitution, we have a referendum Commission that issues the pro's and con's of the referendum plus is the fact-checker on the claims, lies etc of the campaign. Even with that oversight there are always people who will vote against the Government no matter what. The Brexit referendum was full of lies from the start aided by the right wing press, what a mess.
4
I believe there is a bigger story here.
Democracy is under threat throughout the world. Not only do we see this chaos in Britain where the people were served lies and voted on something they didn’t understand.
The alt-right has taken over the United States with a corrupt Congress that does not serve the people.
Even in Australia, there has been a movement to the right upsetting all the progression that this bastion of democracy stood for.
What’s next?
13
I am glad that Brexit has not worked. It is about time we all realized we are one small planet, one human race. The EU was a step in the right direction. Nationalism and borders are passe. the rich nations should help the poor ones so immigration will not be an issue. Most people want to stay in their own home place.
10
No mention of Scotland in this article, though that's usual for the New York Times, which has long struggled to understand that England and Britain are not synonymous. Scotland voted to remain and its voice has been completely ignored by May's government. Scottish independence is now just a matter of time. So ironically, one of the results of a referendum touted as making Britain great will be the demise of the United Kingdom.
11
The United Kingdom is a representative democracy. Parliment is soverign. There's no provision in the constitution for a plebiscite. Parliment should declare the plebiscite null and void and continue in the EU.
3
Looking at the bigger picture, one very quickly realizes that it is not just Britain that is turning against itself. It is hard to find a country that might be regarded as part of "western civilization" that is not fragmenting and sliding into a kind of directionless malaise. Australia is very much included in this. We have had so many Prime Ministers in the last decade or so that we have developed a reputation for being "the Italy of the southern hemisphere".
The causes of this Weltschmerz (for want of a better term) are many and varied. However for I feel that the 'chickens are now coming home to roost' after the west adopted the pernicious neo-liberal model of capitalist economics some 40 or so years ago.
I also feel that the west is suffering as a result of an unmanageable influx of migrants into our midst who have no intention of ever integrating and accepting our way of life. Instead, they seek to impose their values on us. One only needs to read Douglas Murray's book, "The Strange Death of Europe - Immigration, Identity, Islam" to gain an insight into what is happening in Western Europe.
Far be it for me to elaborate on the problems faced by Americans in your country. The quality of the person occupying the White House indicates the seriousness of the situation facing the United States.
If the west does not get its act together and do so mighty soon, then the future for our children and grandchildren and those who follow them, is going be mighty bleak.
9
I have worked with the Remain group in Devon - South West England for 3 years. We are now have 10,000 members. ask
The government made mess did not start with Mrs May IT started with Cameron. His referendum was not for Britain but to save his old calcified Conservative party. It should have been a 2 stages. 1. To vote remain/or trigger article 50 to find out what the best leaving terms. 2 . Vote remain or leave on what was then known to be the terms and, the consequences.
The Democracy should never have arisen, Parties caused confusion with contrary statements.whether the referendum result was binding or non binding. After the result Tories used innuendos to suggest it was binding . May described it as an.."instruction" from voters and the word was used deliberately to add weight. In 2015 all members of the Commons were told it was advisory only. The Democracy arguments was the Tories plan. May even waved the patriotic flag such was the state of desperation. She has been a rabble rouser with her public iutterances .
The fact is the British - -are still imperialists. They do not like beinga member of anything..they like to be the leaders The situation we have is measurably explained by the ognorance of not knowing. The belief that Government and parliament would produce all things - was busted by an ill prepared -wrongly prepared unbelievanle badly managed referendum that should never have taken place On that issue we have unity...
3
It is hard to adapt to dictates from Bruxelles even for a small nation like Finland. For an empire which ruled half of the world only a few centuries ago, Brexit is a foolhardy but an obvious choice, in spite of ruining their economy and only mildly affecting the rest of European countries.
2
Do not worry, Carbon Dioxide is settling Britian’s future — indeed everyone’s — quietly, persistently, and permanently.
Brexit will soon enough be placed in its proper perspective, and those of us left, if any, will think: “How quaint! What were they arguing about? Where’s my oxygen mask?”
4
It's often more difficult to get out of a marriage than to marry.
3
As a Briton who has lived in the United States for forty years and who visits Britain frequently, I feel qualified to say that, compared with the system of government in the so-called United States of America, the British have got it made. Ergo: what country, other than a totally misguided one, would have elected Donald Trump? Seriously!
8
"We’re in the Last Hour’: Democracy Itself Is on Trial in Brexit, Britons Say"
You accurately describe the UK attitudes, but there's a certain smirk in your tone, as if we were any better, any different, any closer to a democracy. Being bigger, being more powerful, having also lost our empire and our reputation, we should see them as us.
Their system is their system, their accents and schooling are also theirs. Perhaps they should have changed back in the days of "the angry young men", but they didn't, they remained our puppy dog. Now our schooling or lack of it, our health system, our gulf between those earning above $250,000 a year and the other 99% is as divisive and unhealthy as their wanting out of the crooked EU!
It's time you looked at the death of democracy here - and it's not just Trump. It's both sides of the crevasse. It's time for our media to become great again. Try objectivity.
2
Where is the common sense of leaders in this world? If they really believed 'in majority rules' they would require that a real majority, and that means 75% and not 50.1%, would be necessary for such a significant change in their nation. It is too bad that this logic does not exist in any nation today, that is except those dictatorial ones where the voters always vote 100% for the decisions of their leaders.
11
Theresa May adamantly refuses to hold a second referendum when the first passed by a razor-thin majority that most opinion pollsters would say fell within recignized margins of error. The British people have had an abundance of time since then to become much better acquainted with the issue than they were before that vote. A second seems in order.
But Mrs. May is insisting instead on a fourth vote in Parliament on her proposed deal. Huh? Twice, maybe, but FOUR times? Psychiatrists tell us repeating the same thing time after time after time after time and expecting a different outcome is a symptom of insanity. That's what seems to be ruling Britannia these days... well Parliament at least.
19
Gee, it seems cut and dried: A referendum was held, the majority voted to leave the EU, and the political leaders failed to follow through and leave the EU. Sounds anti-democratic to me. Vote 'em out and get it done.
3
The simplest solution to this Gordian knot is a second referendum. There is far more information out there now on the consequences of leaving the EU and people will be able to make an educated decision, unlike the first one which was largely about propagating absurd lies and fear-mongering. I'd wager 100 quid that it will be a positive to remain.
19
I agree that Scotland has been chomping at the bit since late 2016 and I'm hopeful that their overwhelming vote of 62% stay and 38% Brexit will get them back into the EU by the end of the year. To Ireland, all of this commotion is simply background noise. They will continue to prosper economically within the EU stronghold. Northern Ireland who voted 56% stay and 44% Brexit is the one that has a real dog in the fight. The N. Ireland/Ireland border tensions can only be resolved by Northern Ireland joining the EU. England and Wales, the only two that voted for Brexit, will have to watch the monkeys in Parliament continue to reach no consensus.
5
With all the other problems in the world, this does truly seem to me to be much ado about nothing. Not clear to me that in or out of the EU has made a fundamental difference to other countries in the area. Switzerland and Norway seem to be managing fine without it. Germany and France seem to be managing fine with it. I think affluent folks in affluent countries, ie the US and the UK, increasingly need something to argue about.
1
First Referendum was absolutely not clear about consequences of the brexit. It was done on the enthusiasm of breaking in a historical period where the must is breaking things. Now people know the disatrous consequences of brexit for UK an EU. So it’s time to repeat the referendum, Britons deserve this second chance.
19
I don't understand. I have heard the British pundits say, "we can't have another referendum because that would be betraying the will of the people." But with a decision that momentous, doesn't it make sense to check in again with the will of the people after some time has passed and the complications have become obvious? Meanwhile they think nothing of having vote after vote after vote in parliament -- so they get to have do-overs, but the will of the people doesn't?
Grand statements about democracy are rhetorical, used to support the agenda of the speaker. I don't think democracy is going to die because someone got petty during question period.
15
@ Alexandra Hamilton I totally agree that the first referendum should be considered invalid because no one voting to leave actually understood what they were voting for. True, there was a government handout, stating what would be involved. As it turns out, the government had no idea what would be involved. Since Parliament has clearly shown it doesn´t know which way to go (no less than 8 different options voted on), it must be the people who decide. And this time, let´s be clear that nothing short of a 2/3rds majority will be sufficient to trigger the massive constitutional change that leaving the EU represents.
11
Combining democracy with capitalism has always been a dicey project, depending entirely on having a business community with ironclad ethics and social responsibility. Unfortunately, we don't - not in the UK or the US, and certainly not elsewhere. And we're seeing the results.
12
This is a large part of why our "founding fathers" created a representative government rather than offering a government by public plebiscite. David Cameron bears a good deal of responsibility for this mess since he called for the vote expecting "stay" to win and settle things down.
As to a system which gives more voice to more parties, I've never been a fan. It might seem to work well for those with minority views, but what it does time and again is create fragile coalition government. In countries with such a system, very small fringe parties hold the coalition hostage to their demands. When they do not get what they want, they pull out of the government forcing called elections and turnover.
14
@Anne-Marie Hislop Are you actually advocating for government of the lessers by their elected betters? And how do you suppose those "betters" got into office - certainly not by demonstrated ethics and utterly pure accountability. And unless you can guarantee full participation and completely untainted "plebiscites," any generalization you might make about them is skewed by whatever machinations have been applied to the voting process.
2
We are in a world where political leaders think they are kings. Three times voted down, May seems to be overdoing her role as prime minister. Democracy is an interesting form of politics as it obliges every citizen to be responsible. Brexit shows that the Brits voted without really understanding the referendum and then passed the hot potato to their government. We've voted, now you deal with it!
10
The referendum on Brexit, as I understand it, is not legally binding. Politicians tied themselves to the outcome of the vote, however. As in the United States, there are no politicians of courage who are looking to the future. Something as momentous as fundamentally altering one's economic well being seems to me to be something that could have been finessed with a call for more study and avoid this really horrible fracturing that is going on. It was a fatal fault for Mr Cameron to hold this referendum instead of discerning what exactly were the problems to solve within the then-existing EU relationship and then get the public on board as he (or somebody in charge) worked to solve those problems. In the U.S., the ACA is a sort of cousin issue to the Brexit strategy of throwing the baby out with the bath water. Instead of fixing problems and moving forward, politicians hanging onto anarchic right wing ideology and an executive branch brimming with incompetence vow to remove health care access from our most vulnerable population. Sadly, the days of any country in the world looking to the US or the UK as an aspiring example of refuge for liberty and justice for all are long gone.
19
I saw that Sinn Fein took part in the demonstration at the Ireland - Northern Inland border against the possible return of border checks to be expected upon Brexit.
Would it not make more sense for Sinn Fein to end its policy of abstentionism and take up it seats in the House of Commons? The seven votes could make a large difference, and, especially when used in softening or revoking Brexit, would be of huge benefit to the population of Ireland as a whole and even to the UK and the EU. What a brilliant gesture to move forward and put all the troubles behind us!
8
@What'sNew
Why on Earth would Sinn Fein sit in the parliament of a foreign country?
1
The people who voted to leave the E.U. have good reason to be angry and the rest of us have good reason to be concerned about democracy's future.
It is clear that a majority of the people want to leave. It's also clear that a majority of elected politicians don't. The people vote and say this is what we want. But elected politicians say we know better so this is what you get.
The politicians punted this question to the people, the people decided, and now those same politicians need to follow through, no matter where it takes them.
4
@Ex New Yorker
It's not clear that there is a leave majority. England and Wales voted out, Scotland and Ireland (North) voted to remain. Added to that is the treaty with the RoI (& the EU, with US sponsorship) on how the island will work.
The vote was 52% of those voting, not the electorate.
Though seeing what has happened, I think that for the sanity of the European project, that the UK must leave.
I saw a Scottish MEP last week asking Europe to keep the lights on for Scotland - this could lead to the break up of the UK.
9
@Ex New Yorker Over 16 Million people voted to remain, a 48:52 split.
That's why it's a mess; the result was not as clear as you state.
Would you let 52% shoot the other 48%? Even changing a company's constitution requires a greater degree of support.
@Ex New Yorker
It is not clear that a majority want to leave.
It is not even true.
The European Union did not vow to make the exit process painful for the U.K. It has merely stuck to its founding principle that a non-member state cannot has such a favourable deal as a member state. All the pain is due to Mrs May’s red lines and the inability of the ruling Conservative Party to agree amongst itself what kind of Brexit it would like to see. Back in 2016, those people who voted Remain knew what they were voting for, whereas Brexit was a blank canvas on which disaffected people sketched out their hopes and dreams. People who voted Leave each had a different idea of what it might mean and they were urged in by the snake-oil salesmen who promised a future of rainbows and unicorns and the moon on a stick. Those chickens are now coming home to roost.
54
The formation of the European Union was one of the greatest triumphs of recent times. Typically nations disintegrate into smaller entities and become less important countries. The EU created a more powerful economic block of countries with open borders. A group of British politicians confused the public into believing leaving the EU would provide them major economic and social benefits and rid themselves of overbearing rules from Brussels. Now the country is at a crossroads and the rosy promises seem to have faded into shadows in the Thames. Parliament should initiate another public vote to ensure that the people really do want to isolate themselves from Europe; a leave or remain vote would ensure democracy is alive in the UK.
25
I have never really considered Britain a democracy. With the monarchy, and appointed (not elected), House of Lords, the Commons leadership has always been subservient to the royal establishment. How could the common person be represented sufficiently, given this governance structure?
Brexit is madness. It does no good for the common person, as any negative impact on the economy due to Brexit, affects the common folk more than the affluent ones. Theresa May has repeatedly had her withdrawal agreement up for a vote, only to be defeated three times. And she is going to try to attempt a fourth vote on this same agreement next week. It seems that she will only move on to next steps, once her withdrawal deal is accepted. Brexit was engineered to come to pass, and surely May is engineering the acceptance of her withdrawal agreement, by repeatedly bringing it up for a vote without substantial changes.
The UK is not the US. It is much worse. It is highly dependent on external trading relationships, for even day to day commodities. With UK debt being 90% of GDP and increasing, GDP growth stagnant at 1% or therabouts, Brexit should never have come to pass. To couch it as something that must be deliverd, as this is what the people wanted is irresponsible, to say the least.
Futhermore Scotland, Wales and NI seem to want something different than the English. Democracy was never the English way.
9
@Paul Rutherford Funny, I thought the British have had a democratic system in place for hundreds of years.
The fact that it's being manipulated by the wealthy establishment seems to be rather commonplace in our superior Western democracies.
Or are you happy that Exxon etc pays for both Republican & Democratic candidates - how's the common person representation going in the land of the free?
The Supreme Court seems to have become somewhat politicised these days too, I'm sure the common person is going to really enjoy some of their decisions in the next few decades.
1
As sorry as I am to see the UK leave, I think it was a mistake for the EU to grant an extension. It's obvious that the UK is never going to make up their mind. The EU should just stop being held hostage by the incompetence of the UK and cut the relationship and begin a new one. I just am shocked every time I see these politicians act like they can just go to the EU and tell "this is how it is". Not only does the EU have the upper hand, I think they have been very patient and the most adult-like throughout this whole process. They've done their part, looked out for their own interest, and are abiding by the rules and timelines. If the UK can't keep their end of the deal, then (I love you UK) but good riddance. The UK politicians are scared of no longer being able to portray the EU as the boogyman and deflect economic or society woes on them while actually having to take responsibility for their votes.
36
@Drew
...and take responsibility for what comes after Brexit happens. You raise a good point that the up or down future fortunes of the UK are now on the backs of Parliament with no convenient continental bogeyman to blame.
4
The countries and corporations that microtargeted voters to engineer Brexit knew what they were doing. The process has succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.
The upcoming regimes worldwide will be autocratic. People will vote for right-wing parties, partly to make sure that democracy does not endanger their futures.
12
/re: UK Parliament and "I know you are but what am I" at a most inopportune time.
It's exactly what one would expect in the ebb of a democratic civilization. But if you think I'm gloating, no. The USA faces the same challenges. Either we all turn back from the brink and embrace the common good, or the next world war looms closer.
6
llies during the Somme battle in 1916.
The visionaries who founded the European Union obviously gave that a lot of thought and decided to allow free movement of goods and people all over Europe.
Problems exist but they will not be solved by walking away from the Union. The UK should be in the lead in putting things right, not by washing their hands and giving up.
At the referendum, a bunch of lies and inaccurate politics was aimed at the voters, reason enough to either have a second referendum or revoke Article 50 and remain in the European Union.
6
@Tim Hendley.Absolutey.
The UK should be leading Europe, not running away muttering resentment.
The failure of UK politicians to lead over the last 40 years is a disgrace to the people who entrusted them to do a job.
1
Yet again the campaign of misinformation about the House of Commons and Brexit is trotted out.
First fact, only 25% of MPs went to Oxbridge.
Second fact, only 29% went to a private school. That’s fairly representative of the society as a whole.
Third fact, as a comparison about 20% of members of the US Congress went to an Ivy League college. So the UK is basically the same and the attacks on the composition of the House of Commons are misconceived.
Fourth fact, the vast majority of Britons who voted leave were Staet educated and have been nowhere near a university of any description in their lives. Draw your own conclusions.
Final fact, the European Commission is far more elitist than any of the democratically elected institutions under attack.
7
Can you please elaborate why the European Commission consisting of members from 27 EU member states is elitist vis a vis the House of Commons ? You should know that the commission members are elected by democratically elected members of the European Parliament following recommendations of the European Council (democratically elected heads of governments respectively states).
The Britons have decided to leave and they should do so pronto! No more populist alternate realities from across the channel or the oceans!
1
Whether Britain stays in or leaves the EU, here's one thing that needs to happen in whatever fragments of a country remains: Pass a law requiring anyone who is running for an elected position to have been to a state school (what Americans would call a public school).
Currently, almost 100% of those in power in the UK went to the kind of private school that 99.99% of the population could never even think of attending.
This outrageous fact has two effects. One is that the Hooray Henrys in power have absolutely no idea of what life is like for 99.99% of the UK population. They belong to a heavily insulated, highly elite club of people with a "reality" all of their own.
Another effect is that these private school prats in parliament have no incentive to invest in state schools. They didn't attend those schools, their kids won't be attending them, they know nothing about what goes on in those schools, and they care even less.
How does any of this make sense?
Passing a law to make this happen would be well-nigh impossible, of course, as parliament is occupied almost exclusively by the prats who would be ejected from power under such a law. So, it's up to the British public to *only* ever vote for someone who went to a state school. When state school graduates make up a majority in parliament, then they could pass such a law and make it a part of Britain's constitution.
3
The rule that determined leave/stay was a sham exercise in democracy. To leave the EEU is an act that resets the fundamental future of the UK. The referendum rule was simple majority, something that could not read a clear will of the people. By setting the cut point at >50%, the referendum guaranteed permanent division in the country since it could not read a clear-cut will of the people.
A referendum is the same as not an election of individuals in discreet electoral districts upon which a governing party is determined. To reflect the will of the people, the referendum rule should have been a ⅔ vote. That would have settle the issue in the eyes of the UK and the world.
Instead, the simple majority rule fractured the society and allowed a specific set of incompetent elected representatives to drag the UK into the mud and become one of the two laughingstocks among the nations of the world (the other being the United States with its current president).
15
I suspect the BRITs must have some sympathy for us then as we struggle with a minority president and a minority Senate. Two old democracies without the tools to deliver for our pluralistic modern societies at a time when we need governance as perhaps no other time in human history.
17
You cannot understand Brexit and the terrible damage it is doing to Britain without understanding its European context. Much of what the Brexit camp says about the European Union is perfectly true. It is the result of the EU having been hijacked by elites who think it is their fief to do with as they will. Britain leaving the EU is not the solution however, a thoroughgoing reform is.
The EU is for the European people to prosper and be happy, but it has failed. Greece is a good example. Their ruling class ran up a mountain of debt so that they could get rich in a credit fueled boom, leaving the taxpayer to pay it back. The government sent false statistics to Eurofin, and yet no one has been prosecuted for that and other crimes. Italy is riddled with corruption, most of the council contracts in Rome are in corrupt hands, and increasingly the Eternal City is looking like a slum. The people running the migrant rescue missions in the Mediterranean are working for the Mafia if only they knew it. Last year the largest migrant reception center in Sicily was found to have been in Mafia hands for the previous ten years. Prime Minister Viktor Orban has implemented a fascist slave-labor law in Hungary. In France the ruling class rode the Republican and Socialist parties into the ground, so they founded a new party and a new horse to ride.
6
The article states that the EU vowed to make UK withdrawal from the EU painful. Not so. The UK wished to leave the club but retain the benefits of membership without the obligations. You can't leave your fitness club and show up the next day to use the swimming pool. That reality is now evident to the British. The stated British Brexit lobby objective was ''to have our cake and eat it''. Not a runner.
64
The sign of a true fool is someone who talks about where they went to school as an adult.
The big mistake was to include a singular referendum into a well established and sturdy democratic republican government. Referendums are the enemy of democracy.
11
Putin's ROI has been huge in terms of Brexit and Trump.
7
It's okay, Boris Johnson will still be wealthy and respected by his fellow wealthy Oxbridge mates.
I have a feeling that we will eventually hear stories about how pro-Brexit imbeciles like Johnson and Nigel Farage spent the entirety of 2018 moving their money around into investments that would be sealed off from this chaos, unlike all of the fellow Britons they are so contemptuous of.
12
@QTCatch10
...and the howling mobs will whine: how could we possibly have known at the time?
Humans can be painfully ignorant of human nature...
1
Until further notice, Putin should get Time Magazine’s “Man of the Year” for being the most dominantly influential figure on elections around the globe that ever lived.
7
The UK government's desperate adherence to the 2016 referendum is a pathetic case of political necrophilia. That vote and its result are stone dead. We have come a long way since then, and repugnant as referenda are, a fresh one is likely the only safe way out of this embarrassing mess.
8
The jibes about boardings schools are a big part of the problem. The Members of Parliament, especially those who represent the Tories, are disproportionately from a small "well-educated" elite. But what they learned at Oxford and Cambridge except to respect privilege beats me. And although most British academics abhor Brexit, but it will take decades for their any of the places where they teach, unless they are in Scotland, to recover their reputations beyond Britain's own borders.
The real question, in both Britain and America, is exactly how deep will these self-inflicted divisions get. The native Brits possess the advantage of having lived on the same small island for countless centuries, while Americans account their country to be the great Melting Pot. The bonds of emotional connection in Britain should prove stronger and a shared vision of national existence more easily sustained.
In America the tribes are separating into incompatible mythological entities -- a breach that may take generations to bridge. The already feeble bonds are growing weaker. The opposing camps are beginning to view each other as either hostile cosmic conspiracies or conglomerations of sub-human alien creatures. Once you deny the essential humanity of those with whom you disagree, the doors to communication will remain closed.
7
By free vote, each MP should be made to prioritize all of the indicative amendments in order of preference so as to salvage a hint of a tolerable path forward, Speaker Bercow. If that doesn't perform suitably, scrap brexit as being too divisive: it would thereby be made clear as being the Cameron-Farage school-boy prank it is.
3
Britain's political institutions are not falling apart. They are flexibly responding to a difficult situation in a manner similar to the way they did in 1940. A resolution will emerge even if it means remaining in the EU, with all the disruptive consequences which that would entail. For a comparison have a look at the US Congress over the last three years. For all its apparent entropy, it still functions as a legislative body constrained by political realities. So it is in Britain. The British institutions (notwithstanding the public school humour of some of its members), are solid and will find the least worst solution.....and in a civilised manner. Let's hope that American institutions can emulate them.
2
Leave or stay, the elites will come out on top.
The same result was true in the United States after the Great Recession.
Around the world, the perpetual triumph of the elites and the corresponding increase in the wealth gap is the real cause of people’s growing disillusionment with their elected leaders. It is the reason for the Orange Vests in France and Merkel’s political downfall in Germany. Note, elites in those two nations, France and Germany, are among the EU’s strongest supporters. This fact reveals much about what is wrong with the EU, and why, as it is currently constituted, its future is questionable and deserves to be.
3
@Hugh
I would encourage you to inform yourself a bit more before you pronounce sweeping generalizations such as "Merkel's downfall." She remains highly respected and nothing about Merkel is elitist. Germans of different political colors refer to her as "Mutti", (mother). She is still a pastor's daughter from East Germany who legitimately earned her PHD in physics. She lives in a modest apartment, no elitism there.
It is also "Yellow Vests" and not "Orange Vests."
You might also have noticed that the EU is becoming stronger rather than weaker. You might read up on the fact that the rightish populist parties in Europe have erased their anti-European agenda. No longer any "exits" are proposed for the upcoming elections. Even Marie le Pen talks about a "Europe des Nations." Europeans treasure the mobility and peace and are adhering to the obligation to get along with each other after two terrible wars. This is worth every error on the way. It is more worth to pursue unity than to revert to nationalist fragmentation. The EU is uniquely effective in controlling rampant capitalism. Its member countries still offer health insurance for all and free higher education, from which many members of the "elite" come. Progress is made with two steps forward and one back, but the EU is moving forward.
A good article but I take issue that the EU ‘vowed to make Britain’s withdrawal painful’. I don’t recall such a vow, rather it is the reality of the misguided decision to quit one of three major trading blocks that will cause the pain. Withdrawal requires the renegotiation 1,200+ agreements carefully put in place over 40+ years which regulate everything from aviation, to medicines to taking your pet on holiday with you to Europe. The UK’s actions will have an adverse economic impact on the EU but will affect the UK much more since a far greater proportion of its trade and exports is with the EU than vice versa. Mrs May has shown her government to be inept in delivering a withdrawal agreement and there should be no expectation that it will prove any better in the next phase of the process, negotiating the post-withdrawal treaties with the EU and the rest of the world. The sheer magnitude of this exercise is apparent to one of the sanest voices in this debacle, the former UK ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, sidelined in modern day politics through the use of political advisors. Given the abysmal performance of the government the opposition Labour party should be well ahead in the polls but is not. In a backlash against the Tory-lite years of Tony Blair mentioned in the article, it is now led by an old left-wing warhorse without the charisma or policies required for the position.
17
@Philip Lees
The clearsighted Sir Ivan Rogers did in 2016 what Ms. May should have done also when he had realized that his negotiation task could never be accomplished according to the expectations of hard-line Brexiteers who are controlling Tory party and the management level of Labour: Throwing this "mission impossible" to their feet before he was made a fool from himself.
Conclusion: Ms. May is not clearsighted.
Everybody knew it by her decision to become PM in this situation. Now the entire world knows also.
2
Is it possible to have a postmortem of the fact that this whole thing was triggered by a referendum. Can you imagine John Q. Bloke trying to understand the mindboggling complexities of the issue:
https://jonworth.eu/brexit-where-now-the-flow-diagrams/
Maybe next time the Brits want to build a major bridge, they could have a referendum on whether it should be made with plastic vs. styrofoam.
5
Yeah clearly the decision whether or not to be controlled by a bunch of Brussels bureaucrats is way above the pay grade of the average person. They should leave that to the elites to decide for them
4
@JerseyGirl
This "controlled by Brussels bureaucrats" is a dangerous fiction that only holds sway with those who do not know how the world works.
It's right up there with "Trump is bringing money back to America."
@JerseyGirl -- Proponents of a reductive analysis like yours could only benefit if life-decisions were taken from their hands and put into those of well-trained and well-informed Brussels personnel.
In a personal quest to better understand what was going on in the halls of their earlier version of democracy, I've been drawn to watch much of the Brexit-related proceedings in the U. K. House of Commons.
While much passes for their own version of political Kabuki theater from the various party leaders, I also observed very well reasoned and eloquent thoughts emerging from many so-called backbenchers. The sense is they are not just following the scripts of their parties, but are genuinely trying to reason paths forward for the good of country.
It seems that they just don't have enough (or even any) experience in taking this approach of forging their own directions. We learned this past week that since 1906 the daily agenda of parliament has been under the exclusive control of the government executive (Mrs. May and her ministers). No wonder it seemed, to an outsider looking in, that the primary activity of the MPs appeared to have just been asking government ministers questions of narrow particular interest to their individual constituencies.
So much for the supposed advantages of the "Westminster model" of government that Theresa May touted to Donald Trump when he visited. Can you imagine the White House having complete control of the legislative agendas in both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate? Thankfully our founding fathers emerged being fully aware of the shortcomings of the British system and gave us a written constitution with co-equal branches of government.
8
Democracy requires an informed population.
I wonder if the quality of the British press has a lot to do with events there.
https://www.agilitypr.com/resources/top-media-outlets/top-10-uk-newspapers-by-circulation/
http://www.humantruth.info/uk_newspapers_comparison.html
7
@reader
Oh God, yes, even The Times, ostensibly the stuffiest and staunchest of quality papers, has trouble telling an enzyme from a bacterium.
And David Cameron - the casual perpetrator of the single most irresponsible major decision ever taken by a Prime Minister - is still unscathed by the chaos he created. The referendum in 2016 was intended to silence his Eurosceptic fellow Tories with a resounding victory for Remain; and it-might have done so if his government had set out the negative consequences of Leave, to offset the outright lies about the benefits being peddled by people like Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage, and the tabloid newspapers read by millions. Cameron should be sent to Coventry for the rest of his life.
21
@Ruskin
Yes Cameron is largely to blame and seems unable to express any remorse for the single biggest destructive decision taken in British politics for half a century. But why would he be concerned? He and his wife are the products of extreme inherited wealth and with the money to shelter that wealth they are not likely to suffer any economic hardship as a result of Brexit. That falls to the rest of us small tax payers of modest means whose estates will have to suffer inheritance tax at a rate of 40% on any assets in excess of £325,00 held at time of death. As Leona said taxes are only for the little people. But back to Brexit. Cameron was so sure that Remain would win. The Remain campaign was uninspiring and failed totally to extol all the many virtues of being part of one of the biggest trading blocks on the planet. As you rightly say we have a passel of rogues to thank for the final result which has brought the country to this sorry part.
10
A few words, don't become like the hateful racist destructive dictatorship Amerika. Chase out the rich and greedy corporations and you all will be fine. You existed before Brexit and will exist just fine afterward. Your healthcare is the envy of the world and well, the so called death care in Amerika is at the bottom because of hate, greed, ignorance, destruction, death panels etc. Tax the rich Tax the corporations Tax the 1%ers out of existence and you all will be just fine. Take from the rich greedy and give to the poor and middle class!
4
Brexit was a stupid plebiscite. It said leave the EU, but not how and not what the end was suppose to look like. It overrode representation without actually providing a legal framework towards the implementation of anything. It wasn't a plebiscite to change law, it was a poorly thought out popularity contest.
It was muddled and pie in the sky, and this outcome is exactly what the people of the UK who voted for it deserve. It is exactly what Theresa May and her Conservative Party deserve. It is exactly what anyone who before hand said that it was a plebiscite that was meant to be followed deserves. This includes most of Labour and Jeremy Corbyn.
Then there is those in opposition to Brexit who cannot form a coalition on the most important issue of the day. Sticking with entrenched parties for power, but without policy. They should be ashamed, and held in as much account as those leaders of the parties they are unable to leave or change.
There is a small minority in the UK who are for reasonable representative government. Who are willing to ask the people in a plebiscite that is not wishful thinking- is this what you want? This law, this proposal, not something abstract. But they don't have power and are being dragged to the bottom by May and Corbyn.
In the end. The majority of people in the UK deserve a hard Brexit. They deserve to be held accountable for their votes and actions. It isn't their leadership in the end, it is the voters who put them there.
9
@Edward Brennan. The small minority for reasonable,
representative government are mostly in Scotland. As an expat Scot living in the U.S. I have one wish: that I will live to see Scotland become an independent country.
6
@Antonia and I, the child of a person born in Northern Ireland, to see Ireland united and independent.
2
Complacency and overconfidence kills success. Just as in the USA, a citizenry complacent and overconfident that "it can't happen here", has been shocked to find that not being involved in the democracy, exercising the franchise, has real consequences. Complacent and overconfident about their parochial beliefs and biases with only the limited opinion delivered straight from media (no longer a "free press") controlled by either nobody, whoever can muster the biggest hack or those whose main motive is self aggrandizement and financial profit. Arguments framed from preconceived notions, debate controlled, rhetoric aimed solely at the gut remaining undisputed and unchallenged. Stupid is as stupid does. Democracy delivers exactly the kind of government we deserve. Trouble is, the fascist, authoritarian dictator who is then sought by the rabble to be the savior will be even worse. History untaught and unappreciated. History repeated. "Ignorance is strength." Recall the source or meaning?
4
@Rmayer
Amen
Steve Bannon must really be enjoying this.
Now on to France!
3
@mce to quote a Brit who posted earlier:
The Tory battle cry: "We're burning this country to the ground and ain't no majority that can stop us!"
3
Putin wins again. Like the US Presidential election, the Russians impacted the Brexit vote. Discord and dissent in the US and Britian are the result.
The most important disinformation campaign since the Allies tricked the Nazis into believing that the invasion would occur at the Pas de Calais, not Normandy.
9
So to be clear, Terry-bops gets four (4) opportunities to put her failed plan to a vote (at last count); but the British public are denied a confirmatory vote now that the alternatives are clear? Geeze, and I thought the US was screwed up.
14
Replace Parliament with people who will honor the wishes of the citizens and their votes or rebel and drive them into the sea. Self serving politicians do not represent the citizens.
3
What a waste. What a drag. What a nightmare.
All the energy, sweat and tears this topic is consuming. We should all refuse to read one more line or spend on more thought on this.
So many other topics much more relevant to our future, and we waste our time on a scam like this.
Global warming, globalization, austerity, autocrats, conflicts, wars, sexism, racism, poverty, hate, injustice, the future of work, the future of society and the planet....... only to name a few
6
I could easily paraphrase a quote from this article to apply to the US:
There is a parochialization as the US loses ambition in anything bigger than itself; it’s a shrinking of horizons and a self-obsession”
The more we argue about Trump and his issues, the less we plan for the future of America.
Quite parallel situation to the UK, actually!
5
Fear not! Putin's Russian troops are standing by, ready to move in as needed to restore order.
4
The UK system has the potential for being far less democratic than it currently is. The UK has no constitution; it has a regent to preside over the government, and parliament is subordinate to a powerful executive branch headed by the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister can be changed, his/her mandate extended without limits, all without the people EVER putting it to a vote. All the "people" do is vote for parliament once every few years. The British version of the "Senate" is even worse - the "house of lords" is by no means a democratically elected body.
For centuries the UK remained a stable, mostly fair and honest democracy because the elected officials took their oath of duty very seriously, and because the delicate system of checks and balances worked. However, the current crisis has exposed all of this ancient system's weaknesses and its vulnerability to authoritarian abuse of power.
The current Tory party is lost to powerful financial lobbies, with self-serving apparatchiks angling for power, influence and money. And the Labour party is no better, lost in a socialist nostalgia that will bring it absolutely nowhere.
Everyone else is stuck in the middle. With a catastrophic brexit, a dishonest and self-serving ruling class, and nobody ready to stand up for what's best for the country. All because of a wretched referendum, a dim-witted attempt at short-circuiting the delicate balance of British parliamentary democracy which backfired in the worst possible way.
20
Dear Great Britan. We here in the states offer you the spectacle of Mitch McConnell. One senator of 100. Who single handed, has destroyed the US Senate and our country.
So to you who must watch a handful of Torries destroy your country and your Parliament we say - “ we know your pain”.
37
The author falsely claims that the EU “vowed to make Britain’s withdrawal painful”. There has been two years of tough negotiations, and the UK has acknowledged that there are some problems to be solved when leaving such a union of independent nations. So, like in the pub you’ve to pay what you ordered, also when you wish to leave the room before delivery. And the status of both, British citizens living in the EU as well as citizens of various nations living in the UK need a clarification. That these issues wouldn’t been easily to solve should have been clear to the ones promising a bright new future in a resurrected British Empire to their constituents. It isn’t the EU who is responsible, the whole mess is the responsibility of the short-sighted politicians (mainly Tories), who had (and still have) no plan, underestimated the problems triggered and often just told lies like the refunding of the NHS. Assuming that 27 other nations will be afraid and by such will re-negotiate in the last minute what has been already agreed on after two years is simply stupid. Looking at the up and downs of the parliamentary decision making in the House of Commons and the English society, the “United” Kingdom will dissolve in the near future because the Scots and the majority of the people living in Northern Ireland have clearly stated that they would like to remain in the EU. That should be accepted by the gang of upper-class Oxbridge liars currently demonstrating their complete incompetence.
14
@dwalle The EU is dealing with reality while the UK is being driven over the side of a cliff by idealogues. For instance, it is a reality that there is a border between the EU country, Ireland, and a part of the UK, Northern Ireland, which will be leaving the EU if nothing changes. Tories immediately pounced on that factoid saying that the EU was making things difficult when, in reality, they were just stating the obvious. The fact that there is a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland is a reality which the EU did not create. That's pretty much how the negotiations have been going to date.
7
@Ron, the EU will assist the Republic of Ireland when the last remains of English colonization on the Irish island will vanish in the near future. And also the extremist unionists of the DUP will be better off within the EU than in a declining „United“ Kingdom with England. Scotland will be independant also and member of the EU. Not what the sycophants promised, but very likely the outcome of Brexit.
3
Yesterday, the Withdrawal Agreement was rejected by the House of Commons for the 3rd time.
I’ve read from the Times (of London) and the BBC’s sites that Theresa May wants to try it for a 4th time.
This is ridiculous!
The referendum result was 51.89% for Leave and 48.11% for Remain.
It’d be better to compromise to avoid resentment from half of the UK citizens but it’s something this stubborn British Prime Minister can’t do.
I’m a Frenchman seeing that from Paris.
5
The people elect representatives to make decisions for them.
Here, David Cameron did not want to make a decision, for fear it would cost him his political career, so he threw the matter to the British people to decide. A coward's way out.
The people were fooled by con men lying to them about the benefits to be had from Brexit and they voted to leave.
Whereupon Cameron resigned, thus ending his own political career, capping failure with desertion.
If they are too craven to make difficult or unpopular decisions, politicians should be in some other line of work.
Enter Teresa May. By personality, the absolute worst person for the job she holds. She does not believe in negotiation, only in getting her own way after the other side capitulates. Except here, there will be no capitulation by the EU since the Brits have cornered themselves into a position with no leverage whatsoever.
She promises to resign, yet she remains.
Who are these people? If they were in the private sector, they could not hold their jobs for five minutes with this degree of incompetence.
It's no wonder the British people are astounded at their lack of leadership. But that does not call for another referendum, or any other question put on the ballot for the people to decide (except whom to elect).
What's needed is some leader with a spine, who will simply say: "the first vote was a mistake. I will take things no further. Brexit is hereby declared by me to be dead. We will now all go on with our lives."
6
What a mess. At this point, I suspect the Europeans have decided they are better served by the UK leaving and, if the UK wants back in eventually, to consider admitting them but without any of the special deals that now exist.
6
As an objective observer I don't see how anyone doesn't see the truth which is; The entire effort was illegitimate from inception through the vote.
That effort was a propaganda campaign the likes of which we have rarely seen outside of a Murdoch paper. It was pushed and funded by Russia! How is it so many alleged rational reasonable adults are simply not talking about that central fact? It calls into question the validity of the idea of Brexit?
Getting the British people to the place of self creating the idea of "having a reboot" was the whole point the Russians had in mind. They won't change so they are forcing you to and dividing the Union that holds them in check as well.
For crying out loud Steve Bannon supports it. If the fact that Russians are the instigators here is not enough to bring people back to clear minds. Bannon being behind it should be enough reason to stop!
I don't know if the blokes who are still for it are just useful fools or intentional actors. Nothing they say is convincing especially the irrational way they are trying to make the vote for it seem sacrosanct. That sounds like the mind of an autocrat not a person who votes and lives in a democracy.
We all know that votes get spun and manipulated by folks trying to win instead of seeking the right result. Apparently few votes have been so manipulated with propaganda in Britain before this one.
If Britain does leave we will see a world war in the next 20 years.
14
Russian interference in the politics of the West has reaped huge rewards in the chaos sown yby Brexit and the election of Donald Trump.
Moscow’s disinformation mavens deserve huge bonuses.
2
Of course Democracy is on trial, and its failing...that's why you must have REPRESENTATIVE democracy, not government by referendum.Without the cynical and selfish "initiative" by Cameron, NOEN of this would be in play.
1
From all appearances the entire Brexit gambit turns out to have been a giant bluff. How do we know this? Well, Britain has made no preparations for leaving the EU. Even at this very late hour if Britain takes no actions at all in the next two weeks it will have slipped its moorings from Europe into uncharted seas.
The EU on the other hand has made preparations for Britain's departure, and perhaps are even desirous of doing so. After all how long can they be expected to tolerate this spectacle?
If one recalls what Brits were saying two years ago, it ran along the lines of expecting the EU to bend to Britain's will and allowing it to stay a member, with full rights, while also allowing it to pick and choose which Euros it would let in or stay. Win-win!
It turns out that Britain way-y-y overvalued its worth to the EU. Now what is it going to do? The going betting is to (1) leave cold turkey (bad idea), or (2) ask (beg) the EU for more time to waste trying to avoid what they enthusiastically initiated two years ago.
In all this mayhem there is a winner, though, the EU. Having watched in horror Britain debase itself trying to appear that it wants to leave but not knowing how or even if they really want to, a slew of countries have quietly set aside plans to copy Britain's exit attempt and are now planning on discussing changes through the EU process. A much better idea. After all, lunching in Brussels is nice.
4
@GerardM
You forget that there just as they helped initiate here in America back in Thatcher's day it is a very small minority of people most of whom are 1%ers that are driving the "conservatives" to do the destructive to the people things they have done.
2
The sun has set on the empire. It shouldn't set on the island. Perhaps a nationwide rethink about Brexit is due.
Ireland wants its north portion back. Scotland almost wanted out of Britain.
Parliament can't seem to figure on which side of the issue to land.
This is one war that can't be won with our help (especially nowadays).
1
A second referendum should be called. All The Pros and
Cons of leaving the EU should be listed on this Ballot . The emotional disinformation bantered about in the first referendum must be avoided. The next vote should be a sober and informed One that is unerringly factual.
7
The UK should revoke Article 50 notice first to extricate the country from a untenable situation, then rethink Brexit if they choose to. It should not hold another referendum or invoke Article 50 notice again until there is a plan that is likely to be approved by both the UK and EU parliaments. The original referendum was too ambiguous for voters to be aware of the complexities Brexit would entail and Article 50 notice was given prematurely without an approvable agreement. If not, hope for the second best option of a long extension.
7
How is any compromise possible when you have a nearly 50-50 split on such a consequential question. It's not as if they are arguing over Pepsi vs. Coke. The two choices are diametrically opposite -- leave EU vs. stay. The haggling over details can't hide this fundamental fact.
The bitterness is compounded by the fact that this division is class-based: the poorly educated class vs. the well-educated and moneyed class. We have the same problem here in the US. In neither place is the divide going away any time soon.
11
America and Briton still have much in common, including a portion of the population that believe good things will come based on promises told by con men.
75
@BMD
This problem comes from the same place as our own hopelessly dysfunctional government: conservative propaganda TV and radio deluding a sizable fraction of the population using an echo chamber of Koolaid. Their problem, as well as ours, had one name. Rupert Murdoch.
6
"A slim majority" you write? If you remember, since a lot of legible voters didn't bother to vote only around 37% of the whole legible populace actually made the decision to leave. In a democracy? Ha, ha. That extremely poorly organised 2016 referendum produced just a sort of a terror by minority.
14
@Kris Z. Yes. A referendum to upend the status quo on issues as significant as this should be required to clear a very high bar, either a supermajority of voters or a majority of the entire electorate, or both. Maddeningly, the Brexit referendum was only advisory. Parliament was and remains the sole authority on the question, and could end this fiasco tomorrow by cancelling Brexit. Leadership does sometimes require leaders to actually, you know, lead, and not merely chase the latest polling result.
9
Brexit not amusing
Tribes emergent
Dark Age
Looms
nil
5
So, the UK (how ironic) is fragmenting and Uncle Vlad is licking his chops.
16
There is one big factor the British parliament is totally missing:
They are not in the DRIVERS SEAT anymore. And if you look at the recent months votes subjects, they actually think they still are. PURE BRITISH ARROGANCE!!!!
And after the massive bad attidue against the EU maybe it is time now for a referendum in the EU 27 countries (included in the major EU election in May) if THEY - 450 Million people - still want to have the UK - 60 Million people - in their family?
7
David Cameron cynically used the idea of a referendum on Europe to solve a Tory party split. The concept of leaving was put to the people with none of the actual details spelled out. And the leave campaign used outrageous lies,millions of extra pounds for the NHS, the imaginary threat of an "invasion of millions of Turks", to sell a snake oil version of a perfect Brexit that was never going to be achieved. Yes, a majority of the UK doesn't like being in the EU. But they also don't like a border in Ireland. The also don't like the companies that are already making plans to close down plants because of Brexit. And they don't like the fact that the Pound has dropped like a stone in value. They were promised unicorns and rainbows and the harsh realities of an actual Brexit just don't match up to the hype of the ERG zealots.
33
"... “We’re in the last hour,” he said. “I’m wondering: What does more damage? Leaving without a deal? Or the total annihilation of faith in democracy?”
The first pub patron, Tommy Turner, has a better than average maturity and understanding about Brexit.
If the political mood is as bad as this and other Brexit stories describe, then Britain's and US body politic are very much at the same place. That is, shooting themselves in the leg because they don't like the indicision about the direction they are going.
1
It seems to me that no one is addressing the elephant in the room: the need for experts to adjudicate these matters.
In a break room in my workplace, there’s a comic pinned to a board: “your google search does not replace my advanced degree.” Trumpism in the US and Brexit both represent people’s rejection of technocratic leadership. But, it seems to me, that as people in both countries just want to see “effective” government, what they’re clamoring for is really a strong, effective, technocratic stare.
What we’ve not been able to solve, because the change in focus has happened quickly, is how to square technocratic leadership - founded in deep knowledge of effective, data-driven governance - and the need to better represent historically marginalized populations (eg anyone who isn’t a white male). The baby (data-driven policy) has, in fact, gone out with the bath water (‘white male’-centric viewpoints).
3
I saw government by technocrats in Eastern Europe in the 1960's and '70's. It wasn't successful.
Effective government requires effective politicians. People willing to compromise and keep the welfare of the state (i.e., the citizenry) foremost in their minds.
Excellent politicians can transform the technocratic knowledge of experts into policies that the public can embrace and accept. Without this essential societal lubricant, sensible action becomes impossible.
6
Democracy is not a process of winning a single referendum and then saying "No-one can vote on this issue again". If that were the case, then Brexit wouldn't even be on the table.
It is clear that there is a strong divide in the UK over Brexit, and it is also clear that a close referendum vote was badly tainted by the leave side, with financial malfeasance and Russian-backed interference in the campaign.
Now that the consequences of leaving the EU have been made clear to every voter in the UK, and the sunny piffle of UKIP, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg have been revealed as total fantasies, another vote by the now well-informed electorate would seem in order.
If the majority of Brits still want to jump off a cliff, it's their right and privilege, but that decision should not be based on the ridiculously manipulated first Brexit vote.
Otherwise the US would have president-for-life Donald J. Trump.
41
@WJG Donald J. Trump will be manipulating Congress and his base to win President-for-Life. Count on it.
8
@WJG
This is the whole reason the referendum was so absurd the first time. Major shifts is the fundamental nature of your nation should never be made by a simple public referendum. Ever. Otherwise the UK would leave and then re-enter the EU every few months or so as the political winds blow. In the US, changes to the fundamental nature of our government require supermajorities in multiple sequential votes, a very high bar. That is the point. Putting your nation up for a vote once and then following a 51% result blindly for the rest of time is madness. Sheer madness.
5
The whole process was flawed from the start. The referendum should have required a 2/3 majority as with decisions in the U.S. Senate. One cannot, or should not, leave fundamental and crucial decisions on a nation's future to possibly a 1 % majority of its citizens. And what is the purpose of the House of Lords if not to have a veto right over the Commons?
As for the mess, the quote in the article is spot on: “It’s almost as if they are operating in this complete alternate reality.” The MPs are indeed largely made up of overgrown schoolboys and buffoons like Boris Johnson -- who may become the next prime minister. Indeed, what a mess!
18
@Hamid Varzi Buffoons seem to be in favor these days to head up democracies.
2
"Those Britons who wished to remain are reminded, daily, that a risky and momentous national change is being initiated against their will and judgment. "
So like Hillary voters who LOST, they still think they should decide?
THEY LOST. Get it? This was not rigged election, THEY LOST.
This is who democracies work. You win or lose.
2
@Sparky Jones
Any vote that can't be reversed in a subsequent election should require a supermajority, like amending the constitution (or originally adopting it).
7
Goodbye Great Britain, lots of luck, it was good to know you when you were known to exist. As for the United States, what you in the U.K. are going through now is a harbinger of what we are just beginning to go through today. We’ll just do it bigger and dumber. The problem for the world is that while Great Britain can fall apart and few, other than those who live there, will notice, as the United States empire continues to melt away, everyone will be hurt (least until China takes our place). But beware, when we need a scapegoat, we are a dangerous country, both to ourself and to the world.
12
@BS What is the "US empire", please? What foreign countries do we rule?
@me- We rule with $’s, arrogance, threats and ignorance.
3
@me- We rule with $’s, arrogance, threats, ignorance and hubris. Our false pride will be our undoing.
2
This New York Times essay claims that “the European Union, which had vowed to make Britain’s withdrawal painful.” Not true: official pronouncements of European officials and official European policy, have bent over backwards to claim that to inflict pain on Britain was not at all European policy. Au contraire: EU has a legal obligation to not inflict pain on ALL and any European citizens (including the British). It is a fake fact to claim otherwise. The New York Times by claiming that the EU “vowed” to inflict pain on Britain, is feeding the fire of disinformation.
That the withdrawal is painful is an entirely different matter. Britain is trying to leave the European house, completely unprepared, and for no good reason, it turns out. Once out of the door, Britain will lose its voting and debating rights inside the EU… But will still be as dependent upon the rest of Europe as it is now. And like Switzerland or Norway, Britain will still have to pay in the collective kitty of the European Union to take part in the EU, as it needs to: The UK needs to feed itself, warm itself, manage shrinking collective resources, go somewhere outside the island, and be in Europe.
Democracy, as we have it, is not what the Greeks called democracy, but representative oligarchy. In Democracy We The People vote laws directly. However, the fake news and fake facts coming from Pluto owned media drove the British people to vote wrong on Brexit. Solution? Vote again! Crack down on misinformation!
9
@Patrice Ayme thank you for this. There's not a scintilla of truth in the assertion that the EU has sought to inflict pain on Britain. The EU has a lot of to lose from a hard Brexit. I think the best analogy I've read is that Britain put a gun to its own head, and then demand the EU come up with a plan for Britain's departure. As I've observed this process, I've waited patiently, along with the EU, for Britain to come up with a plan that doesn't threaten a hard border in Northern Ireland. None of the arrogant Tories who lied to their poorly-educated constituents that Brexit would be easy, even considered (or took the time to even care about) how Brexit could undo the Good Friday Agreement. This British hubris is responsible for the entire Brexit mess; Leavers have convinced themselves that Britain still plays an outsized place in the world, failing to realize that the Empire has been on decline for several centuries now. Brexit may mark the final gasp of breath in that decline.
9
@Patrice Ayme
I could not agree more. Indeed, the EU had no interest to inflict "pain" but rightly did not agree to the UK to pick the raisins out of the cake. I am disappointed with the New York Times with it anti- EU bias.
Lies tailored to exacerbate long-festering grievances are at the root of the Brexit chaos, and America's great divide. Insisting on truth within the bounds of free speech in an era where uncharted information spews out of every screen to feed any and all appetites for hate, division or misunderstanding. Retreating into private comfort zones — be that chit-chat about elite schools, sharing personal abhorrence about today's outrage, or political rallies scripted and designed to stir up the worst in America — is an ineffective excuse for real remedy. Liars, cheats and criminals in business, education and government have to go.
2
“There’s a fin-de-siècle sense that modern British politics has run out of road,” said Mr. Davies, author of “Nervous States: Democracy and the Decline of Reason.”
Can you blame the British for wanting out of the EU? Who wants to have to look up every other phrase in a foreign dictionary just to find out what’s happening at home?
2
The influence of dark money and russian social media meddling prior to the Brexit vote should have been a wake-up call here in the US. It wasn't, and now both countries are crippled as a result.
13
“Expectations that Brexit would have concrete effects — by lifting the economy or slowing immigration — have diminished sharply, the data show.”
You can’t blame that on the failure of those executing Brexit. It was — and still is — a horrible idea that was sold to a gullible and mean-spirited public with a pack of lies. Of course they dint see any benefits. And they never will.
6
“I don’t feel that I’ve been listened to, or that nearly half the population have been listened to,” he said. “The majority has essentially been pandering to the worst elements in our society.”??
OMG where have I heard that before. Oh - the USA.
5
Just as we Americans elected Donald Trump and the Republican Congress that has supported the fraud in the White House, the Citizens of the U.K. voted for Brexit and this Parliament. They can kick all the bums out of office by a vote in 2019 and act more judiciously when electing a new parliament and asking for a new vote on whether they really want to leave the E.U.. Unfortunately we Americans have to wait until November2020 until we can kick the bums out of the White House and the Capitol Building. Can we survive until then?
2
Democracy is on trial in a country that survived the ravages of WWI and WWII, and was united with the rest of Europe after those wars and rose from the ashes and now wants to extricate itself because of some blathering, self-interested politicians?
Britons...you're made of and deserve better than this.
3
The Brexit referendum was the dumbest thing Blair could have done. For something so monumental a simple majority was destined for failure. They should have had a 2/3's of voters if anything. Maybe May should treat the vote as just an advisory plan instead of a dictate. 51% voted to leave and 49% to stay. What would be the harm to just say we're not leaving. 2% points of discord won't make a difference now.
1
@markd writes: "The Brexit referendum was the dumbest thing Blair could have done."
Except that it was David Cameron who called the referendum ...
1
@markd It was Cameron wot done em in.
How can people of wealth who don’t walk and live in our shoes daily ever represent us? Weren’t we supposed to remove aristocracy?
The other poison pill is our problems are complex and we lack the education as voters to make good decisions. On top of that we have entire billion dollar propaganda entertainment agencies lying to us daily saying they present alternate facts that are designed to undermine opposition and government.
I think the two above is the driving force and less so the internet. The internet just provides the smoke screen for the above to achieve their goals.
3
@Mathias. People of wealth rule the world. Don't kid yourself.
3
Parliament controlled by two large political parties that are becoming more and more polarized - welcome to the United States government system!
3
@Julia It's absolutely NOT the case that the two big parties are polarised as the two big parties are in the US. The deadlock is because both parties are pretty much split down the middle on Europe and May thought the only way to get an agreement through parliament was to keep mouthing inanities about the negotiations (Brexit means Brexit) until nearly the last moment. She then whipped off the covers, and asked for support for her agreement while running down the clock to a self-imposed deadline.
Not the most democratic strategy but, you have to admit, better than shutting down the government until she got her way.
1
The process was wrong and undemocratic, people are right to be angry, it's been a failure of leadership and those in power.
There should have been (1) a first referendum to give direction; (2) negotiation with the EU to get to a concrete deal, *without* calling the article to exit the EU; (3) a second referendum to vote the concrete deal on the table, now that the real consequences and the real deal are clearer; (4) If people are in favor of *this* deal (not of some dream dreamed during the first referendum), then call article 50 and exit the EU; if not, scrap everything as a a practical impossibility.
12
The sensible approach, for Parliament to bring in expert analysis to appraise consequences of various possible “deals” , and then discuss the results, never happened. Instead the May deal was devised that leaves vague most of what follows, and nobody trusts May (or anybody else) to carry out the details afterward.
So the two recourses are 1) To have another referendum, which will simply return Brexit to the squabble of Parliament, regardless of its outcome, or 2) Rescind Article 50 and let things normalize.
Whadayya bet the referendum is the choice, and the “public” will “decide” anew what fairy tales they support?
2
Leavers voted for fantasy Brexit, but all the votes in the world won't turn the moon to cheese. It may be frustrating to learn that you voted for something your government can't deliver, but that doesn't mean Democracy is Dead. It just means that politicians aren't good leaders and voters are low-information and/or easily misled.
If there is to be a referendum at all, it should be on the reality Brexit that the government is able to negotiate with the EU. Time to withdraw Article 50 and make a decision grounded in reality, not fantasy.
4
The initial referendum was fueled by disinformation. It's completely reasonable for people to ask for a new vote now that the costs are better known.
5
Of course democracy is on trial. The people have spoken, much as they did in the US in 2016. We didn't like what the people had to say, then or on the Brexit referendum. Democracy means following the will of the people. England can no more take back the "Leave" vote than we can rid ourselves of our current president.
Not liking the answer doesn't mean a do-over. Accepting the answer, horrible as it may be, and working to facilitate positive change - no matter how painful - is what will uphold democratic principles.
Democracy has not been working as exemplified by Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, the reelection of Erdogan in Turkey and many demagogues in Poland and Hungary. Why would the US insist on export a failed system to the rest of the world?
Brexit and Trump to some extent were borne out of a glaring inequality of income and opportunity between the haves (now commonly referred to as the elites) and the multitudes of have nots. That is the underlying major problem and cause. I don’t see the Brits throwing off democracy as this doomsday article insinuates. Rather they are trying to make it fit to a vexing and unaddressed socio economic issue.
2
@Mitchell Karin Thank you! (You can add the French "gilets jaunes" and Italian 5Stars to that list.) I wish NYT would choose your comment a "pick", but won't hold my breath.
Perhaps the problem is putting Democracy, the people's vote, on a pedestal. The implication seems to be that once the people have voted X, it is somehow sacred and must never be questioned or changed. The same people who came up with this "divine revelation" vote for X, can not not be given the chance to vote not X, because that would imply they are human.
The British who voted for Brexit thought they could leave the EU on their own terms. There is another party to the "deal", the EU. The EU was never going to agree to the terms that Farage and Johnson told they would get. It was a lie and the voters bought it. This is a breakdown of democracy, but it was brought on by the lies of politicians and the ignorance of the electorate, not an inability to compromise within the UK. No one in the UK seems to be able to admit they are not negotiating with each other, they are negotiating with the EU. And they are losing.
4
Democracy was hardly what the Brexit vote reflected. Good decisions depend on good information. Brexit took place not only with poor information as to what it meant, but deliberate directed mis-information intended to inflame. The Brexit vote represents what happens when Democracy is hacked and undermined. With two years worth of research into what Brexit would actually do, Great Britten deserves to vote again with better insight and a hard response to Russian money and messaging intended to make a mockery of the Democratic process.
4
Parliament should follow the lead of the UK's people and officially define “Leave” for Brexit purposes as including no change in the Irish border, no loss of commercial advantages for the UK with the EU, and a net fiscal gain for the UK of GBP 350 million per week. That's what the people voting for "Leave" voted for.
The UK should leave the EU as soon as it can negotiate what the majority voted for.
And of course the UK should not leave the EU until it can negotiate what the majority voted for.
Will of the people.
The fundamental problem with the entire Brexit fiasco is the disconnect between the dreams of Brexiteers as to the possible "deals" and the reality of the allowable terms of separation. Brexit was sold on the basis of "they need us more than we need them" so Britain was somehow convinced that great trade terms were available without the more onerous terms of accepting migrants, paying fees, meeting regulations and having EU courts override British law.
Well, the actual, realistic "deal" is on the table and it has NO trade terms (Britian, you are a foreign entity and will pay all duties).
The dreaming continues to this day. The "indicative" voting was a supreme waste of time, Parliament debated and rejected 8 "deals" none of which were agreed to by EU, and none had any hope of being agreed to.
I am sure most Britains do not know that the "Norway Deal" they seek requires free transit of EU citizens to Norway (good bye discrimination against migrants) and many of the legal terms Brits reject.
In short, this fiasco is the result of disinformation from the right that was used to sway public opinion that a sweet deal was available without membership. Sound familiar, trumpists?
Welcome to the real world Britain. Either you stay in the club, with its rights and responsibilities, or you leave, with the shirt on your back.
7
Since ancient Athens, “the people” have always been vulnerable to loudmouths and liars. That’s why the term “demagogue” exists. Anchises mocked democracy as a system “where wise men declaim and fools decide.” Phedrus said “Vulgus vult decipí,” the common people want to be deceived.
Eventually, they do wise up, sometimes only after their country has been turned to rubble. Brexit was sold on a pack of lies and wishful thinking by some of the world’s most cynical opportunists. Decent people had their most childish self appealed to and voted for the dimishment of their country. (Sound familiar?)
The Leave forces are desperate to avoid a 2nd referendum, knowing they would lose, and hoping to take advantage of a momentary error in judgment to get their way.
A second vote, based on reality, not fantasy, is clearly the most democratic choice. Whatever happens, unfortunately, will be used by anti-democratic forces to continue their attack on democracy itself, just as is happening here. That’s the deeper struggle.
5
The abject cynical nature of Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg istruly a wonder to behold. When May presented her plan to the publc they both savaged it. They called it a worse deal for the UK then remaining. They compared it to being a "vasal state"to the EU. Johnson resigned his ministry post because of his principled opposition to the deal. They used Churchillian terms to describe their fight against it. Never, Never,no, no, no. Then May promised to resign her post, and suddenly they voted for the deal when they thought it might get them a seat on the throne. JRM even stated he would only vote for it if the DUP went along, they said no, he voted for it anyway. With leaders like this is there any wonder why the public is disillusioned.
4
As Roger Cohen eloquently pointed out in a recent column, British democracy is not on trial. What is really on trial is the foolish decision to hold a national plebiscite on such a consequential issue, with many voters insufficiently informed to make a sensible decision. Representative democracy, like the UK's, is designed to put such decisions in the hands of people who are paid to study the issues and know what they are doing. If their constituents don't like the results, they can vote their representative out of office. But now Parliament is being forced to manage an exit that would never have commanded a majority in that body. Of course, it's not working. The mystery is why anyone would ever have believed it could.
6
900 thousand Polish people moved to Britain in two years.30 percent of the new Eastern European countries left for the west upon joining the EU.Camps of people in France waiting to get to Britain.The country is an island,how many people from the continent move there affects the quality of life.School overcrowding,medical care needs overwhelmed.New workers undercutting existing wage scales.A race to the bottom among workers.
Blair not having a moratorium on new countries members not working there for two years like the Germans and French did.Blaming the British for feeling overwhelmed by how the society is changing rapidly and just saying they are racist is a cop out.
4
America and Briton still have much in common, including a portion of the population that believe good things will come based on promises told by con men.
The British leaders lied about the economic benefits of Brexit and Trump lied about pretty much everything - and yet people believed them.
8
There isn't democracy when May promised to leave her position after the last vote, went back on that promise, and has now promised to step down after a fourth vote on the same proposal, a vote she will lose and another promise she will renege on again.
There isn't democracy when nearly six million British citizens sign a petition demanding that Article 50 be revoked, and May's dictatorial response is to outright ignore those six million Britons.
There isn't democracy when the public broadcaster BBC refuses to report on the financial relationships of prominent Brexiteers with Russian oligarchs and banks, and when the BBC refuses to report on the lies (like NHS funding) that were used to manipulate Britons three years ago.
There hasn't been democracy in the UK in a long time.
2
As a Californian, I can tell you first hand direct democracy, letting people vote on individual decisions with huge consequences, doesn’t work. Look at Prop 13, and the resulting housing crisis in California as an example. Voters want the moon and they want it for free. Complex decisions need competent politicians in power with an informed electorate to make nuanced and pragmatic decisions. With half the populace lacking basic math and geography skills being informed by Fox like outlets which cater to their worst fears and biases, we get idiotic decisions not grounded in reality. Maybe people have to make the wrong choices, bear the consequences, before their minds can be changed from first person experience. Sometimes even a crisis like the Great Recession doesn’t result in enough for some “brilliant” voters to course correct, because we had some really smart economists at the Fed who studied the Great Depression and knew how to barely rescue us from a generational crisis created by the people chosen by our average voter.
3
The two big hits of the last 30 years have been the arrival of the Internet and the Great Recession. Great leaps have been achieved but many have been left--wounded--on the roadside. Earning low wages. In addition, globalism has seen manufactuting outsourced to cheap labor markets. And the followers of Milton Friedman have cut corporate taxes to the bone leaving individuals carrying the load.
There's going to be a great reckoning as the masses begin to correct these truly historical happenings.
4
It is ironic that at this particular time where far rightists seek to increase their 'point of view ' in various corners of the European continent that the UK has mired itself in the Brexit debacle.
At this time of movements to autocratic rule particularly in Poland and Hungary , the UK should fear that if the country cannot put its democratic house in order there are those in other European states who would love none other to help make the decision for them somewhere down the line if they do not confront the destabilizing issue. But it should be noted that the assistance would work the clock back virtually to the 30's in attempts to massage democracies towards new types of 'illiberalisms'. Read autocratic type rule with tight grips on media and the judiciary.
What is occurring in the UK today is not something to be expected in the postwar from a nation which fought tooth and nail to defend its freedom.... for itself and the world. If the country is tired it is the wrong time to sleep.
2
I think the most important element of Brexit is the sharp polarization between young voters, who want to stay in
Europe and old voters who want to leave. The young will disproportionately be hurt by the economic disruption following Brexit and that will lead to a rebellion, possibly replacing the existing major political parties with something new. Ironically, succeeding in Brexit will probably be the end of the Conservative Party as their voters age and are not replaced. We see a slower version of the same thing happening in the United States.
45
@Mndy
I've been waiting for the sheer madness of the conservative party to devour itself into extinction for decades now. I'm not holding my breath anymore. Newt's scorched Earth tactics, the Iraq fiasco, the most horrible recession of the modern era, the Tea Party loons, Mitch's scorched Earth tactics, Donald "wait I won?" Trump, children dying in cages, Russia bromance, the Saudi butcher bromance, the Hitler 2.0 Dotard bromance, the Billionaire welfare act, the yearly take-away-your-insurance acts, the parade of Fox News icons into Hall of Sexual Assault and Scandal.
Yeah, 30-40% of us are beyond help. Always have been, always will be.
4
There’s no way around it: sometimes democracy is messy.
The reality is that the more participatory democracy is–the more a system allows voters to weigh in on policy–the more likely a system is to put forth ill-considered ideas. Brexit is a textbook example of this truth.
Compromise works best when it happens behind the scenes, at least to a degree. The agreements needed to make a compromise happen are often messy and are full of quid-pro-quos. You have to give something to get something, which often seems like selling out. Reality is harsh, though, and often clashes with ideals.
Brexit is a classic example of this. The empire is long gone, but how it felt to be at the top of the heap lingers on. To the public, a longing for the grandeur that was, clouds an accurate view of how things are. The European Union was a rational choice to allow smaller countries to compete with larger economies. That’s still true. Pretending that the British empire of the past can resurrect itself by simply going alone is clearly shortsighted.
The founding fathers of America, British by birth and training, understood that unfettered democracy had to be constrained by a system that allowed more temperate voices the space to make rational, not emotional, decisions. But even we sometimes fall prey to the siren call of direct democracy.
It sounds good, but letting the people weigh in too directly is not an effective way to govern.
13
I disagree.
1
No form of democracy is without faults. Strict direct democracy requires everyone to participate in every governmental decision. That’s fine when every person in a village can meet under an apple tree, but problematic with more than one village at any distance.
The occasional exercise of direct democracy by popular vote is highly contingent on the matter at issue and the knowledge of voters. It also represents a failure of representative democracy. And no law of nature says a majority vote is wisdom incarnate. The majority can still be tyrannical or just wildly in error. Democratic Athens made many mistakes, some lethal. Still, the US invaded Iraq with hundreds of thousands dead and still dying. Humans, no matter the manner of organization, are error prone.
The Brexit vote should have been advisory, and the underlying sentiments should have been formally explored. There was real angst and maybe no small measure of racism and misinformation. Ten mitigating initiatives might have better served the population. Some of the economic distress is related to the rise of big box or chain stores plus online shopping. When the pie gets smaller, people start looking for who to eject from the polis.
Brexit will almost certainly go down as a failure of direct democracy. That’s why you have better informed and engaged representatives. Still, they can fail too. That’s happening in real time.
7
@Michael Tyndall
The Brexit vote was, in fact, advisory. It was treated as mandatory by British politicians because they lacked the leadership skills to lead the national discussion that would have been necessary in lieu of simply leaving the EU.
A skilled prime minister could have explained that the referendum raised serious issues that needed to be addressed. She could have listed those issues and created commissions to follow up on each issue with the British public. Legislation could have followed based on the commissions' conclusions. The PM was under no legal obligation to carry through on the exit.
6
@Alice Clark
I agree but the conservatives act like they have an irrevocable mandate to leave the EU.
1
Brexit is precisely the kind of thing the founders of the US feared might happen and took great pains to protect against in designing the framework according to which the former British colonies would, with pluck and luck, govern themselves, independently from England (and from royalty in general): emotionally-driven, ill-informed, mob rule. Their fear of such is one of the main reasons the US has a Senate. I think somebody said it was meant to function as the saucer in which one pours the tea to cool—something like that. Unfortunately for the US, its precious Senate is now an ice tray full of ice stuck in a freezer badly in need of defrosting, such that we can’t even get the ice out of it.
22
The article begins by making fun of what Jacob Rees-Mogg said the other day about the superiority of his "prep" boarding school (over Eton, I think). What the article did not explicitly state is that the precipitating factor here is an intramural Tory fight. David Cameron was trying to achieve a victory over Tory rivals by calling the referendum and defeating the Tory "Leave EU" faction. There are certainly Labour voters and other voters who believe the UK would be better off outside the EU, or simply hate the French or Germans or Eastern Europeans--but the root of it was Cameron's bid for dominance within the Conservative (Tory) party. The rest of the UK, as far as some Tories are concerned, is just along for the ride. But it hasn't been much of a joy ride.
18
Direct democracy does have a major flaw in that it requires the population to be properly informed, which in turn requires leaders to tell the truth. Since Britons were lied to in the 1st brexit election the result is not necessarily accurate. A major reason for representative democracy is for the representatives to stay informed of the issues and make good decisions for those they represent. the latest votes in Parliament are probably accurate in that close to half wish to stay in the EU and the other half are broken into various degrees of relationships with the EU and are unwilling to compromise enough to form a relationship with the EU. A rank choice vote would be a solution possibly.
19
@Duncan
You are entirely correct. A corollary of your point of view is that the representative has a duty to explain things to their base --- dare one say it, educate the base. Instead, too many politicians, particularly on the right, have been telling self-serving lies to their electorate for decades.
3
I would suggest that the cure for an ailing democracy is usually more democracy. Hold another referendum, with clearer terms. Lots of people voted for Leave without any idea of what it meant, filling the gap with rosy scenarios, and now that the day is upon them, the discord among the different expectations has ripped apart the bare majority they were able to muster in the first place.
So be clearer. Hold another referendum. Hold it on the question: "Shall the UK confirm its wish to leave the European Union, with the understanding that the following shall be the terms of its departure [include major terms of exit here], or shall it stay?" No other options. All sides make efforts to convince their own supporters that whatever the outcome, it reflects the will of the people, and pledge if they lose to agree to pipe down in Parliament and let the result happen.
51
@William J. Keith
But sadly, Brexiteers regard another referendum as undemocratic, un underhanded way to steal their "win" a bit like the "OK, best out of..." gambit of children's squabbles.
Also, they feel they were promised whatever rosy scenario caught their fancy, and now they want it. Your parents ask you to name whatever you want Santa to bring you, and then when it turns out you asked for too much, there suddenly are equivocations and constraints. Understandably, you feel miffed: if they are not going to deliver, why did they ask in the first place?
6
@William
And make the vote advisory.
3
@Michael Tyndall
Advisory? Then the Parliament and the PM can simply ignore the result of the vote and go back to what they were doing, which is disagreeing with each other? The PM’s position seems to be that a “meaningful vote” is a vote where she gets what she wants. The previous three votes to disapprove of the PM’s agreement obviously haven’t been meaningful enough in the PM’s view. Parliament’s position has been to vote no on every conceivable position, damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead over the edge. And another vote may not end well, as a majority of English voters might still vote Leave, thereby continuing to drag Scotland and Northern Ireland out of the EU when the majority of Scotland and Northern Ireland voted that they don’t want to leave. What to do? One scenario is that the EU has had enough of all this and the UK gets thrown out of the EU in April, and Scotland and Northen Ireland then petition EU to get back in. A more equitable voting option would be for England, Scotland, Wales, and Northen Ireland vote separately, in a legally binding vote, and then the UK honors the results whatever they may be.
1
There is/are studies that show that when people in Europe vote on the E.U., the choices reflect the concerns with national issues as opposed to issues actually related to the E.U. From what I have read, austerity has left a giant chunk of the U.K. in pain and crumbling. I can fathom how people who are hurting would fall for the false promises that no E.U. means more money for social services (not to mention the bait and switch of xenophobia).
From watching parliament debates, I’ve noticed in the last week the dawning of the painful realization that there was never a compromise possible between the two ‘sides’ in regards to the relation to the E.U. No outcome will fix the damage the referendum has caused, it will only exacerbate it. The real issue that needed to be addressed was the two diametrically opposed models for how the U.K. should relate to the E.U., the underlying anger and resentment born out from income inequality, and the poison introduced by individuals willing to lie and engage in demagoguery to achieve their ends (check out the Bloomberg reporting on the Brexit short by Farage!).
What is missing is a leader/group of leaders that could see that any change in the relationship to the E.U. would only add unknown variables into an already volatile situation. That what needed to be done is fix the wound of the Brexit referendum. That’s not necessarily a failure of democracy-that’s bad luck.
5
The original referendum decisions were made without any understanding of what leaving would entail. Now that the population has seen what leaving means it is only fair to hold a second referendum. The first referendum should be considered invalid because no one voting to leave actually understood what they were voting for.
88
Remainers have been peddling that patronising condescending claptrap since they lost the vote. We are not all members of the far right. We have legitimate concerns about the continuing size and centralisation of EU power. You cannot sustainably continue to have one ideology pushed on 28 different cultures for an eternity without any social or economic repercussions. The EU will collapse someday and the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
5
@Alexandra Hamilton
This is true, but Leave voters hugely resent the implication that they were short of understanding (read dim, ignorant, bigoted etc etc). They keep shrieking in ever higher tones that they knew exactly what they were voting for, and with a sort of perverted blood-mindedness state that they always wanted a hard Brexit under WTO rules.
11
@Tony
As I understand it, a good size chunk of the Leave votes came from Labour voters that don't live in London.
2
Mr. Castle it seems that the key component to everything "Brexit" is your statement that it "suggested a country unburdened by longing for its more orderly, homogeneous past." Ah yes the good old days when Britain was mostly white, the classes had developed social and cultural rules of the road and the sun never set on the British empire. This sounds remarkably like what has happened here in America where we have the tribe willing if not always eagerly embracing the changes of globalization and racial, ethnic and religious diversity and the other tribe longing for its more orderly homogenous past.
But we only always have our feet in the present and must learn the new rules of the road. Perhaps proportional representation is the answer as all voices need to be heard but it is a tough lesson for governments historically dominated by a ruling class.
9
@Steve People who disagree with you, and whose tastes and preferences are different from yours, still have a right to their own feelings. Sometimes the "left" doesn't seem to get that.
1
It is hard looking at what is transpiring in Britain without reflecting on what has been happening since Donald Trump was elected in this country. Doubtless the same frustration among those who have leaned to the right has been at play here and in Britain. It appears those who want out of Europe are prepared to deal with whatever consequences there may be, even if to their own detriment. In the U.S. the folks who love Trump are getting reduced pollution controls... meaning dirtier air and water; the likelihood that medical care will be lost as attacks on ObamaCare continue; a shrinking of government services all over the place because tax cuts are more prized than a responsive social safety net. They wanted to throw the bums out of Washington and what they got is a collection of wealthy oligarchs who are delighted to do anything and everything that will enrich themselves.
Those of us who weren't happy about Mr. Trump's election are left simply to ride along this wave, praying that the damage done to the environment, to people's well being won't be irreversible. Doubtless Great Britain will survive this crisis as well, but who knows the cost to the people living in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Sometimes it is possible to bite your nose to spite your face and this seems like one of those occasions, both there and here. I wish us all well.
80
@CAG
Thank you. I think your comparison of what's happening in the US and here in the UK is very helpful and it gives me some hope that what's happening here isn't so unusual after all, and that, God willing, we might even survive it.
7
@CAG
Thanks for the humor. Speaking of pollution, I can't think of any other city aside from SF where a mayoral campaign pivoted on removing excrement from sidewalks and where half the population wants to exit, due in large part to disastrous decisions by "progressive" elites who live in fortified compounds outside the city and enjoy an alternate reality.
1
@ClearedtoLand You're right, of course, San Francisco has become a very expensive place to live but less because of "progressive" elites than the brilliance of the many entrepreneurs who live and create dynamic businesses in the Bay area. Yes, it has been difficult for most working adults to keep up with housing costs but I seriously doubt anyone WANTS to leave this beautiful region, unless, of course, they're Trump supporters offended, as you seem to be, by progressive political values. Those are definitely in evidence in the Bay area. Trump supporters who leave generally are not missed.
5
While 81% of Britons are reportedly unhappy with the lack of progress, what proportion takes that distress to the next step — thoughtful consideration of the underlying causes for Brexit being stymied?
A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is altogether unavoidable, but that runs counter the Good Friday Agreement and the Anglo-Irish treaty appended to it. Having failed to secure a majority in the last elections, Theresa May allied herself with the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland in order to form a government, but the DUP has no regard for the Good Friday Agreement and in fact refused to even participate in the negotiations that produced it. Although reunification of Ireland would eliminate the chief obstacle to Brexit, the DUP's price for the alliance with the Conservatives is opposition to reunification.
Mrs. May said that she will resign as Prime Minister once Brexit is implemented. Let her push Brexit through with the hard border and then instruct the Secretary of State in Northern Ireland to conduct a referendum on reunification. A strong majority of voters in the north of Ireland voted remain and might be expected to support reunification as the way to remain in the EU and avoid the hard border. Let Scotland — who also voted remain — then conduct another referendum on its independence.
The result of these two referenda would be the United Kingdom of England and Wales, which really was the bulk of the Brexit vote anyway.
23
@Graydon Wilson
It is for this reason that the DUP is in favour of staying in the EU if this means NI staying in the UK.
That's right: for all their cosying up to Brexiteers, they will turn remain if the unionist cause demands it.
With unionist being willing to make any sacrifice against reunification, do not count on any such referendum!
1
@Hugo van den Berg
I'm not at all sure of this, Hugo. The DUP is deeply imbued with the very sentiment that was the principal driver of Brexit — devotion to Empire. It is the core tenet of unionism. Rule Brittania! Yielding to Brussels, which Brexiteers view as the essence of remaining in the E.U., necessarily requires a recognition that the days of Empire are over with.
It is the same in Northern Ireland, where Arlene Foster, Sammy Wilson and the rest of that crowd regard it as their own empire and cannot accept that they have to share power. That is why they have obstructed the Stormont Government for the past two years.
So, while you certainly are correct about the DUP's fervent opposition to reunification, voting remain does not advance their central raison d'être.
1
@Graydon Wilson
The reason I am so sure about this is that I have it straight from the horse's mouth! The DUP came out with this last Friday.
1
What did Britain expect? There was a fundamental disconnect between the referendum that was directly made by the people, and the votes that have subsequently occurred in Parliament by representatives of the people. The two are not the same - representatives bring their own biases to the chamber so it is no wonder that the outcome is not consistent with the original national referendum.
I am a big believer in referendums as I think they are more representative of the will of the people, but this is a the flip side - a referendum that has lots of devilish details that were never part of the original referendum with the expectation that the representative democratic government will be able to agree on how to resolve those details.
There is an object lesson here for America - polls show the public wants many things: affordable healthcare, better gun control, immigration reform, yet our own Congress is unable to do anything effective in any of those areas.
In this day and age of instant electronic access to information, perhaps we should get rid of representatives and let the people vote directly on these things.
5
Not properly protecting the interests of the UK's people for decades is how they got into this situation in the first place. It seems that every time Brussels set conditions the British representatives just rolled over and agreed.
3
@Karen
It was not so much a matter of Brussels imposing conditions, but of lazy British politicians finding it all too convenient to simply adopt default EU directives without bothering to find out which options national governments were free to stipulate for themselves. And then turn around and blame the EU for everything of course.
@Karen Completely agree.
@Karen
In Europe the view that the Britain enjoyed special advantages in the EU prevails.
"as factions within the British government have grappled for control over the country’s exit from the bloc, the mood among voters has become dark"
The referendum was called at all, and turned out as it did, because the mood among voters was already dark.
Austerity was reaching them, but "recovery" was not. Parliament was seen as unresponsive then, and as serving interests not their own.
The trade with the EU was seen as hurting them, whether or not that was correct on net balance. They saw Eastern Europeans taking their jobs, and cheap goods taking their sales.
I doubt very much that those who voted for Brexit thought any better of Parliament before it bungled Brexit. That perception of incompetence was what got Britain to this in the first place.
9
@Mark Thomason
Forget this "austerity" narrative. This is national depth of UK from 2008 to 2018 in relation to GDP (BIP)
https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/167313/umfrage/staatsverschuldung-von-grossbritannien-in-relation-zum-bruttoinlandsprodukt-bip/
As you see the impact of US induced financial crisis has driven up the depth from comfortable 49,9 % in 2008 by annual steps of average 10 percentage points up to 81,2 % in 2011. Main reasons were welfare benefits to compensate losses. If this hadn´t been stopped they would have reached the "Italian style" mark of untenable 130 % in 2016. Because recovery was not in reach due to well known structural productivity deficiencies of obsolete British industry UK just put a cap on it by effective cost cuts in purpose not to cross the "red flag" line of 90 %. This is plain to see. Beyond this UK "imported" well skilled Eastern European workers to compensate deficiencies of productivity - industry - and labor markets - NHS for example.
These sovereign decisions of UK government have nothing to do with EU and Euro and German banks but with simple self-preservation.
The point is: All these "Eaton Oxbridge" folks were unable to turn it around - no wonder by watching their "debates" recently - blamed simply it on the EU - who has nothing to do with sovereign financial and educational decisions of member states according to EU terms - and suggested to their people all this could be voted out by pseudo-democratic decisions.
1
@Mark Thomason
You put your finger on it. Britain's unforced austerity under the Conservatives, supposed to achieve a balanced national budget though that was a chimera, has badly hurt many of the people. Through all the Brexit controversy the Conservative government has kept trying to take social service support away from the people. The latest is a new system of "payment to the poor" that withholds payments, forcing poor people to lose their homes or resort to prostitution. All this led to anger and frustration and Brexit as the Brexiteers blamed the E.U. for Tory policy.
5
@ws
Assuming "depth" should be "debt", you omitted the effect of large cuts in business taxes.
1
It’s quite simple. The old ways have to go but they are entrenched in policy and personhood. This is probably how France was in 1788.
1
@Jts Exactly which "old ways" have to go? And who are you to declare that they "have to" end?
1
The article says:
"the country might have united in its resentment of the European Union, which had vowed to make Britain’s withdrawal painful. But that has not happened. Britons are blaming their own leaders."
This is not true. The UE negociators had a fiduciary duty to protect the interests of the EU's citizens, just as UK negociators protected the UK's interests.
But the outcome of a negotiation between an entity of 60M people and another of > 400M is pretty predictable: the 60M don't get the cherries. That's all -- no need on either side to make anything painful.
47
@Lorenzo
I think you missed the meaning of this quotation.
1
I'm inclined to think a significant amount of the people claiming "Democracy is dead" have never lived in a country where Democracy doesn't exist.
I have.
And what's happening both here in the U.S. and in Britain is proof that Democracy is very much alive.
No one ever said it's not complicated.
156
@N. Smith Thoughtful perspective, thank you. It's important for all of us to realize that liter on the street, doesn't mean the neighborhood has fallen to pieces.
17
@N. Smith
British people have apparently gotten a "dose" of the California disease: "popular sovereignty" written into their states mad constitution. If enough people want a thing-all they need is to have a "vote", and then, regardless of the probable long term effects, the immediate "winners" get to impose their will on the state-even if they won by having only a minority of voters constitute their majority.
This is some kind of popular and immediate democratic action but it is not, by any measure, "representative democracy", which is a concept created to rule small nations before the advent or invention of telegraph and electricity or even mass market newspapers.
Representative democracy may be slow and often seem obtuse, but it has served the purpose of doing the job of keeping Britain afloat when it was obvious no individual could do the job , at least for more than a year or so.. . .
4
@N. Smith THANK YOU. I'm tired of people saying that we are descending into chaos and fascism.
Fascism would be orderly and clean.
8
Granted the disastrous failure of the "leadership" of the major parties in Parliament, would it really be wise to go to proportional representation? Exhibit A: the ability of small right-wing parties in Israel to push policy to extremes because without their support no one can put together a governing coalition. Exhibit B: Belgium, where putting together a governing coalition can take months and months. Exhibit C: Germany, where all too often the only way to put together a governing coalition is for the two opposed major parties to form a government that then doesn't really represent the policies of either, nor of anyone else. And on and on.
3
Germany is remarkably stable, precisely because the major parties are forced to compromise.
It is important to have more than 2 large parties in parliament, but there should not be too many small ones. Put a 10% hurdle in place, with a second party as a contingent in case the first one doesn’t make it.
That way, workable and representative majorities are assured.
21
Inability to solve HealthCare problem, to fund infrastructure projects, to curb extreme conservative agenda are hardly a showcase for two-party system
@Kara Ben Nemsi
Sorry. But at the moment, Germany isn't as "remarkably stable" as you seem to think.
True. It is a coalition government, but
both factions of the Conservative Party (CDU/CSU) are at odds, the Socialist Party (SPD) is hanging on for dear life, the Liberal Party (FDP) has all but vanished and everyone is anxious about the right-wing AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) -- at this point , only the Green Party seems to be thriving....which in itself is a good thing.
1
I think this analysis misses the mark a bit. Great Britain is a REPRESENTATIVE democracy, meaning that complex policy decisions ought to be made by representatives chosen through a democratic process. The failure here was not one of representative democracy—it was David Cameron’s disastrous choice to take a complex policy decision directly to the public.
152
@Jen
And I remember Cameron campaigning in the general election that proceeded the Brexit vote that a vote for labor was an existential threat to the country.
Turns out he had that in the reverse.
Not only did Cameron’s win create an existential threat for the country but also to his party and to the Labor party as Labor’s defeat meant the rise of Corbin, which has not offered an alternative to Brexit to the country because he was not in favor of EU. His choice has been to let the Tory’s self destruct themselves and the country.
11
@Tim Kane
In fairness to Cameron, there had been a constant trickle of support to BNP and UKIP that looked like it might turn into a tsunami. This was his gambit to silence them for once and for all (or at least the duration of his premiership) and keep the Tories on his relatively centre-democratic course.
It back-fired spectacularly. We all know that know.
11
@Jen. There's is a very serious question raised over the process of representative democracy that we have evolved here too.
The issue is that it's now becoming clear that a significant number of MPs stood for election in 2017 nominally representing parties while actually and knowingly planning to work against major elements of their party manifestos.
The clearest sign of this I think is in the vote of 264 MPs in favour of the UK remaining in the EU's Customs Union, when both major party's manifestos undertook to leave it.
There is no relevant change of circumstances they can point to since the 2017 election as an excuse, there is no way that they can claim it was only a minor factor in the election. The only real explanation is their dishonesty. Maybe if it had been a handful it could be sustained, but for 200 plus to do this, it does truly raise serious questions about our entire democratic process.
3
I'm an outsider to this this crisis, except in how it relates to our own existential crises in the US. It seems like the original sin of this mess in the UK is that there was not sufficient effort to clarify what the binary "stay or leave" choices meant. Now things have been clarified somewhat, in that leaving, at least, has been clarified to not be as simple as walking. So nobody can agree on how to leave. That shouldn't really be surprising.
Staying would also be complicated. No matter the "decision" here, the real decisions about the future of the UK will be made afterward, in how it pursues its relationship with the world, and in how it decides to let this "decision" define its future choices.
5
@Aaron
Trust me, the populace were informed, by flyers their right-wing tabloids warned them were full of lies and a waste of taxpayers' money.
The Brits are walking off the cliff eyes wide open and have done so since the start.
Democracy, whether here in the States or across the pond in England, has been faced with challenges for quite some time. The fall of the USSR, weakened the promotion and support of democracy in places where democracy was born.
A weak democracy, or a democratic political system, creates a vacuum that would encourage the forces that always viewed democracy as s threat to expand their ill political will. We are witnessing such movement coming from the east, and sadly in our own backyard as well.
I don’t know if the answer is somewhere out there, but it is not promising as we witness the deep divide of our political parties.
5
Britain is in a civil war scenario. While I don’t expect there to be organized violence, both sides are poised to be irreconcilable for a long time to come, regardless of the Brexit outcome.
7
@heinrich zwahlen
It sounds like you're describing what's going on here.
1
David Cameron's folly has morphed into the intractable departure of England from Brexit due in part to May's inability to form any sort of real coalition to speed it or impede it satisfactorily. Where is Queen Elizabeth and her Drake? Or Essex. Henry 8th and his Cromwell? Of course the Brexit deal is a "total mess" and for a nation like most that must trade, and Scotland, Eire and the Republic in the mix, it appears there's no center that can hold. The fireman in the pub supported exit, but he's not running the country, nor are any firemen that I know of in any part of Parliament. Is it class? Gender? Foolish pride? When I think of the European Union, the benefits accrued to all as an economic force, what is it that led to this impasse? "It" being of course, an impossibility to identify.
5
@Katalina
A germ of an answer to your question may be found in the observation that folks tend not to notice systems that work well.
1
One of the fundamentals tenets of democracy which everyone in government has seem to forgotten; is the ability to compromise.
It’s not about ‘honouring’ one side’s demands.
It’s not about having only a ‘soft Brexit’ or a ‘hard Brexit’.
It’s about having thoughtful, conscientious and respectful dialogue. Regardless of personal ambitions, thoughts, beliefs, hopes and dreams; our common goal in democracy isn’t about ‘which side democratically wins the popular vote’.
It’s about compromise.
The U.K. Government are not comprising at all, they consistently refuse anything we put to them. Turning a blind eye to the protests, the marches, the petitions, the outcry in the streets, the worried and concerns of businesses. They have been so focused on one moment in time - the outcome of a referendum that took place three years ago, that they have forgotten that the people who voted all those years ago may have changed. Our priorities may have changed, our beliefs, hopes, thoughts and opinions may have change in the interim.
‘We the people’ value democracy, but we also value the right to change our minds. The right to take a step back, clean the slate and begin again. The right to cancel on something we made a promise on. The right to make a rain check. The right to say, okay we did something stupid, and we recognise this, and we are mature enough to re-concile with this.
Democracy isn’t about stubbornly and blindly going forth on a promise you want to break.
97
@Isse How 'bout that 2016 election in the U.S.? Because I've really never reconciled this.
4
Yes! Politics in the US and UK is being played like a team sport these days, where there are only winners and losers. That is absolutely not the way our governments are supposed to function. Once elected, politicians are supposed to work for the good of their entire electorate not simply those who voted for them. Of course they have policies and beliefs that align most with their base but they are supposed to be intelligent decent people capable of listening to an opposing point of view without demonizing it.
11
@Isse
Extremely well thought and said. Thank you. Maybe someone will listen.
8