ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, March 01, 2019

Mailvox: Brexit update

Our British Brexit expert is now less certain that a no-deal Brexit will take place as scheduled on March 29.

The recent votes in the Commons were a non-event. They simply commit parliament to hold votes:
12 March: Theresa May’s deal;
13 March: ‘No Deal’ if Theresa May’s deal was rejected the day before;
14 March: Article 50 extension if ‘No Deal’ was rejected the day before.
Belgian MEP, Guy Verhofstadt, leader of the liberals in the EU parliament, and lead EU parliamentarian on Brexit, was last night against any Article 50 extension which would cause Britain to hold European Elections 23 May. This is because it would give Faragistes and Kippers a say in the selection of the new EU executive to replace Juncker, Tusk et al., and over the ratification of Theresa May’s deal.
Remember that Britain is not trivial in size and is equal to the smallest 19 EU countries combined.
Also remember that Brexiteer lawsuits are stacked up, just waiting for the government to make a mistake. If we can litigate our way out, we will. However, as the lawyers know, first we need a cause of action, and that can’t happen until the government or parliament makes decisions. For example, any delay and Brexiteers will litigate to ensure EU elections are held in Britain so that we can affect the selection of the EU executive and ratification of deals. Of course what is litigated depends on what decisions are taken, it is inherently reactive.
The EU are saying that they would only agree to extensions if Britain has a clear roadmap to achieve a deal. By which they mean surrender. And it is a surrender, on a par with military defeat and occupation, which would lead us around by the nose.
Jacob Rees-Mogg was last night saying that he would be prepared to vote for Theresa May’s deal, including the Irish backstop on one condition: Theresa May resigns.
I think that this is wrong. However it’s not completely crazy. Here’s the logic:
1. Almost all of the deal is time limited. It expires over the course of the next decade. It’s humiliating, it fails to give the EU the contact with hard reality that they desperately need, and it hamstrings our ability to chart our own course, but it does eventually expire. The exception here is the Irish backstop.
2. Any Conservative Party leadership contest would result in a Brexiteer prime minister. This is because the final 2 candidates are voted on by the party members around the country, who are ‘no deal’ Brexiteers. Personally I would prefer Jacob Rees-Mogg, but he would rather remain the “éminence grise”, so it’s going to be Boris Johnson. We have to work with who we’ve got.
3. The ‘Future Relationship’ agreement with the EU, Brexit Part Deux, would then NOT be negotiated by Theresa May and Olly Robbins. Instead it would be negotiated by Brexiteers.
4. This kicks into touch the Labour Party’s new strategy of another referendum and Customs Union with dynamic alignment of regulations (EU membership and control of our economy without representation), because it would simply have been overtaken by events at the next general election (probably 7 June 2022). The Labour Party has yesterday firmly demonstrated that it doesn’t care about its rust-belt voters, so a properly led Conservative Party can pick up those districts at a future election. The Labour Party would solely be the party of metropolitan chatterati and minorities.
5. A Brexiteer Prime Minister can start to dismantle the incestuous relationship whereby Central Office chooses the MP candidates and the MPs choose Central Office – turning ordinary party members around the country into a rubber stamp. This relationship, as I have previously written, is the fundamental problem which disconnects the MPs and government from the electorate. It is this which causes the implementation of policies which are well received by the media, but detested by any sane person.
6. If the Irish backstop remains a problem after several years, we can simply use the 1970 Treaty of Vienna, combined with the fact that no British Parliament may bind a future British Parliament, to repudiate the backstop after the next election with 3 months’ notice.
Separately, I would point out that when we decided to leave the EU, we were prepared to treat it as the cancellation of a golf club membership – which is legally what it is. “We don’t want to play any more. In fact we never did and you lied to us, but no hard feelings, and good luck with your 18 holes tomorrow.”
However, what the EU has done since the discussions with Cameron began after the May 2015 British General Election, is demonstrate that they are not simply a hazard, but are actually a direct threat to us. They have behaved with a colonial mentality towards us. We won’t be safe until we have dismantled the EU. This must now be the primary objective of British foreign and economic policy. Fortunately, the EU is so unstable that this is practical objective, rendered much more so by a Brexiteer Prime Minister who understands the threat with the EU poses.


My thought is that Leave means Leave. No Deal Brexit is the best possible outcome for the British people. No matter how celebrated it may be at the time, any deal with the EU will eventually come to be seen in much the same light as Chamberlain's Munich Agreement and the MPs are being exceedingly foolish to even consider any deal of any kind with the Fourth Reich.

Labels: ,

33 Comments:

Blogger D E K March 01, 2019 4:35 AM  

As always a great read. Love the golf club membership analogy.

Blogger Lazarus March 01, 2019 4:41 AM  

Perfidious Albion.

The foreign office has had the same policy for 500 years: Create a dis-united Europe

Blogger pyrrhus March 01, 2019 4:58 AM  

@2 Britain's policy of preventing a united Europe under either France or Germany always made sense provided that it could be accomplished with limited use of British land forces, with most of the fighting conducted by allies...When that principle was violated in WW1, the result was catastrophic for the UK.
In the present case, the EU doesn't have an army and Britain has nukes, so no problem.

Blogger wreckage March 01, 2019 5:13 AM  

A thought I may have voiced before, thrown out for those who might find it useful: the strategic goal of the British Empire (unlike, say, the Spanish) was always (among other things) to provide Britain with a plausible defense against mainland trad-imperialism. Historically, it did so, predicting the outcomes of both WW1 and WW2. It seems extremely likely it will do so again, only against economic and "soft power" imperialism from the mainland, rather than outright conquest.

Blogger Bert Head March 01, 2019 5:30 AM  

The Irish border was the unavoidable sticking point from the beginning. The English will work out how to deal with all the surrounding countries whatever dog’s brexit we are presented with. The Irish have a border with each other, so the issue is one of traditional separation conflicting with integrated modern trading arrangements.

It used to be postulated that Northern Irish Catholics would breed faster than protestants and take over the province. Instead Eire lost it’s independence, Catholicism waning, and is now ruled by an Indian homosexual.

The backstop issue will resolve itself when the majority in Northern Ireland experience the reality of brexit and decide where they want the border to be.

Blogger Mandos March 01, 2019 5:35 AM  

EU army is now a very real possibility with the current French leadership being foolish enough to seriously considering surrendering France's military capabilities to Europe. We're not there yet and thank God Macron doesn't have much political capital right now, but at the very least a good bunch of French political leaders are comfortable with the idea.

Blogger Steve March 01, 2019 5:38 AM  

Our British Brexit expert is now less certain that a no-deal Brexit will take place as scheduled on March 29.

Yeah, I can't see a path to "No Deal" that doesn't rely on some sort of deus ex machina. The thoroughly rotten and entirely worthless British political class is solidly against it, and unfortunately they're in a position to block it.

My crystal ball reading skills are no better than anyone else's, but I reckon Brexiters are horribly mistaken if they support any iteration of the Surrender Agreement.

Because it's not Brexit. Because it will never be Brexit. Because it's designed to keep us under the EU's thumb and frustrate British democracy... forever. Because the Treason Lobby would rightly say "look - even the Brexiters supported the deal!".

The supposedly time limited nature of the Agreement is a mirage. It will only be time limited in the sense that it will lead us back to formal EU membership within a decade. The Agreement is constructed to give us all of the disadvantages of Remain, and none of the advantages of Leave.

Yet this flaming bag of shite will, of course, be dumped on the door of the electorate and falsely labelled "Brexit".

Relying of future Conservative Party leadership changes is also a fatal mistake. The Conservative Party is a thoroughly converged organisation. It has been marginalising and purging actual conservatives for decades. Two recent examples of "conservative" policy:

* Forcing schools to teach 5 year olds about how awesome gay sex and trannyism are

* Banning cars

Do we get the picture yet?

It doesn't matter what the (despised and ignored by their own leadership) Conservative Party rank and file want. They couldn't even get a pro-Brexit leader in the immediate aftermath of the historic Brexit referendum. Expecting these people to somehow nut up after the Surrender Agreement is successfully substituted for Brexit is astonishingly naive. They'd also need to somehow purge the majority of their own MP's, and there's no sign of that happening.

Here's my tuppence worth for pro-Brexit MP's:

* Just Say No to the Surrender Agreement
* Just Say No to an Article 50 extension
* If Brexit is to be killed off (for now) - don't put your prints on the murder weapon. Let the Remainers own it. (What's the highest level of 4GW? EXACTLY.)
* The Conservative Party needs to die. Once Farage's Brexit Party is up and running, work with them

The most powerful asset Brexiters have is popular support. Don't trade that away for a handful of beans and the delusion that you can somehow collaborate in Not-Brexit and translate that into actual Brexit somewhere down the line. This is a highly volatile time in British and Western politics. We are overdue a massive realignment. The future belongs to politicians who keep faith with what the public actually wants.

Blogger Steve March 01, 2019 6:24 AM  

The Irish border was the unavoidable sticking point from the beginning.

It wasn't.

The Irish border "issue" is a complete fabrication, introduced into the Brexit discussions late in the day as a fake "because" to stymie the British government.

Neither Britain or Ireland have ever had any intention of creating a "hard" border between NI and the ROI. Even at the height of the Troubles, when terrorists were running guns and bombs into NI and slaughtering people on a regular basis, there was no "hard" border, because it's geographically impossible.

What's the backstop supposed to guard against? The apocalyptic threat of a few truckloads of potatoes crossing the border without paying tax? Nobody cares about that stuff, least of all the people (the EU and Ireland's gay Indian prime minister) who are pretending it's a crucial sticking point.

Why create a sticking point where none needs to exist? Because the Brexit negotiations weren't real. The EU (and its client in Dublin) never intended to negotiate. They intended to present a list of impossible demands so that the London branch of the globalist project could declare Brexit to be impractical.

Blogger andrisf March 01, 2019 7:37 AM  

My suspicion is, that there will be no real Brexit. It has been 2.5 years now. Talks about soft Brexit (actually not a Brexit at all) are increasing, mutterings about second referendum are also strong.
It is very risky, and "elites" know that, to just cancel results of referendum, yet it is painfully obvious, that Brexit is not moving forwards.
In the end most probable thing is a formal Brexit, but one which actually keeps most of what binds EU and UK law wise, just hidden and UK remaining under jurisdiction of EU courts.
But lets be frank - at this point UK is pretty far gone in many ways and people in charge in UK are almost as insane as in EU, plus Islam and migrant problem in UK is immense, not as insurmountable as in Sweden, but close to it.

Blogger JC Skinner March 01, 2019 7:40 AM  

Call Europe's bluff. Hold a border poll in Northern Ireland. Note that most of NI in both communities voted to remain. So let them. Unify Ireland and then Britain gets to leave the EU. Win-win-win.

Blogger Nate March 01, 2019 7:54 AM  

"The recent votes in the Commons were a non-event. They simply commit parliament to hold votes:
12 March: Theresa May’s deal;
13 March: ‘No Deal’ if Theresa May’s deal was rejected the day before;
14 March: Article 50 extension if ‘No Deal’ was rejected the day before.The recent votes in the Commons were a non-event. They simply commit parliament to hold votes:
12 March: Theresa May’s deal;
13 March: ‘No Deal’ if Theresa May’s deal was rejected the day before;
14 March: Article 50 extension if ‘No Deal’ was rejected the day before."

With all due respect... that's not a nonevent at all. Putting No Deal Brexit on the docket is a damn big deal.

Blogger justaguy March 01, 2019 8:12 AM  

The golf club membership idea was the same one the American Confederate States used-- it didn't work. I guess the new army is an army of lawyers and media. Who knows how many votes there will be until the right result is achieved.

Blogger artensoll March 01, 2019 8:14 AM  

I very much appreciate these posts. They enable me to get a clearer understanding of what is happening to my country without the gut-wrenching anxiety that invariably follows. Thank you.

Blogger slippin jimmy March 01, 2019 8:19 AM  

@ 8

You're clearly not tall enough for this ride. A "hard border" means border controls and Ireland and the UK most definitely have a long history of border controls going back to 1923, the year the Irish Free State came into existence. They were only fully abolished in 2005. Given that the EU is (amongst other things) a trade block with a high degree of harmonization from external tariffs, to phytosanitary standards, to conformity of manufactured products, it is absolutely essential for it to be able to control the flow of goods into across its borders.

It's not a matter of a few truckloads of potatoes. If goods from the UK are allowed to cross unregulated into Ireland and therefore the EU, it will become a massive smuggling point, not only for goods from the UK but goods from overseas countries as well.

Furthermore, there's those famous WTO Rules to worry about. Hard Brexiteers love to witter on about trading on WTO terms but few if any of them have bothered to read them. Under WTO rules, you are required to treat the goods of all signatory countries the same, absent specific trade agreements. If the UK leaves with no agreement and the EU simply turns a blind eye to goods crossing its external border in Ireland, it will the find itself getting challenged by the US, China, and Japan and every other major WTO member state demanding that their goods should be landed at Hamburg and Antwerp completely unrestricted.

Far from being a fabricated issue, this is an existential matter for the EU. It's also pretty important for the economies of both Northern Ireland and Eire which are heavily integrated.

Blogger Teleros March 01, 2019 8:22 AM  

The supposedly time limited nature of the Agreement is a mirage. It will only be time limited in the sense that it will lead us back to formal EU membership within a decade. The Agreement is constructed to give us all of the disadvantages of Remain, and none of the advantages of Leave.

Rejoining requires adopting the Euro. GLHF with that.


With all due respect... that's not a nonevent at all. Putting No Deal Brexit on the docket is a damn big deal.

It's meaningless actually. If Parliament says no to no deal but doesn't agree to a deal... guess what the result is.

Blogger VD March 01, 2019 8:33 AM  

My suspicion is, that there will be no real Brexit.

Andris, you simply do not seem to understand that literally no one here gives a quantum of a damn what you think or suspect about anything.

Blogger LiveForever March 01, 2019 9:14 AM  

I'm a little more optimistic on No Deal. It is enshrined in law that we leave without a deal if the WA is voted down and no extension is agreed (which seems likely).

What was worrying, as the writer notes, is that Jacob Rees-Mogg seems to be slightly cucking on the WA - albeit with the demand that May resigns. As Chairman of the ERG he is very influential in whether or not the WA will pass.

Blogger RusticFederalist March 01, 2019 9:15 AM  

Would it help matters if America exchanged Northern Ireland's Protestant Ulster-Scots Unionists for our Catholic Irish Democrats?

Blogger Phelps March 01, 2019 9:35 AM  

As someone living in a former colony, colonialism isn't the tiger you think it is. You simply have to make it unprofitable for them to attempt to retake you. They'll try once, maybe twice, and then they will other bothersome colonies to deal with.

Blogger Steve March 01, 2019 9:53 AM  

Slippery Jim - Thank you for sharing your opinion, unfortunately it's a daft opinion and you should be ashamed of your pointy little head.

"A hard border means border controls"

If that's what a hard border means, we already have a hard border, genius. There are already cross-border arrangements to ensure VAT and excise are paid. There are already anti-smuggling arrangements between the UK and ROI to prevent the exploitation of the different tax regimes. The "hard border" threatened by Eurotwats unless we accept their "backstop" very clearly isn't what you describe, because what you describe already exists.

"Far from being a fabricated issue, this is an existential matter for the EU."

It's such a profoundly existential issue that they only started crying about the supposed need for a "backstop" to the Irish border at the end of 2017, nearly a year and a half after the Brexit referendum and several months into the "negotiations".

Let's be clear, for the hard of thinking, what's going on here.

The EU has, late in the day and with malice aforethought, offered a false choice between a "hard border" (think checkpoints and barbed wire) and the "backstop" (an outrageous demand that the existing border in Ireland undergoes no change whatsoever, forever).

Despite their supposedly existential concerns about the unlikely scenario of cheap American and Chinese imports suddenly invading Ireland via Belfast, they have flatly refused to discuss technological solutions which would extend the existing border controls to address these matters.

Ultimately if the EU genuinely believes (they don't) that a hard border in Ireland is necessary to protect their gay crony capitalist single market, that's their problem.

Blogger Nate March 01, 2019 10:01 AM  

"It's meaningless actually. If Parliament says no to no deal but doesn't agree to a deal... guess what the result is."

You're a fool. What it is...is a chance to say YES to a no deal Brexit. Which is fantastic.

Blogger Servant of the Chief March 01, 2019 10:05 AM  

Living in NI all my life, specifically on the border, and specifically smuggling country, I have to weigh in on the matter. There was no 'border controls after the early nineties. No checkpoints, tolls, passport checks what have you, but for a long while there were military bases, regular foot patrols by soldiers and helicopter passes, a hangover from the troubles and something the Prods in the North wanted to keep as long as possible. It didn't stop smuggling (even though both countries are in the EU) of illegal cigarettes and washed diesel and the like, it actually became something of a game to the locals.

The real issue with border controls that wont make it come back is the issue both the UK and Ireland have entered into a number of treaties with eachother and established cross border institutions for the purposes of peacemaking, integration and economic co-operation. The EU by forcing the gay taoiseach in the south to be the gay taoiseach in the south on the matter and the british globalists pretending to go along with it dont realise they are sleepwalking into a hell of a snare for themselves legally.

If they force a hard border on either side or both its going to result in one or another forced treaty violations between member nations (especially if it occurs before formal brexit) which has a cascading effect for all such treaties across Europe and serious ramifications for eu level treaties and their validity since it effectively, officially abrogates the soveriegn level power of member states to make international treaties even with current or former member states which brings into question the validity of said treaty agreements on such things such as Nice or Lisbon, since its EU dictate overriding the sovereign question, it brings the matter to the fore in a blindingly official matter while simultaneously undermining the authority of the EU treaties.

It also doesnt help that even Brexiteer PMs are hilariously clueless about the NI situation so most of them are practically unaware of what ammunition this whole debacle actually gives them, and regardless of the matter the DUP's infamous stubbornness will result in either a hard brexit or this timebomb coming to the fore.

If the EU is lucky, France secedes and it peacefully falls apart before this goes off.

Blogger Bert Head March 01, 2019 10:19 AM  

"It's such a profoundly existential issue that they only started crying about the supposed need for a "backstop" to the Irish border at the end of 2017, nearly a year and a half after the Brexit referendum and several months into the "negotiations"."

You were very slow on the uptake, Steve, but that explains a lot. I could make a list of references to discussions of the Irish border issue going back to well before the referendum.

Unfortunately I feel myself buckling under the weight of the consequences of Brandolini's Law.

Blogger Steve March 01, 2019 10:29 AM  

Bert's Head - Blimey, your big head must echo when people knock on it.

I could make a list of references to discussions of the Irish border issue going back to well before the referendum.

You can make a list of references to any amount of bullshitium and FUD going back to well before the referendum, because there was so much of it.

Prior to late 2017, the UK and Irish governments both publicly stated their desire for a sensible compromise on the border question.

But then, suddenly, the EU decided no sensible compromise was possible (not coincidentally, this happened shortly after the gay Indian assumed power in Dublin). That is where the backstop comes from, and it has always been a deliberate poison pill aimed at frustrating Brexit rather than a serious attempt to manage cross-border trade.

The sensible answer to this is, of course, NOMFUP. Britain doesn't need to trade with Ireland, but the potatoes need Britain.

Blogger slippin jimmy March 01, 2019 10:33 AM  

@20

Steve,

When I say hard border, I mean phytosanitary checks for agricultural products, and conformity checks for manufactured goods. Vat is handled without the need for a hard border as are excise taxes. Tariffs on imported goods can also be handled without in the same way.

In the greater scheme of things, tariffs are near-irrelevant, it's the non-tariff barriers that cause real trade friction. And that's what the EU is concerned about and it's what should be giving UK politicians sleepless nights given the degree to which our industries, particularly our agricultural industries are intertwined.

And the EU made its position clear on the Irish Border at least as early as May 2017 - before negotiations seriously began. https://news.sky.com/story/eu-chief-tells-ireland-he-will-work-to-avoid-hard-border-post-brexit-10872491

Blogger Steve March 01, 2019 10:56 AM  

Slippery Jim -

And the EU made its position clear on the Irish Border at least as early as May 2017 - before negotiations seriously began. https://news.sky.com/story/eu-chief-tells-ireland-he-will-work-to-avoid-hard-border-post-brexit-10872491

That article proves my point. In May 2017, the EU was still claiming it would try to find a solution to the (ultimately minor) Irish border question based on "mutual respect".

Later, they hardened their position to demand that the UK accept quasi-partition at the hands of the EU - which is what the backstop means - as the only solution.

It's been widely reported that the EU's head Kraut decreed "Northern Ireland is the price that Britain must pay for Brexit". These are not the words of people concerned primarily with the elfin safety aspects of the Anglo-Irish beef trade. These are the arrogant pronunciations of the degenerate soy-based descendants of Prussian junkers.

Ireland will probably come to regret taking on the role of the EU's useful idiots in this matter. They depend on good relations with the UK, but we don't need the Irish at all.

Blogger Jack Amok March 01, 2019 12:03 PM  

What it is...is a chance to say YES to a no deal Brexit. Which is fantastic.

It is, and I like the timing. I have no idea how Parliament will actually vote, but if May's debacle goes down to defeat, there won't be much time to scramble for votes the next day. As long as they reject May's surrender deal, things should be fine. For our Brit friends, what's your sense of repercussions for MPs who vote for the deal? I'm sure your globalist scum want to, but do they have something to fear if they do sell you out?

serious ramifications for eu level treaties and their validity since it effectively, officially abrogates the soveriegn level power of member states to make international treaties

Of course actually taking each major step towards subjugating the provinces is a significant event, it's not like this wasn't the obvious eventual result of the EU anyway. Certainly at least since they started demanding Englishmen be punished for selling produce by the pound instead of the kilogram.

Blogger eclecticme March 01, 2019 2:21 PM  

Great posts. Many details are over my US based head.
The Duran often dumbs things down enough for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2pUvBmo3js

Blogger CarpeOro March 01, 2019 3:14 PM  

I was about to lambaste Ireland for electing a gay half-blooded prince when I recalled the USA beat them to it. Perilous times indeed.

Blogger eclecticme March 01, 2019 3:38 PM  

If an extension is OKed ...
1. When is the next election in Britain
and what is the likely outcome? Will the
pro extension voters be punished? What then?

2. If extension is OKed I understand that means people from UK can be elected again to EU parliament? What would that mean?

Please dumb down any answer for me.

Blogger 1st Earl Hardwicke March 01, 2019 4:53 PM  

Tory; Literally, meaning Bandit. Basically going to continue to loot what they can. Drive the price of property up, screwing over first time buyers and a potential increase in the middle class.

As for the socialists. They have their comrade commissars, in the lords(an oxymoron). So they won't be for Brexit at all.

No major faction represents the interests of the British people. Personally I think whatever brains they have left should be sucked out, so the whole organisation implodes.

What main micro issue is going to trip the wire for no-deal or reneging on the future sell out on Brexit?

Blogger Derrick Bonsell March 01, 2019 9:59 PM  

Remain would easily win the next referendum. Brexit is done, the UK will remain part if the EU.

Blogger Stephen St. Onge March 03, 2019 1:33 PM  

“However, what the EU has done since the discussions with Cameron began after the May 2015 British General Election, is demonstrate that they are not simply a hazard, but are actually a direct threat to us. They have behaved with a colonial mentality towards us.”

        Hilarious, to see a Brit write this to us Yanks.  That’s why we ended up breaking with Britain.

        But don’t worry about whether the EU continues to exist.  Just as we eventually taught you that we weren’t your lackeys and didn’t have to do as you said, so the EU may figure it out, once you’re gone.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts