Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[HVC]

Am I correct in reading between the lines here that you are seeing solidarity as meaning sacrificing their own situation for the sake of others?
What it actually means is mutual support. Recognising that throwing others under the bus for your own short term gain will screw you both over in the end.
There's no judgement on the working class of the past being more selfless and moral. Just a lot better informed about their place in the world and the way to improve this not being by trampling others to the ground.

A union strikes a work place to get higher wages.  The company wants to hire replacement workers, or scabs as some like to call them.  It's easy to see what mutual support the replacements are being asked to provide (i.e. not crossing the picket line); what mutual support are the union members extending to the replacements?

future earnings potential?

[Admiral Yi]

future earnings potential?

I don't follow.

[Grey Fox]

future earnings potential?

I don't follow.

After the strike, you might get a union job.

[The Minsky Moment]

That gets to the distinction of union movements that are dedicated to building ang guarding walled gardens of labor versus union movements that are dedicated to pursuing the interest of the broader working classes as a whole. In the US the former (epitomized by the AFL) won out over the later (IWW).

Until they both lost.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

The very real concern I have on that is that the tories are not dumb. The connection between poverty, low education levels, and far right beliefs must not be lost on them.
It is actively in their best interests to make traditional labour areas as poor as possible.

ever thought that these people -when they still voted left- might have held the same opinions as they do now? And that -as such- it's not the voters that have left the left, but the left that has left the voters?


The far right like to claim this a lot.
It doesn't hold up.
Solidarity and minority rights have always been left wing beliefs.
The areas in question have changed massively with the collapse in industry, rise in unemployment, etc...
Nonetheless it makes a great soundbite. Helps to excuse people for spitting on their grandfather's grave if you can convince them it's the left that changed, not them

Rinke van den Brink's book "In de greep van de angst" in 2005 (with cases in the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Denmark, Austria) already figured out that what you claim is not what happened. These people didn't become far right, not did they change their beliefs. What changed is the leadership of the socialist parties, moving away from what is (in flanders) often called beefsteak-socialism to gauche-caviar. Left wing parties did not (and generally still don't) take the concerns of their erstwhile voters seriously. As a party you can do that a few times, but at some point your voters become your ex-voters.
But of course the leftwing parties find it easier to call their former voters extremists, right-wingers and all that... Easier than doing the required soulsearching and concluding that they did indeed betray the loyalty of their voters.

[Josquius]

Whilst what you claim is a clichéd far right rant. As is playing the victim when somebody calls a spade a spade.
What you're saying there makes absolutely no sense. Where labour changed it was with Blair. With Corbyn they were actually going back to what labour used to be. It wasn't so much that the left had changed but that they hadn't changed (or rather undone their change) that was the issue (plus Corbyn being generally a bit shit).
Clearly there has been a huge change in demographics in the former industrial areas. The established working class hold has decayed with many falling into the ranks of the lumpen. The rising threat of far right extremism is well observed in these areas.
It's just sheer wishful thinking and playing politics to claim the people have not changed, only the left has changed. 

[Valmy]

The FDA is very strict. You know about Kinder Surprises, right?

Yes but we only seek to ban things that actually have facts supporting them, so GMO hysteria doesn't really work.

[Valmy]

Whilst what you claim is a clichéd far right rant. As is playing the victim when somebody calls a spade a spade.
What you're saying there makes absolutely no sense. Where labour changed it was with Blair. With Corbyn they were actually going back to what labour used to be. It wasn't so much that the left had changed but that they hadn't changed (or rather undone their change) that was the issue (plus Corbyn being generally a bit shit).
Clearly there has been a huge change in demographics in the former industrial areas. The established working class hold has decayed with many falling into the ranks of the lumpen. The rising threat of far right extremism is well observed in these areas.
It's just sheer wishful thinking and playing politics to claim the people have not changed, only the left has changed. 

It was because of the Iraq War wasn't it?

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Whilst what you claim is a clichéd far right rant. As is playing the victim when somebody calls a spade a spade.
What you're saying there makes absolutely no sense. Where labour changed it was with Blair. With Corbyn they were actually going back to what labour used to be. It wasn't so much that the left had changed but that they hadn't changed (or rather undone their change) that was the issue (plus Corbyn being generally a bit shit).
Clearly there has been a huge change in demographics in the former industrial areas. The established working class hold has decayed with many falling into the ranks of the lumpen. The rising threat of far right extremism is well observed in these areas.
It's just sheer wishful thinking and playing politics to claim the people have not changed, only the left has changed.

You only confirm what I'm saying.
The left abandonded their old voting base and blames it on the right, while they should blame themselves. But it is easier to shout "far right!" and dismiss everything.
Here, have a spade.

[Josquius]

It was because of the Iraq War wasn't it?

The Iraq War is an odd one, as it really brings a lot of hate against Blair from young Middle class left wingers, more than tuition fees even, but I really get the impression it's not much of an issue with working class voters.
Though, it could be fair to say the disturbing rise in militarism and attached far right views in recent years heavily draws from Iraq.

]

You only confirm what I'm saying.
The left abandonded their old voting base and blames it on the right, while they should blame themselves. But it is easier to shout "far right!" and dismiss everything.
Here, have a spade.

You're only proving my point here
Ignoring what actually happened in an attempt to play victim.
If it was the left that abandoned the working class then when was this? With Blair and New Labour who was very popular with the working class but heavily changed what the left was about or Corbyn who is not so popular and is very much of the labour old school?
If it was the left who abandoned the working class then how come the working class in the majority still supports Labour with it being a minority who have defected, some to the Tories, and others to far right parties?

[Sheilbh]

I have no doubt that refusing to align with EU will be used to quietly dismantle a lot of worker and customer rights and protections.

As Sheilbh says WILL OF THE PEOPLE and BREXIT IS BEING DONE presents a once-in-a-generation opportunity for this.

With a major crook at the helm, they may very well be going for this.

Yeah. I mean look opposition to the EU was left-wing for the first twenty years and then right-wing for the next twenty years. The reason for the shift was significantly the move to a social Europe and Maastricht and the run up to creating the EU from the EEC.

It's basically Thatcher's line - the Treaty of Rome was a "charter of liberty", but creating the EU was moving to "introduce collectivisation and corporatism" and "concentrate power at the centre of a European conglomerate". As she put it (with the royal "we"): "We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them reimposed at European level, with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels."

And I'm not entirely sure that's wrong because part of the reason for the shift of the left from opposing to supporting the EU was that many in Labour saw winning in Europe as a way of helping develop "social Europe" and basically creating European policies that would basically create a backstop on what a Tory government could do. So Labour MEPs are generally very active and this does happen once New Labour win - John Major got an opt-out from the social charter, we signed up (I think under Brown as part of the Lisbon Treaty) and there's no way that a future Tory PM can get that opt-out back. I think it's striking how defensive that position from Labour is though - it basically says "we might not be able to build broad enough support domestically for x, y or z policy, so instead we will work to implement it at a European level". But that defensiveness probably makes a lot of sense in the late 80s/early 90s (or now) when I think Labour people were genuinely wondering if they'd ever win again.

But that's definitely the understanding and the way a lot of Tory Brexiteers approach this subject. There was a really interesting Twitter thread today by Peter Foster on the government starting to consult business groups on the trade negotiations and lots of business groups being a bit pissed off at how little they've been consulted. He said business couldn't quite believe that Johnson would cause this much disruption, but then had briefing from the government:

BUT...just as biz world can't *quite* believe @BorisJohnson
is really going to inflict disruption on a grand scale; so Government doesn't really believe business is really grasping/embracing what government is planning to do. /12
Those with knowledge of life inside the 'black box' warn that business really needs to understand just how hard/committed the government is to ramming this #brexit through...and how little notice they will take of business complaints or warnings. /13
One old hand notes that biz groups get to see the PM's business adviser; they *feel* important, they *feel* as if they are getting through - but truth be told, on big strategic negotiation decision, the biz adviser is not 'in the room'. Biz is not as important as it thinks /14
Perhaps this will change, but on current evidence, there is really no particular reason to believe that it will.

Some of the groups feels resigned to this; others accept that given some biz will be thrown under bus by Brexit, it makes sense for govt to do the dirty late

I could be wrong and maybe Johnson will sign up for level playing field, that wouldn't shock me given his Northern Irish "deal" - and that was definitely May's goal. But my feeling is that for this generation of Tories, especially the Brexiteers, this is their miners' strike. If they win this then they get to "roll back the frontiers of the state" that have accrued at a European level since 1992 - which I think they genuinely believe will be better for the country. And maybe, with a decent spin operation, splashing some capital investment around and spending state aid (we'll be out of those rules too) and unless the Labour Party sorts itself out, they'll actually end up being rewarded for it - just like 1987 

Edit: This is why I'm not so sure all of the old complaints of "have cake and eat it" apply. I'm not convinced this government wants the sort of trade deal May would have proposed. So they may start aspiring to as frictionless as possible etc, but I think that's a position. May would prioritise frictionless trade over divergence, I think this government will prioritise divergence over frictionless trade.

[Sheilbh]

On the left this paper's interesting - and some of the stats/tables are really interesting:
https://www.europeforthemany.com/tdd-web.pdf
Particularly liked this profile:

I think the housing bit and age profile are particularly interesting. And I think there's a bit of both identity and economics going on, but they don't map easily.

Corbyn who is not so popular and is very much of the labour old school?

This will be the hill I die on - Corbyn's brand of politics is nothing to do with old school Labour. He'd have been treated with the same sort of benign contempt by Attlee, Bevin or Bevan as he was by Kinnock, Smith, Blair and Brown - as an essentially harmless eccentric. Now we know he did a fair bit of harm.

Also on the working class - I think what is typically meant is "white working class" in smallish town, but ignores that the urban working class has always been multi-ethnic. If a definition of working class doesn't cover East London, or Liverpool, or Leicester then I'm not sure it's really working - and those areas are still overwhelmingly Labour.

I query if you can rebuild the left on the old working class politics of the 19th and 20th century (at least without re-unionising ) because class used to be the single biggest indicator of how you vote. That's not been the case for the last few elections: it's age. And one factor that may be relevant in those "white working class" areas is they are ageing, they have more pensioners than average and fewer workers. In Europe with PR this has means there's a pincer movement - the social democratic parties are losing young voters to the Greens and old voters to right populist/far-right parties. Our system protects Labour, but is the challenge not how do you win back the old heartlands but just how do you build a coalition of young people plus middle aged folk that could beat the current Tory coalition of middle aged plus pensioners?

[Sheilbh]

Couple of other interesting points - Tories now at 49% in the poll (the Brexit party are at 2% so not quite 52% ), which is the second highest. Just behind Theresa May who reache 50% before she called an election

Also, as we're moving to a points system British future have done some research on what people think should matter - really striking here is that none of the stuff (like earning over £30k) which the Tories have previously wanted to use really seem to matter:


Also about 79% of people want the number of high-skilled EU workers to stay the same or increase, which is about the same for non-EU high-skilled workers (77%). 65% want the number of seasonal workers to go up or remain the same, and aout the same want that for international students. 51% of people want to reduce low-skilled EU migration (31% want it to stay the same or go up).

[alfred russel]

Back in the day (the point when most of us came of age) the center right conservative parties in the west represented the better off, and the center left the working class.

It seems portions of the economic classes have realigned, but the policies of the parties have been slower to adjust. Hence someone like Trump breaks through Hillary's "blue wall" with a bunch of working class votes in the rust belt, and the most significant legislative result is: corporate tax cuts.

[Tamas]

The UK has asked the European Union for help to repatriate their citizens from Wuhan - two days before the country leaves the economic bloc.

Janez Lenarčič, the European commissioner for crisis management, listed the countries that have requested help from the EU at a press conference this afternoon. The list includes Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Spain, Finland, France, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, and the UK