thanks for posting this.
I do think there are some carefully choreographed theatrics involved in this depressing circus.
And there is a going to be quite a lot of calculation (possibly agreed by both the EU and the UK civil
servants) that a dramatic last minute battle that goes down to the wire and from which both sides
emerges and are seen to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat will play well with domestic constituencies
and may (they calculate) help May get the parliamentary support she so deperately needs. It is this fact
that makes it hard to disentangle the real battles and real news from the misinformation and 'phony wars’.
But having said all that I am skeptical of the picture painted by JP of the brexit enterprise as some kind of strategic
master plan. This attributes a level of strategic skill and competence that is glaringly absent from the moronic
fantasists that populate this government (and much of the wider parliament). I am not averse to conspiracy
theories but in this case I just don’t buy it.
But more seriously it lacks credibility because this ‘civil war’ has been years in the making. The fault lines in both
the conservative party and Labor go back nearly half a century. They are generational and have
deep historical and cultural roots (you can see it in the studied nostalgia of Johnson’s faux Churchillian strutting) and
probably do not need to be re-heated on this list. So I think the enmity between the almost religious fervor of the
nativist Brexit true believers and the more straightforwardly neo-liberal Tories goes a long way back with many of the
same character actors.
So the divisions are not a theatrical smokescreen to distract us from the unfolding master plan of the brexit brain lords.
They are however destructively idiotic) quite real. Sometimes a cigar is.. you know.
This does not mean that special measures and emergency powers are not being planned as in the event
of crashing out without a deal. A crash out with no transition period would bring chaos and disruption that would
have to be managed and though this may be the desired outcome of some of the ’true believers’ I do not think
that this is the aim of May and Olly Robins (the civil servant who probably cooked up Checkers). Robins and May
knows (whatever she says) that no deal would be catastrophic.
But to be honest Ian I am just like most of my benighted British brethren guessing and dancing on the edge of the
precipice our fate in the hands of (for the most part) self serving narcissists on the road to no-where. Somehow this
tailspin feels even worse than JP’s grand conspiracy.
I have never posted here before (but long been a lurker!), however this thread on Brexit presents an opportunity to share a recent twitter thread on Brexit, which I came to indirectly via social media. As far as I am aware, the author of the following twitter posts is a well-known whistle-blower, and now author and film-maker. I don't know any of his work so am taking this info at face value.
The reason I post the following is that, as an explanation/interpretation of the UK gov's Brexit-related activities and statements, as played out via UK news media, it is the only account I have read which comes close to 'ringing true'. The narrative of the UK gov's 'incompetence' seems too politically convenient to take at face value, and a united strategy of feigning division and creating chaos as a smokescreen for power-grab stacks up much more plausibly esp. in light of clear parallels along these lines in the US. What I find to be strange is that the possibility of united and disingenuous UK gov strategy and narrative has never been raised in the press, as far as I have seen. As with many recent high profile political events in the UK recently, perhaps the real concern is the role of a supportive and compliant media across the board, in presenting what may be an entirely and knowingly false narrative.
I would be interested in anyone's thoughts on the twitter posts below, in relation to David Garcia's previous comment and what has already been posted.
Here is the twitter commentary I am referring to -
"Right, I really don't care whether people listen to this Brexit thread. It's just here.
This is a sanitised briefing. It is rated as "high level of confidence" and supported by OSINT, meaning it comes from multiple, reliable sources and is supported by open source information.
Numerous sources have confirmed the British government is deliberately aiming for a no deal Brexit outcome in order to take advantage of extended powers available to them under the scenario - including civil contingencies and so-called Henry VIII.
The Chequers plan is a ploy designed to engage the EU in distraction from the desired British outcome and create a false narrative at home in the UK that the EU are responsible.
Sources claim emergency legislation is being prepared for January next year (2019) when the Withdrawal Act no deal deadlines pass - this would be 29/01 and the civil contingencies secretariat have been convened as per leaked Hammond notes recently, adding credibility.
On Ireland: The British government hopes the EU will be forced to move first and install a hard border in Ireland in order to avoid blame itself for a situation it has created. Further sources claim the data harvested during Repeal 8th will be used in some "unity" campaigns.
The British government has progressed trade talks with the US to the point of potential emergency supply, moving substantially beyond informal discussions - though the Trump administration should not be taken at its word, a degree of reliance on this has been factored in UK side.
The government intends to create a tax haven on the EU's doorstep to exploit financial service deregulation. This speaks for itself.
The British government aims to prevent France and other EU countries from properly preparing for no deal by continuing to falsely engage in the negotiations in bad faith, keeping the EU27 from moving from early stage plans to contingency measures as long as possible.
The British government hopes this will create a ripple effect of impact so it can later pursue a "Europe in chaos" narrative of disinformation and exploit the situation. In short hoping to spread the load of no deal impact, particularly into France due to geographical impact.
The British government hopes this collateral damage will add to planned disruption around the EU election processes next spring and they will use dissident relationships to further this - likely to include Orban.
The British are aware that contingency planning in France has not yet reached operational unit level even in the GIGN because the general French presumption is that the British government is genuinely engaged in good faith, which they are not.
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
(W.B. Yates.. The Second Coming)
Its a critical juncture in a very very complex moment of a 4 dimensional
chess that the UK pretends to be playing with an opponent, but is
actually playing with itself (in every sense, including the vulgar sense of
wanking our time away).
Actually Kier Starmer -the Captain Sensible of the Brexit narrative- is
incrementally (and with some skill) inching the Labour Party’s leadership
towards a refferendum on the deal (I dislike the sterile populism of the
‘people’s vote' tag but it seems to have caught on).
In yesterday’s tragic parliamentary performance May stood isolated
and friendless trapped by her own cack-handed trail of bad decisions
and contradictory ‘red lines’. Apart from the isolation of someone whose only
piece on the chess board is the king which is being relentlessly pushed
towards the innevitable one other thing stood out. Accross parliament MPs
from all paties except the DUP were increasingly advocating the once unmentionable
concept of a 'referndum on the deal’ (or ratification). MPs who have not taken that
position before such Dominic Reeve argued for it. This fas has moved from a being a
very faint possibility to a distinct option as one of the only ways to resolve political
This would be not so much a ‘people’s vote’ as the equivalent of the consent form
the patient must sign before undergoing a highly risky piece of useless cosmetic
surgery about to be perfomed of an ageing dowager suffering from severe
delusions of grandure.
On 16 Oct 2018, at 07:35, Patrice Riemens <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 2018-06-17 11:15, Patrice Riemens wrote:
>> In today's Guardian/Observer:
>> Cheers, p+2D!
> That was then - but even earlier there was:
> (referd to in to-day's Guardian, hence ...)
> I'm afraid that's going to be the scenario. A Labour party led by an Eurosceptic at heart too afraid to ruffle feathers f its brexiters voters (who mind well have changed their minds in the meantime), and going for the 'extend and pretend' scenario ...
> Brexit gonna be a disaster - and not only for UK, even if far worse there.
> Salvini appears to have backtracked on Riace deportations
> Cheers, no cheers, I dunno
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: email@example.com
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: