PMs change and lol we're all gonna die (but brexit will never end)

who posts here as mr snrub

sadly lexiters have been chased off ilx by our groupthink. funnily enough the place I've met most of them have been through labour and unison

Even Comrade Alphabet is a Remainer!

always quite lol seeing commentators sneer at jeremy corbyn and angela rayner's school exam results. all those As and all it's got you is a telegraph column nobody reads

— tyron, the creator (@TyronWilson) September 23, 2019

If you consider a WA preferable to burning corpse piles and scurvy - that doesn't make you a Lexiter does it?

Yeah Euler is going to have to come back & explain that cos otherwise we could be at this all day instead of discussing Johnny Mc and the SUPREME COURT RULING AT 10.30 TOMORROW

Euler and Pom think support for Corbyn is indirect support for ending freedom of movement because St Jezza won't do what The Guardian says.

I presume there has to be some autarkic fantasy element to your brexit to be a lexiter. like those myopic brexit voting fishermen who were told there would be so many fish they'd be jumping into their nets after we've left the EU!

Johnny Mc gave a p fine speech from where I'm sitting and (half) listening imo.

I'm frankly tired of this topic and doubt anyone's opinion has budged either way. From where I'm standing, many (most?) of you are insufficiently pro-Remain, as is Jeremy Corbyn himself, which is somewhat understandable when free movement doesn't concern you personally in the here and now, including if you're an EU national who has acquired UK citizenship or settled status. But I support Labour's domestic policies and believe Labour to be our best shot a second ref. Just don't expect me to muster any enthusiasm for the head honcho, because he has shown no interest in speaking for me. So ILX's hagiographical bent is quite unpleasant in that regard.

But, like gyac said, at this point there are more pressing matters to discuss.

I was thinking about Corbyn's observation yesterday that he doesn't presume a deal would be better than remain, and wondering how EU freedom of movement fits into his thinking about a deal. On this the 2017 manifesto was clear: "Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union." Given the uniform support for Labour on this thread, I wanted to see how posters here thought about freedom of movement, in particular on what good there would be in ending it as the manifesto declares is to happen should Labour win.

the_remainer_judger has logged on

There is no 'hagiographical bent', but you seem to need to believe there is, so carry on, it's of a piece with your habit of misrepresenting what people are saying.

For the absolute!last!time!on this!

- you are not the only foreigner itt
- the government is literally deporting black and brown citizens, so don’t act like anyone is cavalier towards this country’s utterly fucked up immigration policies
- there is no actual existing Labour deal so there is no point in getting mad about anything at this point in time
- did I mention how even the “least foreign” of us have to live under the government defending their soldiers using the hollowed out skulls of Irish citizens as ashtrays or stripping Irish citizens from NI of their rights?
- the last labour leader was the son of two holocaust refugees and yet he still found himself putting out the infamous “controls on immigration” mug.
- I’m not sure exactly what I or anyone would need to do to be sufficiently remain enough? Stop slagging off the EU?

I am unequivocally pro-FOM fwiw and think the leadership should be full throated in its support. while I think there are issues around the posted workers directive, JC and co have been a little cute in the purely factual statement quoted above. I also have issues w some of the dogwhistling they have done in this area

there are some indications yesterday in some of what DA was saying that the leadership may take a more forthright/positive position on this

Dialogue de sourds.

tl;dr but while you are largely right that discourse on immigration is totally fucked, that’s not the case itt and it’s not the case in terms of Corbyn’s personal beliefs either. The repeated focus on his “support for the IRA” is explicitly meant to imply that he likes the foreigners a bit TOO much, ffs

er, I meant that Corbyn said he doesn't presume remain would be better than a deal.

he hasn’t negotiated a deal yet. why second guess things. hypothetically, what would happen if he negotiated a deal where we get 10 vetoes and a hundredty billion added to the rebate? now, that is unlikely so I think you can work out where labour will probably end up /enilythornberrywelltherewego.png

That's odd, I thought the weekly discussion about the people itt was scheduled for tomorrow?

xxxps great contribution, thanks

I'm not interested in a discussion *about* the people in this thread, I'm interested in hearing what people in this thread think about a difficult issue. this is to prod a discussion. I'll meta if people want to meta me, but otherwise that's not my interest.

"Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union": this is a simple consequence of leaving the EU, a description of a fact.

what wasn't and isn't clear is what comes next: "FOM is now over bye bye" vs "FOM will be BACK BACK BACK when we establish the customs union we have in mind"

this unclarity was the heart of the tactic of constructive ambiguity, basically sending different signals in different drections to different wings of the party (for unity's sake) and to different types of voter (for votes' sake), while the overall strategy was very much to lean on all the non-brexit elements in the manifesto (with enough success to squeeze the tories into being a minority government but not enough to get lab over the line). But FOM was never actively a labour red line -- if it had been,labour wouldn't have voted may's WA down (it *was* a tory red line).

given that constructive ambiguity is by nature ambiguous, it's unsurprising (and an occupational hazard) that many have chosen to read into it the elements they don't want to hear: corbs is a divisive politician and insofar as he has influence, this influence is often negative! plus i think those who choose to interpret lab's position as guardedly pro-FOM* are also SOMEWHAT reading tea-leaves and making oblique inference (for example from keir starmer's six principles) than much that's been directly said (tho I think Diane Abbott -- a non-negligeable figure on corbs's counsel -- in has been consistently pro-FOM?)

*roughly speaking this includes me, in the sense that i've chosen to be persuaded by commentary that's interpreted the stance as making pro-FOM signals without saying so out loud

Everyone itt is in favour of freedom of movement. There you go. Job done.

FOM D

I think there should be quotas on how many supercilious French speaking nincompoops with a predilection for projecting ignorance onto other people enjoy FOM tbf. joeks obv

was listening to a hostile environment story earlier of a Nigerian woman who was deported by the HO and unceremoniously shunted onto a plane and not even dropped off at the main airport, just dumped onto some remote country lane in some remote part of Lagos without a penneth to her name.

Getting rid of FOM is nbd because of that anecdote. Flawless logic.

flawless reading

joeks obv

and that is what I was saying yes? That's the problem with you pom, your a total dickhead of much wilful misapprehension at times

I just mentioned it because I heard it on the radio earlier ftr.

supercilious French speaking nincompoops with a predilection for projecting ignorance onto other people

your a total dickhead of much wilful misapprehension at times

🤔

yeah really not sure where this kind of passive aggressive sarcasm is coming from, we're all friends here surely!

I don't care that much about leave or remain and if the UK is to have x amounts of immigrants I'm just as happy for them to be from Ghana or Costa Rica as from Iceland or lithuania.

Ireland auto corrected to Iceland there for some reason

ILX sponsorship deal iirc

I have 5 A levels and degrees from Oxford and Harvard. Angela Rayner is a far better politician than I will ever be. And a far more admirable human being than the mean spirited snobs who sneer at her. https://t.co/mjcao8cUYc

— Nick Boles MP (@NickBoles) September 23, 2019

lol

"FOM will be BACK BACK BACK when we establish the customs union we have in mind" - this seems an odd reading though, I'm not aware of plans to leave the EU without a customs union other than No Deal.

- you are not the only foreigner itt

No, but you are AFAIK the only (European) foreigner itt willing to go to the mat for Labour on this issue?

lol @the Boles condescension "don't do it nick!"

the boles condescension is my favourite robert ludlum novel

i think Allison's forgetting that a lot of us have been treated to the depth of her intellect on Late Review and that's pretty shaky ground she's standing on right there

otm, what a dimwit she was on that programme.

it's a delicious idea tho that your GCSE results should disqualify you from being an education minister more so than say never having been to a state school in your entire worthless life

andrew, acc.mcdonnell some time back end of last year the lab dream of a WA would have in mind a future customs union suited to lab's wants and dreams*: this can't strictly speaking be pre-negotiated (bcz the WA doesn't allow for trade details to be pinned down) though it probably could (as of june 2017, which is when we're talking about) have been well signalled and agreed-on in back channels

lab aren't in a position to set out a plan, they're not in government. whether FOM actually ends and re-begins, or in effect carries on, depends on the nature of WA, but there's definitely a case for reading lab's manifesto claim as a lawyerly bit of sleight-of-hand (FOM as grounded by our current status in the EU will end with our current status). the question of the strained-ness of this reading really depends on how effective you think the sleight-of-hand is: the intent behind it is revealed more by lab's refusal to back the may version of WA (and refusal of no deal) than by anything said out loud.

*this was much mocked in the UK media as inveterate unicornism, by political opponents (as you;d expect) and by commentators confused by the fact that the WA was and is a precursor to the next stage of negotiations (even in the case of no deal) -- but among others donald tusk was happy to give it quiet approval

i shd add i'm making a bit of a distinction between the first half of 2017, which is when the manifesto in question was drawn up and when the strategy was evolving, and today -- when a lot of water has passed under the bridge. i don't necessarily think the stance and the strategy are exactly the same now (i fret when lab started calling for a second ref for example, but it was relatively recently and certainly not part-and-parcel with 2017 manifesto strategy)

not "i fret" but "i forget" lol

i fret a little

i mean me too but abt other stuff mostly

butts

who among us does not fret about butts